This is a little bit off-topic, but you can read my latest FrontPage Magazine interview, “Terrorist Camps in America” by clicking here. This is about a new documentary that the Christian Action Network, for whom I am a national security researcher, is releasing about a network of isolated radical Islamic compounds that continue to operate in the U.S. Most likely, some of you live near one, as there are at least 35 nationwide. The head of CAN will be on Hannity’s America on February 9, so this should become a major story.

Remember, for those of you in the area, the documentary “Homegrown Jihad: Terrorist Camps Around the U.S.” will premiere on February 11th at 7:30 PM at Washington DC’s Landmark Theater. It is free to attend.

To bring this more on topic, there’s an element of presidential races that always fascinated me. I remember it in 2004. Some observers argued that Senator Kerry shouldn’t attack President Bush too much on national security, because even if the attacks stung, they brought the issue to the forefront again and backfired as it kept national security/foreign policy as the number one issue. Some writers have even suggested that Kerry lost due to the Bin Laden tape.

Critics of the President could try to spin it, noting that Bin Laden was still free due to incompetence and by diverting our attention to Iraq, but it reminded voters of the terrorist threat.

Generally, when governors become the nominee against an incumbent, the opponent (unless both are governors) argues that the governor is inexperienced on national security. Ironically, if the GOP chooses a governor in 2012, you could see President Obama trying to attack them on their lack of experience in national security and foreign policy–but he runs the same risk as Kerry did, because the Republican Party is generally favored for such issues. Just something to think about.

Alleged Tax-cheat and lobbyist’s stooge, Tom Daschle, is out as Secretary of Health and Human Services.

A Rasmussen poll finds that 55% of Republicans believe that the GOP should “become more like Sarah Palin” in the future:

Coming off a shellacking at the polls in November, the plurality of GOP voters (43%) say their party has been too moderate over the past eight years, and 55% think it should become more like Alaska Governor Sarah Palin in the future, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. Just 24% think failed presidential candidate John McCain is the best future model for the party, and 10% are undecided.

Only 17% of Republican voters say their party has been too conservative, and 30% say its actions and positions have been about right, with nine percent (9%) not sure.

Nearly two-thirds of Democrats (64%), however, say the Republican Party has been too conservative, and 42% think it should look to McCain for the future. Twelve percent (12%) of Democratic voters see Palin as a future role model, and 40% aren’t sure what’s best for their rivals.

Fifteen`percent (15%) of Democrats say the opposite party has been too moderate, and five percent (5%) classify it as about right. Sixteen percent (16%) are not sure.

There is one area of agreement though: Just 11% of Republicans and six percent (6%) of Democrats say the party should become more like former President Bush.

Fifty-eight percent (58%) of all voters have a favorable opinion of McCain, including 15% who say Very Favorable. Forty percent (40%) regard him unfavorably, with 12% whose views are Very Unfavorable.

For Palin, her favorables are 52% (28% Very Favorable) and her unfavorables are 46%, with 26% who see her in a Very Unfavorable light.

Palin fares better with unaffiliated voters… For McCain, unaffiliateds break 10% Very Favorable and eight percent (8%) Very Unfavorable. But 35% of unaffiliated voters have a Very Favorable opinion of Palin, compared to 15% who have a Very Unfavorable view.

New NRSC Chairman, Sen. John Cornyn, has produced the following video outlining his plans to work with Bloggers, Social Networking, and New Media in the 2010 cycle:



Sen. Cornyn is one of the Republicans in a leadership position who clearly, “get it” when it comes to engaging the Conservative Grassroots online. Be sure to take the time to head over to the online resources he mentions in the video, sign-up, and become engaged in helping to take the Senate out of Democratic hands.

Sarah Palin issued her first intraparty endorsement since the election:

AUSTIN – Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has endorsed Rick Perry for re-election, calling him the “true conservative” in a primary election showdown with fellow Republican Kay Bailey Hutchison.

Palin, who electrified the GOP base as the party’s vice presidential nominee last year, has strong support among the party’s social conservatives. Her endorsement appeared aimed at undercutting Hutchison’s appeal with GOP women. Both groups will be important in picking the party’s nominee in next year’s GOP primary.

In a letter to “Texas Republican women” distributed by the Perry campaign, Palin touts the Texas governor’s conservative credentials.

“He walks the walk of a true conservative. And he sticks by his guns – and you know how I feel about guns,” she said.

