December 16, 2003

IT WORKED SO WELL FOR MS McKINNEY:

Congresswoman Invites a Terrorist (NewsMax, 12/16/03)

We're giving Saddam ally Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee exactly what she wanted, but will she thank us?

She recently visited Syria although even the State Department admits it is a state sponsor of terrorism, and she says she was so impressed with dictator Bashar Assad that she invited him to her home state of Texas.

"I'm sure someone will write a headline, 'Congresswoman invites a terrorist'," the Democrat is quoted as saying in today's Houston Chronicle. "But that's not what I'm trying to do."


McDermott questions timing of arrest (Alex Fryer, 12/16/03, Seattle Times)
On Seattle radio yesterday, Rep. Jim McDermott questioned the timing of Saddam Hussein's capture, saying, "I'm sure they
could have found him a long time ago if they wanted to."

His comments came during an interview on "The Dave Ross Show" on KIRO-FM.

"I've been surprised they waited, but then I thought, well, politically, it probably doesn't make much sense to find him just yet," he said.

"There's too much by happenstance for it to be just a coincidental thing that it happened on this particular day," he continued.

Later yesterday, the Seattle Democrat said he did not know whether the Pentagon had manufactured the arrest of the Iraqi leader. "I think the fact is that the administration has been desperate to find something (positive), and this came up.


Exactly whose side are the Democrats on?

Posted by Orrin Judd at December 16, 2003 1:36 PM
Comments

Any side but ours.

Posted by: M. at December 16, 2003 2:05 PM

M.,

That is exactly right.

Posted by: TCB at December 16, 2003 2:33 PM

It used to be that, with Dems, one had to make various distinctions of types & degrees of liberalism & leftism.

Increasingly one now must make, with many Dems, various distinctions of types & degrees of treason-heartedness & treason itself.

And we need a distinction between unpatriotic (weights US interests as nil at most) & antipatriotic (weights US interests as negative).

Posted by: ForNow at December 16, 2003 3:54 PM

I'm continuously amused that in the eyes of the Left the President is simultaneously:

1) A blithering dolt.

2) A Machiavellian mastermind.

How does he do it?

Posted by: jeff at December 16, 2003 4:09 PM

The Left has been SO loopy lately—e.g., Phillip Adams with yet ANOTHER article on The Turkey yesterday in The Australian—that I want to put my own tinfoil hat on & wonder whether “inner circles” of Dems are encouraging mass leftist loopiness as a distraction from Machiavellian strategies in the works.

Posted by: ForNow at December 16, 2003 4:12 PM

The Democrats deserve all the disdain they get these days because no one in the party (NO ONE) has the guts to read these fools out.

Trent Lott is no longer Senate majority leader. He was taken to the woodshed. Other Republican stumbles (Newt, Janklow, and so on) have either left or been moved off-stage. But the Democrats won't do it to anyone, even Reverend Al or Psycho Jim McDermott. Why not?

Posted by: jim hamlen at December 16, 2003 4:26 PM

I should note, with no small amount of chagrin, that Ms. Lee is from the deeeeeeply loopy end of the Donkey Party, and, sadly, a Texan to boot. Point is, neither she nor Baghdad Jim are representative, er, probably not representative of the Donkeys as a whole.

Posted by: Chris at December 16, 2003 4:44 PM

No, its three leaders--Nancy Pelosi, Howard Dean, and Ted Kennedy--are the mainstream.

Posted by: oj at December 16, 2003 5:03 PM

And the others—the Clintons, Biden, Clark—have shifted their center of gravity from Washington, DC, USA, to somewhere further east, since their strategic linkups with the Eurosocs.
Labour forges ties with US' Democrats,” Aftenposten, Oct. 23, 2003. Twice since, EU threats of retaliatory tariffs targeting electorally crucial states. Hmm.

Posted by: ForNow at December 16, 2003 5:28 PM

The loathsome Jihad Jim McDermott's district here in Seattle is so safe he usually runs unopposed. The next time he holds a town meeting locally I think I may have to introduce the Congressman to the 19th century practice of dead-catting.

Posted by: Carter at December 17, 2003 12:44 AM

I will bite.

What is dead-catting?

Posted by: Robert Schwartz at December 17, 2003 9:09 PM

Here's the only reference I could find:

Ambrose Bierce-Devil's Dictionary

Draw your own conclusions.

From my perspective in 'Rinker' Rick Larsen's domain (WA-2), I wouldn't assume that Jihad Jim doesn't accurately reflect the attitudes of his district (WA-7). PI readers, anyway.

Posted by: TimF at December 18, 2003 8:13 PM
« WHEN THEY ATTACK, WE WIN: | Main | REST FOR THE WICKED?: »