So I was just
sitting here debating what my next entry should be, and lo and behold, the
first news item I stumbled upon this morning should scream for my attention. Apparently the National Republican Congressional
Committee issued a statement that it, in essence, hopes that Gen. McChrystal,
commander of the U.S. forces in Afghanistan, puts the Speaker of the House Nancy
Pelosi, in her place concerning Afghan policy.
Now it should be obvious to all what exactly
was meant by this statement, but if not, let’s clear it up at the onset.
Democrats, particularly those like Pelosi, typically possess an intelligence
deficit when it comes to military matters. Let’s face it, liberals, despite
their rhetoric about “supporting the troops”, generally loathe the military.
This is a holdover mentality from the 1960’s, where the hippy generation demonstrated
their “support” for military members by spitting on them and rendering unto
them highly coveted titles of honour, such as “baby killer.” The methods may
have changed, but the disdain has not. Nowadays the libs conduct their warfare
on the military by gutting it, either through denial of funding that is
necessary to adequately achieve mission objectives, or by the imposition of
social engineering schemes that please the politically correct whackos, or by a
vast array of other subtle schemes. Let there be no doubt, the Dems are
squarely in the business of denying support to the military, and are the worst
abusers of it. Ironically, the military is arguably the only successfully run
institution answerable to the government, but it is becoming much less so the
more that the libs are able to sink their claws into it. But back to the
point...
The obvious position of the NRCC is that
Speaker Pelosi is very poorly suited to address U.S. policy in Afghanistan, and
hopes that Gen. McChrystal, who is far more qualified and informed concerning
military strategy, will have the dominant voice in determining the policies in
practice.
But it gets better. In reaction, and in
typical liberal fashion, Speaker Pelosi has used one of the standard tactics of
the left, which is to say that she pulled the sexism card. Without missing a
beat and right on cue, arguably the most powerful woman in the country, and in
fact one of the most powerful in the world, seized the opportunity to interpret
the desire to put her “in her place” as a sentiment motivated by disdain not
for her incompetence, but for her gender. You see, apparently the Republicans
just hate women, or so we are constantly told, since they fail to see that a liberal woman (or any “minority”
group) can do no wrong, as horrendously ignorant as she may be.
Now I want to know, can anyone picture
Margaret Thatcher behaving this way? Or how about the woman libs love to hate,
Sarah Palin? No, you can’t. The sexism / racism game is played almost exclusively
by the left, and they play it because it is unfortunately effective in its
ability to silence opposition or debate. But you would think that the Speaker
of the House should be above this childish and utterly dishonest tactic of
name-calling, wouldn’t you?
The days of race and gender games are far
overdue to fade into shameful history. If this were a sane world, any
politician who played those cards would be promptly escorted out of office, or else
such charges would have to be rigorously substantiated to be taken seriously.
Unfortunately, too many of us have no interest in a sane world.
Comments