Wednesday, April 04, 2007
Downercrats Do Not Want to Fight Terror Any More, Declare End to War in the Middle
The Downercrats in control of our Congress have finally said it with one voice, and even the media is laughing at them: they have said that they no longer want to fight a "Global War on Terror."
A huge white flag is now the symbol of the party of John F. Kennedy.
No more GWOT, House committee decrees
Imagine if in 1944, the Republican Party said, "Our enemies are not `Nazis." That is not good language. We are fighting something but not Nazis, because we don't like that phrase."
People would laugh. And people should laugh at a party that wants to harm our President and surrender to our enemies.
The Downercrats in control of our Congress have finally said it with one voice, and even the media is laughing at them: they have said that they no longer want to fight a "Global War on Terror."
A huge white flag is now the symbol of the party of John F. Kennedy.
No more GWOT, House committee decrees
The House Armed Services Committee is banishing the global war on terror from the 2008 defense budget.
This is not because the war has been won, lost or even called off, but because the committee’s Democratic leadership doesn’t like the phrase.
A memo for the committee staff, circulated March 27, says the 2008 bill and its accompanying explanatory report that will set defense policy should be specific about military operations and “avoid using colloquialisms.”
The “global war on terror,” a phrase first used by President Bush shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the U.S., should not be used, according to the memo. Also banned is the phrase the “long war,” which military officials began using last year as a way of acknowledging that military operations against terrorist states and organizations would not be wrapped up in a few years.
Committee staff members are told in the memo to use specific references to specific operations instead of the Bush administration’s catch phrases. The memo, written by Staff Director Erin Conaton, provides examples of acceptable phrases, such as “the war in Iraq,” the “war in Afghanistan, “operations in the Horn of Africa” or “ongoing military operations throughout the world.”
“There was no political intent in doing this,” said a Democratic aide who asked not to be identified. “We were just trying to avoid catch phrases.”
Imagine if in 1944, the Republican Party said, "Our enemies are not `Nazis." That is not good language. We are fighting something but not Nazis, because we don't like that phrase."
People would laugh. And people should laugh at a party that wants to harm our President and surrender to our enemies.