Palin cited one of the Perry campaign’s top issues – opposition to federal financial bailouts. And she singled out Perry’s opposition to abortion rights.

“Not every child is born into ideal circumstances, but every life is sacred,” Palin said in the mail appeal. “Rick Perry knows this – it is at the core of his being.”

Hutchison supports abortion rights, although with restrictions, including parental notification and a ban on certain late-term procedures.

The GOP primary draws a large number of social conservatives for whom abortion and gay marriage are litmus-test issues. And in recent weeks, Perry has made high-profile appeals to abortion opponents.

Perry spokesman Mark Miner called Palin, seen as a potential future GOP presidential nominee, “a star of the Republican Party.” Hutchison spokesman Todd Olsen said the senator has broad support among Texas Republicans “who know what is going on in Texas,” adding: “We look forward to having the [Alaska] governor’s support after the primary.”

According to the Perry campaign, the letter went to 10,500 members of the Texas Federation of Republican Women, an influential organization whose members have been an important part of Hutchison’s political base.

Her support for Perry, a fellow oil state governor, makes sense and is likely to ingratiate Palin with Texas Conservatives, especially if the letter is followed by personal campaign appearances in Texas. There may be some states where you can make the case that Republicans “need” a moderate Governor. Texas sure as heck ain’t one of them.

No, no, no, no! Stop this madness!

When GOP congressional aides gather Tuesday morning for a meeting of the Conservative Working Group, Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher – more commonly known as Joe the Plumber — will be their featured guest. This group is an organization of conservative Capitol Hill staffers who meet regularly to chart GOP strategy for the week.

Wurzelbacher, who became a household name during the presidential election, will be focusing his talk on the proposed stimulus package. He’s apparently not a fan of the economic rescue package, according to members of the group.

Make him go away! So many questions come to mind: can we not put this misbegotten election and all of its populist, average-glorifying symbolism behind us, already? Does Mr. The Plumber regret what he said about the media: that it should not cover war? Why on Earth is this man advising Congressmen? Why is a man named Joe the Plumber not really named Joe and not even really a plumber?!

Alright, that’s my rant for the month.

–

Alex Knepper can be contacted at apkkib@aol.com

I once heard Geraldine Ferraro tell a story about something she experienced during the 1984 general election, when she was Walter Mondale’s Vice Presidential candidate.

While campaigning at a Pennsylvania union meeting among factory workers, she asked them how many of them were planning to vote for Ronald Reagan. To her surprise, a large majority of the members raised their hands. Not able to understand why a group whom the Democrats had relied on for so many years would support Reagan, she asked them whether or not they supported Reagan’s economic policies. A majority of them, she found, were more in favor of the proposals made by her candidate. Perplexed, she asked one of the workers why he would support a candidate whose policies he admittedly felt were not in his best interests, and that man told her that Reagan made them proud of themselves, and their country (or something close to that answer).

While watching Barack Obama in an interview with Matt Lauer before the Super Bowl, it dawned on me why he has been so successful, and why he will be difficult to beat in 2012. He is able to portray that same type of optimism. By listening to him discuss his withdrawal plan for the troops in Iraq, you would never have guessed that he was the same person as the candidate who would not admit any success in the Middle East during the campaign. In fact, according to President Obama, we have completed our mission and it is time for the Iraqi government to take responsibility. He spoke as though he believed that the operation in Iraq has been a success. To the politically trained eye, the discrepancy would be obvious, but to those who aren’t likely to remember what went on during the campaign, it may not be as clear.

For the Republicans to mount a successful campaign in 2012, they must nominate a candidate who shares those same qualities, as well as the ability to persuade the public that it is Obama’s policies that are not in their best interests. Even if things don’t improve during his first term, they will still have to overcome the fact that the downward spiral began on a Republican president’s watch.

Each of the possible candidates the Republicans have, at the moment, have their own strengths. However, it is going to take all of those traits to have a chance of victory. Mitt Romney has most of the right policy ideas, gun control not withstanding. However, people have trouble relating to him, as he comes across too technocratic. Mike Huckabee shares the same type of ability to connect that Reagan had, but he also rubs many in his own party the wrong way the same way John McCain did. Sarah Palin has potential, but people have legitimate questions as to whether or not she can perform under the spotlight without stumbling. Some have floated the name of David Petraeus as a possible nominee. The problem with him is that nobody knows how he would perform as a candidate for office. For all we know, he could be aloof. The other candidates (Jindal, Pawlenty, Barbour, Sanford, to name a few) are intriguing ideas, but nobody knows whether or not they have that ability to inspire.

