Edwards letter was a call for people in agreement with him to be politically active – to influence their Representatives and Senators by calling. He believes activity like that will make a difference.

Edwards letter and this string was a “wake up” call to me.

I have been withholding support from the Republican party and Bush because of the “amnesty” issue. I believe Bush is dead wrong about it

BUT, the Dems seem to be dead wrong about almost everything.

If we conservatives only support those who agree with us on everything – we. will. lose. big.

If we do not support with calls and small contributions those who more closely hold our views they will fail and lose – and then what will we have and who should we blame?

In the long history of the world, only a few generations have been granted the role of defending freedom in its hour of maximum danger. I do not shrink from this responsibility—I welcome it. I do not believe that any of us would exchange places with any other people or any other generation. The energy, the faith, the devotion which we bring to this endeavor will light our country and all who serve it—and the glow from that fire can truly light the world.

And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country.

My fellow citizens of the world: ask not what America will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man.

Finally, whether you are citizens of America or citizens of the world, ask of us the same high standards of strength and sacrifice which we ask of you. With a good conscience our only sure reward, with history the final judge of our deeds, let us go forth to lead the land we love, asking His blessing and His help, but knowing that here on earth God’s work must truly be our own.

-JFK

Vs. The Modern Democrat:

Ladies and gentlemen, our course is clear. The time has come to knuckle under. To get down on all fours and really lick boot. -McNeal

You know… it’s too bad that the good Kennedys die, and the terrible ones live forever.

When, when, when will the citizens of the United States wake up and see the Left for what they really are?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3131295/

MATTHEWS:Let me ask but the war, because I know these are all students and a lot of guys the age of these students are fighting over there and cleaning up over there, and they’re doing the occupation.

Were we right to go to this war alone, basically without the Europeans behind us? Was that something we had to do?

EDWARDS: I think that we were right to go. I think we were right to go to the United Nations. I think we couldn’t let those who could veto in the Security Council hold us hostage.

And I think Saddam Hussein, being gone is good. Good for the American people, good for the security of that region of the world, and good for the Iraqi people.

MATTHEWS: If you think the decision, which was made by the president, when basically he saw the French weren’t with us and the Germans and the Russians weren’t with us, was he right to say, “We’re going anyway”?

EDWARDS: I stand behind my support of that, yes.

MATTHEWS: You believe in that?

EDWARDS: Yes.

MATTHEWS: Let me ask you about-Since you did support the resolution and you did support that ultimate solution to go into combat and to take over that government and occupy that country. Do you think that you, as a United States Senator, got the straight story from the Bush administration on this war? On the need for the war? Did you get the straight story?

EDWARDS: Well, the first thing I should say is I take responsibility for my vote. Period. And I did what I did based upon a belief, Chris, that Saddam Hussein’s potential for getting nuclear capability was what created the threat. That was always the focus of my concern. Still is the focus of my concern.

So did I get misled? No. I didn’t get misled.

MATTHEWS: Did you get an honest reading on the intelligence?

EDWRADS: But now we’re getting to the second part of your question.

I think we have to get to the bottom of this. I think there’s clear inconsistency between what’s been found in Iraq and what we were told.

And as you know, I serve on the Senate Intelligence Committee. So it wasn’t just the Bush administration. I sat in meeting after meeting after meeting where we were told about the presence of weapons of mass destruction. There is clearly a disconnect between what we were told and what, in fact, we found there.

MATTHEWS: If you knew last October when you had to cast an aye or nay vote for this war, that we would be unable to find weapons of mass destruction after all these months there, would you still have supported the war?

EDWARDS: It wouldn’t change my views. I said before, I think that the threat here was a unique threat. It was Saddam Hussein, the potential for Saddam getting nuclear weapons, given his history and the fact that he started the war before.

MATTHEWS: Do you feel now that you have evidence in your hands that he was on the verge of getting nuclear weapons?

EDWARDS: No, I wouldn’t go that far.

MATTHES: What would you say?

EDWARDS: What I would say is there’s a decade long pattern of an effort to get nuclear capability, from the former Soviet Union, trying to get access to scientists…

MATTHEWS: What about Africa?

EDWARDS: … trying to get-No. I don’t think so. At least not from the evidence.

MATTHEWS: Were you misled by the president in the State of the Union address on the argument that Saddam Hussein was trying get uranium from Niger?

EDWARDS: I guess the answer to that is no.

I did not put a lot of stock in that.

MATTHEWS: But you didn’t believe-But you weren’t misled?

EDWARDS: No, I was not misled because I didn’t put a lot of stock in to it begin with.

As I said before, I think what happened here is, for over a decade, there is strong, powerful evidence, which I still believe is true, that Saddam Hussein had been trying to get nuclear capability. Either from North Korea, from the former Soviet Union, getting access to scientists, trying to get access to raw fissile material. I don’t-that I don’t have any question about.

MATTHEWS: The United States has had a long history of nonintervention, of basically taking the “don’t tread on me and if you don’t we’ll leave you alone.” We broke with that tradition for Iraq. What is your standard for breaking with tradition of nonintervention?

EDWARDS: When somebody like Saddam Hussein presents a direct threat to the security of the American people and, in this case, the security of a region of the world that I think is critical.

He quickly realizes that he’s pissed off a lot of liberal primary voters and tries to say he would have gone about it differently than the President, but he can’t seem to explain how, because he just go through saying he’d have done it exactly like the President and stands by how the President went about it. He actually tried to flip flop in a matter of minutes because he feared alienating the far left voters… yet he had no where to go because the comments I just cited leave absolutely no wiggle room for him. What would he have done differently, sent a hooker over to the hotel rooms of the foreing ministers of France, Germany, and Russia?

This guy is worthless and I hope soon enough we never hear from him again.

