In case you've forgotten what your own bile tastes like, consider the latest from Ann Coulter:
Democrats don't oppose the war on terrorism because they hate Bush: They hate Bush because he is fighting the war on terrorism. They would hate him for fighting terrorists even if he had a "D" after his name. They would hate Bernie Sanders if he were fighting a war on terrorism. In the past three decades, there have been more legitimate sightings of Bigfoot than of "Scoop Jackson Democrats."
That's why Hillary Clinton has anti-war protestors howling at her public events. That's why she has drawn an anti-war primary opponent, Jonathan Tasini, who appears to believe that Israel is a terrorist state.
Well, Mama always said, terror is as terror does
In fact, most progessives oppose this war, and this administration, precisely because Bush is not
fighting the war on terror. His propaganda flacks may pretend otherwise, but look at the record:
Osama remains alive. A.Q. Khan remains protected. Pakistan, the only Islamic nation linked in any way to the most recent terror plot, remains untouchable. Afghanistan continues to slide into chaos and the Taliban have regained their muscles.
The real funders of the 9/11 plot remain uncaptured and, to a large extent, uninvestigated -- probably because the financial trail overlaps with the right-wing networks we have outlined in numerous other posts.
Meanwhile, the American public receives a daily propaganda barrage designed to convince us of a non-existent Iran-Osama connection -- even though Al Qaeda's followers fervently oppose Shi'ite Islam (which they seem to consider a Jewish plot), and even though Iran despises the Taliban and thus took an initially friendly attitude toward the American invasion of Afghanistan.
Even Bush's own State Department concedes that the continued occupation of Iraq has created numerous jihadists.
Only 18% of the Lebanese population backed Hezbollah in any way before the current American-backed hostilities. Now, nearly the entire nation of Lebanon feels sympathetic toward the one force that has shown enough grit to fight the invaders. Other Islamic nations, such as Saudi Arabia, which once expressed contempt for Hezbollah, now offer guarded expressions of support.
Here at home, our ports remain hideously vulnerable. Bush keeps our border patrol on a starvation budget. Does anyone really believe that the increased number of trucks coming in from Mexico (thanks to NAFTA) will ever receive proper inspection?
Homeland Security gives fat contracts to cronies who sub-contract the work and pocket the profits. The administration transfers taxpayer wealth to small towns and small states -- red states -- leaving our large cities, the places where America generates actual wealth, unprotected.
Red states are parasites, taking more from the federal government than they give. All our real money is made in the large blue-state cities. Destroy those cities and you destroy the American economy. Bush has, in effect, invited the terrorists to attack our most important centers of commerce. I'm not sure what our southern tics will do when the host animal they both hate and feed upon dies in a nuclear crematorium.
What has W done to protect this country?
I am not among those theorists who believe that Osama Bin Laden and George Bush have consciously colluded. But ask yourself: If they did
coordinate, if they were
partners -- just what, exactly, would Bush have done differently?