For the GOP to unseat Obama, someone must step up to the plate. It may be one of the afore mentioned candidates. Maybe Mitt Romney improves upon his delivery, or Huckabee silences his critics (myself included). It could be that by 2011, Sarah Palin proves that she has what it takes to ease those loudly voiced concerns.

Until then, it is an uphill battle.

Call this somewhat disappointing from the office of Governor Sarah Palin:

“Alaska and other states need to be treated fairly,” Governor Palin said. “Much of the stimulus plan we’ve seen focuses on spending for government programs that would be a burden on states to continue funding, and doesn’t focus enough on spending that actually does put people back to work and stimulate the economy. Working with our D.C. staff, I took advantage of the opportunity to speak with Democrats and Republicans to voice my concerns. I appreciate their time and assistance in paying attention to our state.”

Governor Palin discussed troubling elements in the stimulus package including provisions that punish Alaska for forward-funding education, the mass transit funding formula that will limit Alaska opportunities but will pour money into other states, and the “shovel-ready” criteria for projects that northern climates might not be able to accommodate consistently due to the shortened construction season.

The governor continues to express concerns first identified in a Jan. 7 letter to the Alaska congressional delegation about the overall level of spending and the hugely increased deficit our nation is growing. Under the legislation, the U.S. would continue sending money to OPEC nations even as it continues to borrow and miss opportunities to develop domestic supplies of energy.

“Worst of all, the stimulus package rewards states for not planning when it comes to prioritizing for things like education, as Alaska has planned ahead by forward-funding 21 percent of our General Fund dollars for this very important priority,” said Palin. “It appears only those states that did not plan ahead with education will benefit. States like Alaska should not be punished for being responsible; yet that’s what the plan means for Alaska right now.”

The governor has asked the nation’s leaders to look at these issues to ensure fairness in the stimulus package and that the package does not harm the long-term fiscal health of the nation. Contrary to some news reports, she looks forward to continuing to work with Alaska’s congressional delegation to accomplish the state’s goals.

As Jim Geraghty points out, Governor Palin doesn’t really take a stand, yay or nay on the stimulus package. She identifies issues with it, but doesn’t come out against it foursquare. Part of this is due to the practicality of being a Governor. She doesn’t have a vote on this and she has to make sure that if this thing does pass that it’s not unfavorable to her state. That said, conservatives really are looking for leadership and Governor Palin needs to show some and this would seem to be a good opportunity.

Now she may be able to get away this. It is, after all, early in the Obama Administration and certainly no one was looking to George W. Bush or Barack Obama to provide national leadership three years before the election, but there are quite a few conservatives that are getting troubled about Palin’s inability to call a pig a pig and oppose this forcefully.

For the record, here are where other potential 2012 Contenders stand:

In Favor: Governor Charlie Crist

Critical, but willing to take the money and lobbying to ensure their state gets their piece of the pie: Palin, Bobby Jindal, and Tim Pawlenty

Critical and not sure if he’ll take the money for his state: Haley Barbour

Against: Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, and Mark Sanford.*

*Note: I’ll no doubt be accused of anti-Mitt Romney bias because I listed Romney 2nd rather than first. I listed the three names in alphabetical order by last name.

So, apparently even the creators of the English Alphabet were anti-Mormon.

1) Want to prevent fatherless octuplets? Years ago, Gamecock dared suggest what many fellow pro-lifers would never utter, i.e. that one should not be allowed to harvest more than 1-3 embryos, and that a condition of same would be a commitment to have them all implanted so that one would not be creating life that would be discarded like refuse.

2) The so-called “stimulus” bill must be rejected, even if the Senate can get significant real stimulative supply side tax cuts added so long as the eight arms of an octupus-like 30% permanent increase in government remains.

3) The Cardinals missed eight tackles during the “Immaculate Interception” that led to the Sixth Super Bowl victory by the Steelers.

4) I already miss the eight years just completed in which our enemies feared our Commander-in-Chief.

5) Reports indicate the Senate version of the stimulus bill will exceed $8 Billion. I say, eight is enough!

