Commentaries, Global Warming, Opinions   Cover   •   Commentary   •   Books & Reviews   •   Climate Change   •   Site Links   •   Feedback
"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." - John 8:32
WEBCommentary Guest
Author:  Sher Zieve
Bio: Sher Zieve
Date:  October 8, 2007
Print article - Printer friendly version

Email article link to friend(s) - Email a link to this article to friends

Facebook - Facebook

Topic category:  Other/General

Dialogue with Democrats Now Akin to Diplomacy with Terrorists?

The problem with Islamic terrorists is that they say one thing with their lies to the appeasing West and the polar opposite to their own people. One only need listen to what Iranian President Ahmadinejad says in his speeches to the fawning leftist media and, then, follow up with his messages to the Iranian and Islamic world. From the Islamist point of view, everything and everyone non-Muslim needs to be irrevocably destroyed. The media avoids the truth of what is being said by this and other Islamo-fascist terrorist leaders, in favor of the feel-good lies. This is stupidity in its most grotesque and dangerous guise. These terrorists cannot be viably dealt with in a diplomatic manner. Diplomacy never has and never will work with those who have vowed to obliterate the diplomats and their countries of origin.

I suggest that the same can be said for the current—albeit ongoing—Democrat attack on anything and everyone non-leftist-Democrat that needs to be terminated; with whatever weapon is handy at the moment. Recently, the leftist George Soros funded Democrat Party money-raising machine ran a hit Ad against General David Petraeus that accused him—and the entire US Military by association—of being a traitor. The Ad sparked a national controversy and an eventual Senate vote to condemn the Ad was taken. The condemnation vote passed by 72-25—meaning that there were still Democrat senators who, apparently, supported the smear against one of the top generals in our nation. Note: This is yet another example of the Democrat revulsion—if not hatred—with the US military.

Regarding those who voted against the condemnation of one of their primary funding sources are two Democrat presidential hopefuls—Senators Hillary Clinton and Christopher Dodd. Their message—which also includes the stance of “we haste everything USA especially those who work to protect it”—most certainly seems to be: “As long as it’s enough, we’ll support anyone who pays us!” Note: When the vote was taken, Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) managed to avoid it and any additional controversy, by being absent from the Senate chamber. Instead Democrats—angered by the fact that their actual-and-true association with the radical MoveOn group—decided to attempt a change of subject and again attack conservative icon Rush Limbaugh. Democrat leaders, including but not limited to Senate Majority leader Harry Reid and Tom Harkin, vilified Limbaugh. Both of these senators and others from their party have blasted Limbaugh for his “phony soldiers” comments. The fact that they have been anti-military and anti-soldiers for years and Rush was referring to actual and verifiable phony soldiers (those who claim to be soldiers and were or are not or claimed to have seen combat—which they did not) appears to have eluded them. It is also patently obvious that they either did not hear or read the actual transcript of Rush’s comments or—even more insidiously—chose to ignore it. After all, Democrats needed to mount a counter-insurgency against the “other side” by whatever means were necessary.

The reality that they are now blatantly lying is immaterial. Besides, they have done it many times before. And the leftist press was willing—if not salivating—to get the bogus story into the public’s hands and minds. So, it did. The fact that the liberals’ own Charley Gibson had done an ABC exposé—days before—on these same and other “phony soldiers” was of no importance to them. Getting the “right winger” Rush Limbaugh was their only obsession.

Note: How can one have any sort of a real dialogue with individuals and/or groups who must consistently lie to the American people, in order to get a point—any point at all—across?

We already know that terrorists and their leaders say one thing when they’re in front of a Western audience and the exact opposite when they’re speaking to listeners at home. Sound familiar?

And speaking of Kandidate Clinton, it was announced by her campaign committee Monday that admitted National Archive document-stealer-and-destroyer Sandy Berger is going to be an “unpaid advisor”: to the senator’s presidential bid. Hiring an admitted thief seems to be nothing new for Ms. Clinton. Payback for a job well done, perhaps?

Although the leftist media has worked diligently to downplay it, Clinton’s association with the previously fleeing Ponzi-scheme convicted felon Norman Hsu placed over $850,000 into her coffers. Even Senator Barack Obama worked to get money from Hsu. These are your two top presidential choices, libs.

But, in answer to this article’s question: (Is) dialogue with Democrats now akin to diplomacy with terrorists? I know my answer. You’ll need to figure your own out.


Sher Zieve

Send email feedback to Sher Zieve

Biography - Sher Zieve

Sher Zieve is a long-time syndicated columnist who generally writes columns of a politically Conservative and Constitutional nature. She also interviews notable people with an interesting and/or newsworthy story to tell. These include politicians, writers, activists and others in the news. Her work has been and continues to be carried by both national and international publications. Sher appears regularly on national talk shows.

Read other commentaries by Sher Zieve.

Copyright © 2007 by Sher Zieve
All Rights Reserved.

[ Back ]

© 2004-2022 by WEBCommentary(tm), All Rights Reserved