Hypocrites, and Cowards.2

Why not. Let's make a continuing series on this theme. Here are two takes from Nealz Nuze...

Hypocrisy--

That British movie about the fictional assassination of George W. Bush has been picked up by a U.S. distributor for a cool million bucks. In case you haven't heard, the movie portrays the killing of the president on a trip to Chicago in 2007. Special effects and actual news footage were used to portray the assassination. How nice.

Sure, these filmmakers and this distributor have the First Amendment rights to make and show whatever film they want. It will be interesting to see just how well this plays here in the United States. Yes, George W. Bush is not too particularly popular right now....but the American people generally don't take too well to the idea of somebody harming their president. Which brings about another point.

What will the Democratic Left say in response to this movie? Will there be howls of protest from Bill Clinton over this movie, like he complained about the 9/11 program on ABC? Will Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid be coming out against this film? Maybe not. Will Howard Dean condemn the idea of assassinating the president, even though they don't agree with him? Their reaction will be one to watch for.

Imagine if this movie had been made 10 years ago about the assassination of Bill Clinton. We would have never heard the end of it.

I've already heard from one Liberal Democrat on this, and I related this response in the first installment of Hypocrites and Cowards... "Presidents do not get special deferment of criticism simply because they are presidents" [paraphrased]. Okay... Cristicism of a sitting President is fine, fantasies about killing one is not.

The Right complains when Clinton and his merry band of Clintonistas demand a docu-drama critical of that administrations response to terrorism leading up to 9.11 be edited, or better yet, dropped altogether. The Left in response throws the Rights howling over a Reagan film right back at them. I think it wil be quite instructive to see how many on the right keep their mouths shut about Death of a President.

And yes, allow me to echo Nealz Nuze here... "What will the Democratic Left say in response to this movie? Will there be howls of protest from Bill Clinton over this movie, like he complained about the 9/11 program on ABC? Will Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid be coming out against this film? Maybe not. Will Howard Dean condemn the idea of assassinating the president, even though they don't agree with him? Their reaction will be one to watch for."

... And I'll be watching.



Cowardice--

George W. Bush, sitting in the Oval Office Monday night, made a fairly tame 17-minute speech to mark the fifth anniversary of 9/11. He talked about the global struggle against Islamic terrorism, how we must prevail and so on. He also mentioned the situation in Iraq and talked about why we had to prevail there. Pretty straightforward, don't you think? Well, not if you're a Democrat.

You see, the Democrats are now all up in arms because they say the president used his prime-time speech to try and generate support for the war in Iraq. Somehow on a day like 9/11, that is supposed to be inappropriate.

First of all, it isn't the war "in Iraq." It's a war against Islamic Fascism. Iraq is merely one of the fronts in that war. A major front, granted... But just one of many.

Republicans weren't taking this lying down. Here comes House Majority Leader John Boehner, who called it like it is. Said Boehner, of the Democrats: "I wonder if they are more interested in protecting the terrorists than protecting the American people. They certainly do not want to take the terrorists on and defeat them." Right on John! But now the Democrat Appeasement Party is really upset.

Nancy Pelosi accused the GOP of the politics of fear, etc... The usual. All of this comes down to the charge that Bush is politicizing 9/11. But in fact, that's what the Democrats are doing. How in the world do they suppose that George Bush is supposed to give a public address from the Oval Office and not mention the war in Iraq? It's the fifth anniversary of 9/11. What is he supposed to talk about, college football?

You do understand the real problem here, don't you? Democrats don't want Bush reminding the nation of the threat that exists from Islamic fascists, and they certainly don't want Bush reminding the American people that he is trying to deal with that threat while Democrats talk of withdrawal and appeasement.

In short, they don't want Bush appearing to be strong while they appear to be weak.

Just ask yourself this question. If you were convinced that the threat from these Islamic murderers was real, who would you want in power to defend our country?

It's as easy as that.

Yes, it most certainly is! The Left has lied, misrepresented the facts, and bent over backward to impeach the president in the public view, outside the prescribed venue-- because they haven't the power to do it in the prescribed venue! They would rather see America lose this war than see Bush come out the other end of his Presidency with a more honorable legacy than their man Bill. Quite frankly, with the exception of a very few, these democrats are cowards... And worse.