6) Which of the Crazy Eight will submit the Biden-predicted International test: Iran, The Hezbos, Hamas, North Korea, Syria, Cuba, Venezuela, or, as Gamecock suspects, Russia.

7) Eight weeks until Major League Baseball’s Opening Day.

Eight months until Braves/Rays World Series?

*Punxsutawney Phil (pictured above)

______________________________________________________________________________________

Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer, Examiner.com and Minority Report columns

“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson

I guess the rabid leftists sleep in over there at MSNBC, because a little truth-to-power slipped in during Jim Cramer’s appearance on Morning Joe. Cramer accurately compares some of Obama’s economic rhetoric to the writings of the Marxist revolutionary and father of the Soviet Union, Vladimir Lenin. Guess who is going to be named ‘Worst Person in the World’ for a while!

For 2012, we’ll have a huge spate of national polls. They’re fun to read, but they really don’t mean much.

What 2008 taught us is that national polls track with the results we see in Primary and Caucus States. Huckabee surged in the late part of 2007 based on what he was doing in Iowa, and went into the lead in the Rasmussen Poll after winning Iowa.

McCain took the lead in national polls after he won New Hampshire and it increased after South Carolina and reached the insurmountable level after Florida and knocking Rudy Giuliani out of the campaign.

National polls were led by Rudy Giuliani for nearly 3 years, he led Iowa in the vast majority of polls for 4 months, and he finished behind Ron Paul. National polls are fun, but close to irrelevant as to who will be the GOP nominee in 2012. Polls that come out between now and 3rd Quarter, 2011 are a nice source of bragging rights for leading campaigns, but that’s about it. 

According to The Fix, Charlie Crist may be eyeing a run for Senate:

Florida Republican Gov. Charlie Crist is considering a run for the Sunshine State’s open Senate seat although he remains a long shot to run, according to informed sources in the state and in Washington.

Jim Greer, the chairman of the Florida Republican party and a close ally of Crist, said that “whether [Crist] is going to actually run for the Senate is a decision that will be made down the road because he doesn’t want to take his eye off the ball, which is serving the people of Florida as governor.”

No final decision is expected from Crist until the legislative session in Florida concludes in early May, said those familiar with the governor’s thinking.

If this is true, he’s probably not running for the presidency. It makes little sense for him to plunge himself into national controversies at a time when he could play it safe from the governor’s perch. He would also need to start his 2012 campaign right after being elected to the Senate.

More, from Roll Call:

Crist, according to sources, has had multiple serious conversations about running for Senate with both Martinez and National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman John Cornyn (Texas).

…

Sources say most Republicans are waiting on the sidelines because they want to see what Crist does before jumping into the Senate race, and explain further that Sink could be eyeing an open gubernatorial seat in 2010, when Crist’s first term is up.

I’d rather see Crist run for the Senate. It keeps the seat safely ours, keeps him from being the centrist candidate in 2012 (lest Mitt Romney stupidly keep trying to tack to the right). Who would then be the center-right alternative to Palin and Huckabee? Hmm . . .

–

Alex Knepper can be contacted at apkkib@aol.com

Paul Bedard has the scoop on Newt’s ’12 assessment over at Washington Whispers:

Don’t count Newt Gingrich, the GOP’s big thinker, down on his party despite the collapse of the GOP at the polls. A student of history, Gingrich said over bacon and eggs today that it’s totally reasonable to think that the Republicans could stage a comeback in the next presidential election. The former House bomb-thrower, who used his 1994 Contract With America to become speaker, says history can repeat itself, especially if the GOP can nominate a charismatic leader who knows how to use the mechanics of the primary and caucus system. He’s not endorsing, but he said that former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin will arrive in Iowa first in line. Her advantage: Iowa, the first state to vote in the primary-caucus season, loves Christian conservatives, and her crew there will be large. “Palin starts in Iowa with a substantial base,” he said. And, yes, Iowa matters, having put Barack Obama and Jimmy Carter in the lead during their races for the White House. Others in the running: Mitt Romney, if the economy still stinks, and maybe Bobby Jindal, the Louisiana guv.

Curiously absent from Speaker Gingrich’s assessment is any mention of 2008 Iowa Caucus winner, Gov. Mike Huckabee.

