"Knowledge will forever govern ignorance

 and a people who mean to be their own governors

 must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives."

Monday, December 19, 2005

New Jersey Democrats Lack Commitment To Victory In Iraq

As we previously noted the House of Representatives voted on November 18, 2005 by a margin of 403.to 3 against pulling American troops out of Iraq. All 13 New Jersey Congressman voted against the measure.

On Friday, December 16, 2005 the Congress voted on expressing commitment to achieving victory in Iraq. The vote was 279-109 in favor of the resolution.

All seven of New Jersey’s Republican congressman voted in favor of achieving victory in Iraq. Four Democrats - Rush Holt, Bob Menendez, Frank Pallone and Bill Pascrell voted against a commitment to victory in Iraq. The other two Democrats - Robert Andrews, voted “present” and Donald Payne did not vote.

Less than a month ago Holt, Menendez, Pallone and Pascrell were voting against pulling our troops out of Iraq ASAP and now they go on record as being against achieving victory in Iraq – truly breathtaking. The country is in the middle of a war and we have congressmen that are not committed to victory. Unbelievable.

In between these two congressional votes, Iraq has held a free and successful election, with Millions of Iraqis voting to choose a parliament, a first in the Arab world. So many Sunni Arabs voted that ballots ran out in some places. Immediately prior to the election, a major poll found that 70 percent of Iraqis say their own lives are going well, and nearly two-thirds expect things to improve in the year ahead.

A successful democratic election and optimistic Iraqis people should be cause for growing confidence and pride that our mission in Iraq is succeeding. Instead as success builds in Iraq Holt, Menendez, Pallone and Pascrell have decided to send a message of weakness and defeatism to the citizens of the United States, to our troops on the field of battle, to the Iraqis people and to our enemies. Pathetic, and to think Bob Menendez is about to become the next senator from New Jersey.

The Democratic Party once had a standard barer that spoke these words:

In the long history of the world, only a few generations have been granted the role of defending freedom in its hour of maximum danger. I do not shrink from this responsibility -- I welcome it.

Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, to assure the survival and the success of liberty.
The difference between Democrats then and now is enough to make you weep.



14 Comments:

At 10:44 PM, Blogger terryp said...

http://telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/10/23/wirq23.xml&sSheet=/portal/2005/10/23/ixportaltop.html

"82 per cent of Iraqis are “strongly opposed” to the presence of coalition troops."

But then again for people who can so easily be spoonfed lies about WMD and ties to terrorism, it should be easy for your cognitive dissonance to ignore reality and sheepishly follow dear leader over a cliff. If someone drives my car into a ditch, I take the keys away. You, however, let him try to drive you out of it. It's funny to watch you still try to reflexively justify and excuse every idiotic thing he does.

 
At 11:01 PM, Blogger terryp said...

I'm curious how the writer(s) of this blog would vote on a resolution with the text:

"President Bush is doing a great job executing the war in Iraq"

 
At 12:04 PM, Blogger Enlighten said...

The Iraqi opinion poll in the UK Telegraph article you cite is from August and the results have been disputed by the British government. But let’s assume those published poll results accurately reflected Iraqi opinion in August. The poll we cited is from December. In addition to the postive findings noted in our post, the poll also found more than two-thirds of Iraqis surveyed opposed the U.S. presence, but only one-quarter of respondents wanted American troops to leave right away.

Assuming both polls are valid, 16% fewer Iraqis oppose the presence of U.S. troops today than in August and 75 % of Iraqis don’t want U.S. troops to leave right away. So our noting the increasing optimism of the Iraqi people is founded in reality and your pessimism… Well, we will let you explain why you choose to ignore these recent poll results in our post and continue to cling to whatever negative reporting you can find, no matter how dubious or out of date.

And please explain where you come up with “But then again for people who can so easily be spoon fed lies about WMD and ties to terrorism, it should be easy for your cognitive dissonance to ignore reality and sheepishly follow dear leader over a cliff.”

And you say “If someone drives my car into a ditch, I take the keys away. You, however, let him try to drive you out of it. It's funny to watch you still try to reflexively justify and excuse every idiotic thing he does.”

First we reject your premise that someone has driven our car in a ditch. But assuming someone had and we landed in the ditch to avoid being killed, in a say a head on collusion, then we would have appreciated the driver’s actions and would have no problem with the driver getting us out of the ditch on our way.

How do you justify your statement “you still try to reflexively justify and excuse every idiotic thing he does”? How did you reach that conclusion? Where’s your evidence that we justify and excuse every thing the President does, let alone reflexively? And finally would you care to name the “idiotic” things you think President Bush has done?

Oh, and the roll call vote over here - 4 yeas.

 
At 12:48 PM, Blogger Ken Adams said...

So why does Garrett get an asterisk?

 
At 1:01 PM, Blogger Enlighten said...

Ken,
Ah, you noticed the secret code we use to communicate with other members of the vast right-wing conspiracy. Now we have to remove it.

 
At 1:38 PM, Blogger terryp said...

I'll just say that you continue to take Bush at his word even though he has lied to us again and again. In 2004, he said that wiretaps require a court order. (From WhiteHouse.gov)

Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so. It's important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution.

Yet yesterday he admitted to bypassing those court orders through exectutive priveledge. That's what's called a lie, but I'm looking forward to your justification and excuses.

 
At 3:48 PM, Blogger Enlighten said...

Terry,

Are you referring to the President talking about the Patriot act in the link you provided? Why do you confuse the NSA program and laws that were changed by the Patriot Act.? The Patriot Act was passed to give the government more authority and flexibility not to less.