Somebody should start “swiftboating” this little bastard.

I am ashamed by the current spectacle in Congress and, for the first time in my life, ashamed to be an American.

Anton on February 15, 2007 at 1:29 PM

I am right there with you.

They will have slowly bled the US military to death. They will have made mincemeat of the idea that America is a reliable ally and a steady force for freedom against jihad and chaos.

This bothers me as much as it bothers you. It doesn’t bother anyone who opposes the war, even my sweet elderly mother who watches too much CNN and MSNBC. Living as I do in Florida, I have many encounters with elderly members of “the greatest generation,” and most of the retirement-community sentiment that I encounter is that Iraq is such a mess that we should bring our troops home now and damn the consequences. And these are solid citizens with conservative social values; never mind the radical left.

I don’t get it. I understand that many people don’t think about long-term international politics, but I really don’t get it from a basic “what’s in it for me” perspective. If we look at the Iraq war situation in the most narrow and self-centered way, we see a bunch of volunteers going to fight a war. None of this directly affects my daily life, not even the expense of it. The economy is booming — nobody I know is in any danger of being drafted — and occasionally there is good news of a thwarted terrorist plot, such as the failed London aircraft bombings of last summer. The volunteers who are getting shot at still have good morale and support the mission; so why all the anti-war caterwauling? Is it too much for the citizens of our great republic to be bothered by unpleasant news reports interrupting their nightly TV shows?

Current events are proving that you and I are a minority, Bryan; as are our blogoshpere friends and the brave folks in our military. The USA is a poor ally because our cultural and political elite is weak and self-absorbed. Our voters are easily bamboozled by the lies and deception of the media. We are stampeding to defeat in a war where ONLY THOSE WHO VOLUNTEER TO SACRIFICE actually have to sacrifice! Oh, except for the anticipated millions of Iraqi victims of Iranian regional ambitions following a US retreat.

I am ashamed by the current spectacle in Congress and, for the first time in my life, ashamed to be an American.

And they won’t lose a second’s sleep over any of it.

But they are the ‘progressives’, the lovers/supporters of rights, freedom, equality, liberty, “all be the same, or else you are nothing”, women’s rights, advocates for the little guy/gal and the downtrodden. Nauseating!!!

Never, ever, ever, refer to them as progressive, without putting the word in quotes. Hypocrites one and all.

A little aside from this topic – I work with a bleeding one of them, who stands for all they stand for, traveled from San Diego to Boston a few days ago, in her full-length mink coat, which she couldn’t “wait to put on again”. I don’t know whether to laugh or cry about such double-standards, which they shove down our throats.

You’ll be calling me Mr. President before Edwards ever gets that honorific.

Pablo on February 15, 2007 at 11:16 AM

You have my support, all the way!

Dear Republican Voters,

You certainly taught those RINOS a lesson.

- The DNC

interesting…

I was reading this several ways.

Anyhoo, I don’t see a retreat untill there is signifigant face saving security in most of Badbag. If Bush was serious about victory wouldn’t he be using the bully pulpit to skewer his foes? Seems like he’s playing nice so he can start pulling out when things look a little calmer.
/hope I’m wrong.

You certainly taught those RINOS a lesson.

– The DNC

When you become President, you can bring the Troops home too soon and Sen. Obama’s remark about wasted lives will become true. Einstein.

“President Pablo” … has a nice ring to it :-)

Traitor pretty much sums it up.

Once we’ve retreated, and I think the trajectory we’re on now all but demands it, and once the bloodbath is over and a new round of monsters have taken control of Iraq, it will be just as easy for all of them to pretend that they had no role in any of it…….. And they won’t lose a second’s sleep over any of it.

Souless Michael Foxtrots, all of them… Isn’t there anyone in Washington who understands what is at stake, what is truly going on, and has the courage to stand up to this tripe?

Make it clear that President Bush is conducting this war without authorization. The 2002 authorization did not give Bush the power to use U.S. troops to police a civil war. President Bush exceeded his authority long ago. He now needs to end the war and ask Congress for new authority to manage the withdrawal of the U.S. military presence and to help Iraq achieve stability.

This is really weak. Congress has abrogated its authority to declare war since 1945 by giving meaningless permissions to ‘use military force’ whenever there is a threat. If these clowns are really concerned about war, then they should stand up and resuse to authorize military force until the President asks for a formal declaration.

Now it’s too late for that, so instead of having the guts to stand up and de-fund the combat troops, thereby forcing an end, they merely strut and pose and interfere with the president’s conducting of the war (which as CinC, it is his obligation to do).

I’ll tell ya, the irresponsibility and recklessness of the radical left is stunning.

Radical left? Hate to quibble but the “radical left” are now mainstream.

He now needs to end the war and ask Congress for new authority to manage the withdrawal of the U.S. military presence and to help Iraq achieve stability.

And he doesn’t get it; if we withdraw with the job half-done, there won’t BE any stability. But then the Dems can point at Pres. Bush and crow about how ‘his’ policy screwed up our relations with the Middle East.

And Bryan, I don’t even get a hat tip? :-)

Well, there’s a different World View there… they do not have the grounding in freedom under God that our American Forefathers had. Just sayin’.

BNCurtis on February 15, 2007 at 11:24 AM

Well, according to the left (and MSM), the terrorists are “freedom fighters”, and they are fighting infidels pursuant to Allah’s will. I guess that would make most of these guys Islamist forefathers.

They want us to pull out of Iraq, let everything we’ve fought for and built up be destroyed to the point where we will HAVE to go back in. Into a situation where the few remaining friends and allies left alive will not trust and work with us. What a nightmare.

It is not in America’s interest for this to be allowed to happen. It is criminally insane. It is treason.