I’m back (hopefully permanently) after a longish hiatus. The Obama fever stuff was too much for me and I needed to clear my system. I think I went (shocker) an entire week at one point, without even peeping at any news medium. So I missed our new additions, but from what I can see Max and Ryan are doing boffo jobs. It’ll be nice to have new sparring partners (hah!). But, in this post I’ll be mostly agreeing with an old one. Alex writes that poetry is dead. So it is, but it is not the only casualty. Art, writ large, has been on the decline for some time now. When Alex points to a lack of cadence, theme, and meter- to a cultural decline that diminishes the value of excellence- he hits upon only symptoms of the disease. We need only look at Alex’s list of great poets to note this; Frost is not Dickinson. Stylistically, they are hardly comparable; thematically, scarcely more so. The notion of limits, boundaries, and structure is perhaps THE great conservative impulse- one that can (at times) unite social liberals like Alex, with culture “warriors” like me. But, if that tradition can admit a Dickinson and a Frost, it’s clear that something else is going on. The limits aren’t an end, but a means to some other end. It is that end, which most of the modern artistic world has misplaced.That great modernist Novelist, William Faulkner, despite the baleful tradition to which he belonged, had a bead on it when he said:

Our tragedy today is a general and universal physical fear so long sustained by now that we can even bear it. There are no longer problems of the spirit…Because of this, the young man or woman writing today has forgotten the problems of the human heart in conflict with itself which alone can make good writing because only that is worth writing about, worth the agony and the sweat.

He must learn them again. He must teach himself that the basest of all things is to be afraid; and, teaching himself that, forget it forever, leaving no room in his workshop for anything but the old verities and truths of the heart, the old universal truths lacking which any story is ephemeral and doomed – love and honor and pity and pride and compassion and sacrifice. Until he does so, he labors under a curse. He writes not of love but of lust, of defeats in which nobody loses anything of value, of victories without hope and, worst of all, without pity or compassion. His griefs grieve on no universal bones, leaving no scars. He writes not of the heart but of the glands.

The modern artist- the truly modern artist- “grieves grief on no universal bones”. When Frost wrote “Nothing Gold Can Stay” he was articulating the universal transience of beauty and perfection, mirrored even in The Fall. It was powerful because it was universal and and because it was timeless. Modern art barely aspires to universality, because modern artists barely believe in universality. This leads to what Alex rightly calls expressions of “transient, seemingly apocryphal feelings” and it leads a desire to break down barriers merely to see them fall. These artists alter the means (the form), because they have no end; no universal story to tell. But, there is one caveat here, because modern art does occasionally tell of a very narrow kind of universality.

Consider the film Crash, the 2005 Best Picture winner. Here we have a seeming symphony to universality, but it is not a Frostian universality. In Crash we have a variety of characters with different (heavy-handed) outward attitudes toward race, and as the story progresses we’re shown these characters acting in ways seemingly incompatible with their attitudes. The racist cop selflessly rescues the black woman, the PC cop succumbs to stereotyping and murders a friendly black man, the racist rich WASP has a heart-to-heart with her Hispanic maid, etc. Crash tells us that we are all racists, but it doesn’t tell us much else. It’s missing a crucial element of historical drama, which helps define a character’s actions: the “In Virtue Of” element. Some characters in Crash fall, while others rise, but there’s no why for any of it. Matt Dillon simply possesses heroic qualities; Ryan Philippe is simply prone to stereotyping. Paul Haggis would have us believe these are clever, thought-provoking reversals, but they are nothing of the kind. In the Aristotelian tradition, reversal, even when caused by a supernatural event, fits neatly into an already revealed aspect of an individual’s character. There’s usually a tragic flaw, as in the case of Othello’s built-up insecurity or Hamlet’s indecision, that drives or worsens the reversal. In the Biblical tradition, reversal is similarly caused: it’s a result of sin and thought to be explicable in terms of sin. The modern universality is universality detached from responsibility; from choice and consequences. We are asked to celebrate universality, or perhaps weep at it, not because it might reveal something about our actions- how we ought to act- but simply because it is universal.

It is not too much to say that this divide mirrors the divide between conservatism and liberalism. We are the inheritors of a universality explicable in terms of human action and eternal and transcendent truths. Liberalism either denies universality, and revels in expression for its own sake, or embraces a cramped, causeless universality, detached from human action. That great modernist Faulkner would have lamented such a turn, and that great traditionalist Frost did lament it. What is “The Road Not Taken”, if not a choice and a consequence?

