Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SeachRE who wrote (72226)	7/14/2006 9:28:58 PM
From: Hope Praytochange	Respond to of 173976

DemoRats Use Dead Americans as Campaign Props by Michael Reagan Posted Jul 14, 2006 Just when you think that the national Demorats can sink no lower, they reach down into the mud and mire in their bag of political tricks and come up with a new and slimier example of their utter shamelessness. Not content with merely undermining the valiant efforts of our servicemen and women risking and sometimes losing their lives fighting international terrorism around the world, the Democrats have now produced a video commercial exploiting the deaths of American soldiers and Marines in order to raise money and win votes. Their new fundraising video shows some 12 flag-draped coffins of dead American servicemen inside a cargo plane. This shocking scene is followed by an image of a soldier staring at a helmet propped up by a machine gun that is stuck in the ground, obviously marking the spot where an American died defending his country against a vicious enemy. The disgusting commercial goes on to show pictures of New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina, successive photos of President Bush (who “obviously” caused the hurricane), a mug shot of former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R.-Tex.), disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff and Vice President Cheney. Apparently there never was a hurricane before Katrina -- it was America’s first. Elect Democrats, the ad suggests, and there will be no more hurricanes, no more dead American servicemen, and no more lobbyists (except for former Sen. Tom Daschle and his wife) -- if only the American people can be fooled into voting for Democrats in the fall elections, or coughing up money to pay for more slimy commercials exploiting our dead. What the ad should say is: Elect Democrats and there will be no more America -- the whole nation will be transformed into scandal-ridden, bankrupt New Jersey. Rep. Tom Reynolds (R.-N.Y.), chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC), says the Democrats are trying to "blatantly exploit the sacrifices made by the men and women of our Armed Forces" for political purposes. “Regardless of what your views on the war may be, this crosses the line," he said in a statement released by the NRCC, adding that Democrat Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Rahm Emanuel “owes our troops, their families, and the families of the fallen an apology." Contrast this with my Dad Ronald Reagan’ s campaign slogans about “Morning in America,” that drew a bright picture of the shining city on the hill, a nation filled with good, decent hardworking people whose promise is still being fulfilled. The Democrat version is more “like nightmare in America” -- an imaginary and dismal picture of a nation that is in fact enjoying the strongest economy on the face of the earth. Americans voted overwhelmingly for my Dad because he made us feel good about America. Why would anyone vote for Democrats who insist on painting a dismal, sordid picture of an America in decline? Where is the media outrage over this sordid money-grubbing commercial? According to the Media Research Council, the liberal media only get upset when Republicans use ads to cite the war on terrorism. When a campaign ad for the re-election of President Bush in 2004 showed images of the 9/11 attacks on America, the media were then quite outraged. Said ABC’s Charles Gibson: “The President, as you probably know, used scenes from Ground Zero in his first campaign ads that were broadcast. That ignited a debate about whether it’s appropriate to use such images in an election campaign." Tom Brokaw said: "The President today also shrugged off critics who’ve complained that he’s politicizing the September 11th attacks. … The Bush campaign is using an image of the World Trade Center in another television ad. And NBC's Ann Curry said: "More fallout expected today from President Bush's re-election ads that feature images from 9/11. Family members of some of the victims of the World Trade Center attacks say they will protest the President's attendance at a groundbreaking ceremony for a 9/11 memorial on New York's Long Island.” Asked the MRC: “Should we expect the same outrage from the press concerning this campaign video by Congressional Democrats, or are such images only verboten when used by a politician the press despises?” -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Copyright © 2006 HUMAN EVENTS. All Rights Reserved.

To: SeachRE who wrote (72226)	7/14/2006 11:13:55 PM
From: puborectalis	Respond to of 173976

July 15, 2006 Editorial Playing Hamas’s Game With the circle of violence in the Middle East expanding alarmingly, it is important to be clear about not only who is responsible for the latest outbreak, but who stands to gain most from its continued escalation. Both questions have the same answer: Hamas and Hezbollah. And Israel needs to be careful that its far-reaching military responses, however legally and morally justified, do not end up advancing the political agenda that Hamas and Hezbollah hard-liners had in mind when they conceived and executed the kidnappings of Israeli soldiers that detonated the fighting. The Palestinian Authority, which Hamas controls, and the Lebanese government, in which Hezbollah is a minority participant, inexcusably failed to prevent or halt these incidents. Iran, which arms Hezbollah, and Syria, which shelters the most violent wing of Hamas, also share some responsibility. Israel is fully justified in treating these two incidents as unacceptable acts of aggression. But it needs to better adapt its methods to the circumstances it now faces. The point is to weaken and isolate Hamas and Hezbollah, while denying them opportunities to rally broader Arab support. To that end, Israel must focus its fire much more directly at the leaders and fighters of these two groups, and do far more to minimize the damage to civilian bystanders. Here’s why: The military chieftains of Hamas and Hezbollah fully understand that their primitively armed guerrillas and limited-range unguided missiles are no match for Israel’s world-class military forces. When they engage in provocative operations, like the recent kidnapping of Israeli soldiers and shelling of Israeli towns, they do not expect to win any kind of traditional military victory. What they more realistically hope for is that the inevitably fierce and devastating Israeli military response will hand them an opportunity to radicalize Arab politics and thereby pressure moderate Arab leaders to distance themselves from Israel and embrace the guerrilla cause. That is a tactic that secular Palestinian guerrilla groups like Fatah pioneered decades ago, and that Islamist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah now use for similar ends. This perverse dynamic is again coming into play after Israel’s wide-ranging forays into Gaza and Lebanon. Most Arabs are not blaming Hamas and Hezbollah for provoking these Israeli raids. They are blaming Israel for carrying them out. That is not fair. But it is the way things work in the real world, and the provocateurs of Hamas and Hezbollah and their allies in Damascus and Tehran understand how to use it to their long-term advantage. Israel’s political and military leaders need to understand it too and not let themselves be drawn into the provocateurs’ game.