It is interesting that George Bush mentioned appeasement the other week in the context of what is going on in the Middle East.
The British tried to appease Hitler, and got completely overwhelmed-it gave Hitler that much more time to build up his technical superiority and then wage his phoney ‘defensive war.’
The British government knew of concentration camps as early as 1936, and did nothing. We KNOW this because British novelists at the time were writing about it and protesting it, and their books were suppressed and are only now coming back into print through women’s presses like Virago.
The American government was still trading with Nazis until 1943.
In fact, George Bush’s grandfather laundered money for Hitler’s chief finance minister. So forgive me if I don’t listen to his opinion about ‘appeasement’ when the word in this instance is ‘collaboration’.
These are all historical facts, not opinions.
So let’s look at the facts now.
We KNOW this administration has lied time and time again to justify the present war. We have had independent confirmation that there is NO nuclear weapons program in Iran. Therefore, there is nothing to appease.
The Iranian people themselves despise their leader and protest against him regularly. Iran is not the problem. Instability and scaremongering in an election year is the problem.
We cannot appease, but nor can we be hypocrites and violate the sovereign rights of other nations.
All the fighting in this war, and clearly throughout human history, rarely produces benefit. But this is a phony war–we were LIED to.
And no one dared speak out against it because they were afraid of their careers being shredded if they did, since anyone who dared was labelled ‘unpatriotic’ at the time.
Obama was not even in office then-it was all very well for him to claim he would not have voted in favor of the war, but he has funded it ever since.
And are politicians meant to represent their own views, or those of their constituents? Clearly WE are at fault if we are not sending a clear message to our leaders as to what should happen.
The fact that Obama is now doing an about-face on his 16 month timetable shows a-he was just saying what people wanted to hear; b-he is na’¯ve and inexperienced; C-he is a hypocrite; D-all of the above.
Do we really want him to be president?
After the initial media honeymoon was over, he has managed to stumble and look like a boob at every turn. He has contradicted himself so often, McCain doesn’t even have to attack him, he can just watch him self-destruct.
His reversal on his supposed Iraq policy is just one in a long line of about faces, or is it just that he is two-faced.
One thing is for sure, you might not have like the Clintons, but what you saw and what they stood for was what you got. She has fought for education, health care, equal opportunities, for three DECADES, not three years. She deserved to be the candidate, and she is now the only thing standing between Obama and defeat in November.
Ever since he ‘won’ the nomination (by which read that they refused to give her all the delegates she won in Michigan and Florida, so that he seemingly went over the required total first) have all the party swarmed around him? NO.
Have huge donations poured in? NO.
Great press coverage?
Meaningful debates with McCain?
A real drive for the White House with a powerful majority behind him?
NO. NO. NO.
He wil go down in history as the greatest president that never was if he does not get his act together.
And by the way, Mr. Media Darling,, since you STILL don’t seem to have learned your lesson yet, just remember, the higher up you climb, the further you fall.
And watching you land on your butt all the time sure makes for great headlines, doesn’t it?
