Today I received an e-PSA from Senator Durbin's office re progress of the 110th Congress, which PSA in part represents that via enacting so much 9/11 Commission aracna and ephemera, Democrats have tightly protecetd us as much as anyone humanly can from foreign attacks or other discomforts to our civilian lives.

 

To be sure, those enactments don't hurt national security. But as a VoteVets e-PSA today in the name of retired General Wesley K. Clark (member Center For American Progress, by the way, a Clinton think tank, and Clark's WESPAC for years has said "Help Wes Clark Elect Democrats") obviated to me, slandering Bush for ignoring or not complying with foreign bullies if they don't like counter-offer diplomacy is not just partisan, it's actually Clark and crowd's way they must have proceeded their whole careers and pray to do so again. 

 

To Votevets' PSA I replied:

 

"The within VoteVets PSA, and one assumes Senator Webb's BornFightingPAC and such, will become their own echo chamber against the sitting USA President (not needing, by circumstances of Mymood Alibabjihad and folks like Vladimir Putin, to be named Bush) and any President following Bush in saying the USA must NEVER attack Iran or engage if the USA attacked; how can a man who rose to four-star command, and another who rose to Secretary of the Navy, stand there and say with straight faces no consequences for failure to follow UN or USA or both diplomacy will get anyone anywhere with bullies? I recall the resolute ways John F. Kennedy and Ronald W. Reagan dealt with the most dangerous bullies, and how George H.W. Bush said "the day of the dictator is over", and how George W. Bush...a true North Star re consistancy of military conduct...had more respect even from Putin and Iran's leaders before some started spitting on our flag, our people re worth of respect, and bending over backwards with every business, defense, and resource treaty appeasement, which seems only to make bullies demand more. For such reason apparent well after the 2006 election cycle and all previous, I reject all artful and handwringing rodomontade geared to inculcate falsely that surrender is necessary or evasive of discomfort in USA civilian life, and I support President Bush in yes pushing for diplomacy at all times (even if conlict arose) but letting Iran or anyone else know there must be consequences for bullying the USA or any other nation(s)."

 

Curiously, those in Clark's camp further demand prosecutions of telecoms who complied with Congress' own laws (yet vouchsafe that "mere" voter trails violate sacred private contracts), imply that saying you're LBGT (married or not married) will entitle you to safety and justice and job protection, that unless you agree to only government-run and provided healthcare you should not expect to work (per Senator Clinton's recent expression via her bill), and that if this doesn't come to pass you can expect those in the Clark camp to keep closing farms and jobs and businesses...and in any event, supplication of all foreign bullies WILL continue, as it's the maximum strength diplomacy Clark campers can stomach as they seek progress for their constituencies.

 

I reiterate, I support the diplomatic efforts of President George Walker Bush including the occasional need to be tough but fair if that is all some understand abroad. What...if some nation doesn't like us having a vegetable garden, or blue shoelaces, or voting, or they're just punks like Qaeda, ignore them until they strike then cave to their demands? Some "progressive" diplomacy, which the other month extended to Oklahoma Democrats saying re Senator Inhofe's near miss of attack in Iraq "So close yet so far".