At the end of last year, I predicted that Sarah Palin would shock me by saying something insightful, and, well, perhaps I’m giving her too much credit (I’m sure Aron Goldman would think so), but I must say that I’m rather pleased with her new op-ed in support of drilling in ANWR.

What’s great about this piece is not so much that the material is insightful or original, but the fact that she’s bringing this up at this point. Remember: it’s not during times of crisis that we should be discussing increased drilling, but during times of rest. When this was a major issue back in August, I often pointed out that politicians would often note their opposition to drilling by saying that it would take five years to get the oil to the American consumer, and then replied: well, where were you morons five years ago? As Palin rightly points out, OPEC may be about to screw us over, and this is not the time to get complacent — this is the time to drill, baby, drill:

Let’s not forget: Only six months ago, oil was selling for nearly $150 per barrel, while Americans were paying $4 a gallon and more for gasoline. And today, there is potential for prices to rebound as OPEC asserts its market power and as Russia disrupts needed natural gas to Europe for the second time in three years.

Thankfully, Palin is trying to get some attention brought to this issue that the capricious American public has all but forgotten about. Yes, it plays to her strengths, and no, it’s not surprising to me that it’s something she’d want to talk about. I’m known as the resident Palin-basher, and that’s true to an extent, but I’m not mindless in my bashing: I’m going to give credit where credit is due, and it’s due, here.

—

Alex Knepper can be contacted at apkkib@aol.com

I highly recommend reading this piece from Pajamas Media. It summarizes the steps Steele needs to make to rebrand the GOP. One of my favorite suggestions is designating governors as the “go-to” people on specific issues. The GOP needs to put credible faces to present their messages on critical issues. For too long, the public has looked to the DNC as the best party on all domestic issues (minus taxes) and the RNC as the best party on foreign affairs and national security.

The truth is that the GOP has major work to do. Minority birthrates are skyrocketing, and when coupled with falling white birthrates and increasing immigration, the GOP is facing a tidal wave of a demographic change that will be very, very, difficult to surf. I’m not playing or advocating racial politics, the voting trends of these groups is incontestable and any poll can prove it. The GOP needs a major debate on how to deal with these changes, and I am not convinced that change can happen quickly enough (unless the incumbent is viewed as a disaster on-par with Bush 43) to stop the GOP from losing the next several election cycles.

I’lll be reading the comments to hear ideas on this topic–let’s try not to get into a debate about whether I am simply being overly pessimistic and a quitter or whether I’m just an independent trying to get the GOP to swing my way. Let’s hear ideas, because ideas are what will decide the fate of the GOP.

I’ve just got home from six weeks of working in Virginia. During my drive home, I noticed an odd phenomenon in Virginia (especially Hampton Roads, Southside and Richmond).

I saw as many Bush/Cheney ’04 bumper stickers as Obama/Biden bumper stickers. I saw practically no McCain/Palin bumper stickers. I can’t speak to enthusiasm but apparently many Virginians didn’t have much use for McCain.

During my trip home, I heard that Michael Steele had been elected RNC Chairman. I congratulate Mr. Steele and this extremist pro-lifer looks forward to his leadership in the RNC.

I also noticed how the popularity of Obama’s pork bill has been on the decline. That makes sense given the bill is unlikely to do much good for most Americans in the next year. Even Senate Democrats are wary of the bag of flaming poop Nancy Pelosi has thrown over to the Senate.

I return home to a Republican Party that is different from the one I left before Christmas. There’s some hope and some signs of backbone. It’s good to be home.

This little nugget from the NY Times’ Frank Rich:

“The nightmare is that we have so irrelevant, clownish and childish an opposition party at a moment when America is in an all-hands-on-deck emergency that’s as trying as war.”

As trying as war? This is Obama’s disaster rhetoric being regurgitated by his base aka the MSM.  Mr. Rich, we have been in trying times as difficult as war, in fact they are wars, two of them.  As far as your beloved liberal democrats go, all-hands-on-deck would be the last way I choose to describe them during those trying times.  No, instead as our soldiers took up the fight, your party screamed from the mountain tops that the ‘war was lost’. That, Mr. Rich, is clownish, that is childish, that is down right pathetic.

By the way, Mr. Rich, that lost cause in Iraq you liberals have smeared and railed against just saw another round of free elections. And wouldn’t you know it, the MSM didn’t seem to care.

Democracy lives in Iraq despite the efforts of your party, Mr. Rich, even as your new president slowly chips away at it here at home.