See more of the quote from the President’s speech below:

"So the first thing I want you to think about is, when you hear Patriot Act, is that we changed the law and the bureaucratic mind-set to allow for the sharing of information. It's vital. And others will describe what that means.

Secondly, there are such things as roving wiretaps. Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so. It's important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution."

As far as we know nothing has changed when it comes requiring a court order for a wiretap for communications completely within the United States and that was what the President was talking about those situations in relation to the Patriot Act..

Now, for more information concerning the legality of the NSA program see this article and this one. Just a snip from one below:

THE NEW YORK TIMES Published: November 7, 1982 - “A Federal appeals court has ruled that the National Security Agency may lawfully intercept messages between United States citizens and people overseas, even if there is no cause to believe the Americans are foreign agents, and then provide summaries of these messages to the Federal Bureau of Investigation.”

 
At 5:10 PM, Blogger RBM said...

I think the issue here, as I understand it, is that the government is snooping on all of the communications not just overseas communications. Of course the administration just keeps aying trust me instead of explaining itself. That's what got GWB into the place he is now.

 
At 5:17 PM, Blogger Enlighten said...

RBM, from the New York Times article that started it all

Under a presidential order signed in 2002, the intelligence agency has monitored the international telephone calls and international e-mail messages of hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people inside the United States without warrants over the past three years in an effort to track possible "dirty numbers" linked to Al Qaeda.

 
At 10:35 PM, Blogger James said...

I hope that the military personnel and their families who are from the Congressional Districts represented by the "Nay" voters take note.

As for my Congressman, Donald Payne, this is not the first time he ducked such a vote. In March 2003 when the House voted on "Congressional Resolution No. 104, Expressing the Support and Appreciation of the Nation for the President and the Members of the Armed Forces Who are Participating in Operation Iraqi Freedom" Mr. Payne voted "present".

They (the Nay Voters) and he (Mr. Payne) disgust me.

Jim
Parkway Rest Stop
http://parkwayreststop.com

 
At 8:43 AM, Blogger terryp said...

Here's a more recent New York Times article you may be interested. This one is titled: Spying Program Snared U.S. Calls

A surveillance program approved by President Bush to conduct eavesdropping without warrants has captured what are purely domestic communications in some cases, despite a requirement by the White House that one end of the intercepted conversations take place on foreign soil, officials say.

 
At 10:06 AM, Blogger Enlighten said...

Terry,

Thanks, yes we had read the article. Some people miss the fact that under this NSA program one side of the conversation must be on foreign soil per President Bush’s order. The article and snip you cited makes that fact very clear.

We too thought The Times headline for the article was misleading – “Spying Program Snared U.S. Calls”. For those that haven’t the time to read the article, the piece says, right after the snip you provided, that a small number of purely domestic communications have been intercepted, apparently accidentally.

The “small number” of cases the article refers to is indeed small – one. As the authors write:

"But in at least one instance, someone using an international cellphone was thought to be outside the United States when in fact both people in the conversation were in the country."

We are glad to see that you have come to realize the Times has been making much ado about nothing. It makes you wonder why, doesn’t it? Yes, one of the reporters, James Risen to trying to generate excitement for a book he’s written, but why would the owners/editors of the paper risk national security by exposing a legal program? As far as we can tell, the Times has uncovered a grand total of one understandable mistake by the NSA under the Bush program. Do you think it could be BDS?

 
At 4:36 PM, Blogger terryp said...

You seem to be confused and contradicting yourself. On the one hand, you criticize the Times for "exposing" a legal program, yet on the other you say that what's happening is perfectly within the authority of the executive branch. If it's legal, then everyone already knows that it could be happening, especially terrorists. So which is it?

 
At 5:12 PM, Blogger Enlighten said...

Terry,
Which is what? A program can be legal and secret can't it? You see the NSA program used to be both legal and a secret. Now it’s still legal, just no longer a secret. Got it?

 

Post a Comment

<< Home


 Contact Us

  • Email Us
  • Blog Roll Us!

    Search

    Syndication

  • Atom Feed
  • Bloglines
  • Feedburner
  • Feedster
  • Add to Google
  • Add to My MSN
  • Add to My Yahoo
  • News Is Free

    Recent Posts

  • Carnival of the New Jersey Bloggers # 31
  • Approval Rating of U.S. Senators - Corzine # 80 - ...
  • So Corzine Wants To Raise The Gas Tax - We Agree
  • It's Called Rude
  • Carnival of the New Jersey Bloggers # 30
  • Conservative Blogs Rock!
  • Jon Corzine - Mr. Business As usual
  • Yellow Ribbon Group
  • Corzine Taps Menendez
  • Remembering Pearl Harbor

    Archives

  • November 2004
  • December 2004
  • January 2005
  • February 2005
  • March 2005
  • April 2005
  • May 2005
  • June 2005
  • July 2005
  • August 2005
  • September 2005
  • October 2005
  • November 2005
  • December 2005
  • January 2006
  • February 2006
  • March 2006
  • April 2006
  • May 2006
  • June 2006
  • July 2006
  • August 2006
  • September 2006
  • October 2006
  • November 2006
  • December 2006
  • January 2007
  • February 2007
  • March 2007
  • April 2007
  • May 2007
  • June 2007
  • August 2007
  • September 2007
  • October 2007
  • November 2007
  • December 2007
  • January 2008
  • February 2008
  • April 2008
  • November 2008
  • January 2009
  • August 2009
  • September 2009
  • February 2012

    Online Journals

  • National Review

  • Opinion Journal

  • Real Clear Politics

  • Weekly Standard


  • Blog Roll

  • A Blog For All
  • Althouse
  • Ankle Biting Pundits
  • Barista of Bloomfield Avenue
  • