Third Rate Name Caller
According to this article from the Post Crescent, Dave Obey resorted to name calling in the debate over the war on terror. We're so proud.
Rep. David Obey on Wednesday likened the House Republican leader's questioning of Democrats' patriotism to Joe McCarthy's Cold War witch-hunt for Communists.
"I come from the state of Joe McCarthy," said Obey, D-Wausau. "(I) know a third-rate McCarthy when I see one. And we saw one yesterday."
The majority leader, John Boehner of Ohio had said that Democrats who criticized President Bush's speech on Monday, "are more interested in protecting the terrorists than protecting the American people."
If you're scratching your head over Obey's reaction, we are too. This is the same guy who felt like it was alright for the New York Times to leak information on a LEGAL program to watch potential terrorists.
I guess Obey's theory is, when someone starts telling the truth about me and I don't like it, I'll call him a name. How old are you Dave, 9 or 69?
And now we comment on all the Democrats moaning, wailing and gnashing of teeth over the President's September 11th speech. They didn't like that he made a case for staying in Iraq. They said that was political and not befitting the occasion. What?!?!?! Regardless of why we got into Iraq, that's where the terrorists are fighting us. That's where they have vowed to drive us out and claim victory for their Islamic-facist (sorry Russ, but that's what they are) cause.
And don't let the Democrats fool you, if Bush hadn't made the case for Iraq, they would have been all over the news this week saying he was running away from his Iraq policy.
And finally, what's up with John McCain? The Supreme Court didn't say that military tribunals were unconstitutional, they said the President didn't have the legal authority to conduct them. Congress is trying to give the President the authority and McCain is blocking it. Not a good time to position yourself in the middle for your presidential aspirations Johnny boy.
Rep. David Obey on Wednesday likened the House Republican leader's questioning of Democrats' patriotism to Joe McCarthy's Cold War witch-hunt for Communists.
"I come from the state of Joe McCarthy," said Obey, D-Wausau. "(I) know a third-rate McCarthy when I see one. And we saw one yesterday."
The majority leader, John Boehner of Ohio had said that Democrats who criticized President Bush's speech on Monday, "are more interested in protecting the terrorists than protecting the American people."
If you're scratching your head over Obey's reaction, we are too. This is the same guy who felt like it was alright for the New York Times to leak information on a LEGAL program to watch potential terrorists.
I guess Obey's theory is, when someone starts telling the truth about me and I don't like it, I'll call him a name. How old are you Dave, 9 or 69?
And now we comment on all the Democrats moaning, wailing and gnashing of teeth over the President's September 11th speech. They didn't like that he made a case for staying in Iraq. They said that was political and not befitting the occasion. What?!?!?! Regardless of why we got into Iraq, that's where the terrorists are fighting us. That's where they have vowed to drive us out and claim victory for their Islamic-facist (sorry Russ, but that's what they are) cause.
And don't let the Democrats fool you, if Bush hadn't made the case for Iraq, they would have been all over the news this week saying he was running away from his Iraq policy.
And finally, what's up with John McCain? The Supreme Court didn't say that military tribunals were unconstitutional, they said the President didn't have the legal authority to conduct them. Congress is trying to give the President the authority and McCain is blocking it. Not a good time to position yourself in the middle for your presidential aspirations Johnny boy.
posted by ObeyOut2006 at 10:12 PM
5 Comments:
What Dave Obey misses (as do most liberal bomb throwers) is the fact that Senator Joseph McCarthy exposed numerous communist security risks who were convicted as Soviet spies. Alger Hiss, the Rosenbergs and others were indeed Soviet spies.
What Obey and other Democrats want you to think is that McCarthy was part of the later witch hunt conducted by the House Unamerican Activities Committee (HUAC) which went after actors and directors in Hollywood. That was a House of Representatives action, McCarthy was a SENATOR.
McCarthy made liberals mad because he exposed actual Soviet spies, who Democrats had no problem with and continue to try to deny the facts in those cases. They fight back by attempting to attach McCarthy to investigations ("witch hunts") in which he was never involved.
It all plays with Americans who don't know history and get their "facts" from movies like "Goodnight and Good Luck." It does not change the fact that McCarthy was dead on and did this country a great service by exposing the enemy within.
Tracy, how did you get so smart at such a young age?
In 2001 Major General Oleg Kaugin, former Chief KGB Counterintelligence, spoke on Washington Journal on McCarthyism. According to Kalugin, there were more than 200 spies in the US at the time of the McCarthy purge. He said that McCarthy did a good service for the United States because 1. He was on target regarding the Red threat, and 2. it worked well to slow the Soviet's spy efforts stateside.
Since the declassification of the VENONA project and the release of KGB files, it has become clear that Joe McCarthy was correct. There was a Soviet spy network inside of the US government. So they must attack his character.
McCarthy died from hepititis, not alcoholism. Robert Kennedy made him god father to his child. John F. Kennedy called him a great American patriot.
I was privy to valuable information because Democrats have not been able to ban actual historical records... yet.
"Unless we learn from history, we are doomed to repeat it," but remember, "those who tell the stories rule society." Liberals are writing the text books and publishing the newspapers. History, therefore, is in danger of extinction.
Tracy,
I agree. It has been said that history is written by the victors. But since we have never been defeated, who writes our history. the rough draft of our history is written by newspaper journalists and broadcasters. The final draft of our history is written by liberal university professors.
The internet, talk radio, and cable t.v. are finally providing a view of history not sanctioned by the drive by media or the screaming liberals of higher academia. But this is not enough. We need to be ever vigilante of our history. History defines who we are as a people and what we want.
Oh, there I go lecturing again...anyway, I like the way you think, young man.
Craig
Craig,
It irks me that we have to spend so much time debunking obvious lies and distortions of history. Clinton is claiming to have been "obsessed with Bin Laden (a quote from Wesley "Weasley" Clark's book, actually)," but got close and failed.
I don't dispute that he got real close. He was, after all, offered Bin Laden on a silver platter by the Sudanese government (twice, by their account). Clinton just wasn't interested... until now; the legacy-building phase of his career.
The "writers of history" liberals are perfectly willing to buy Clinton's version of the story and to throw out anything that proves it's all hooey. At best, we'll get a footnote in text books that says "some of the material facts in this period of history are disputed by other historians."
I can't imagine Germany even trying to claim that Hitler was a great man in their future text books, but we already have to tolerate that baloney about Carter and now Clinton in ours.
It is up to us to perpetuate truth through our own book-writing efforts and to at least try to "balance" history as best we can. The liberals' view: "why let the truth spoil a perfectly good story."
Post a Comment
<< Home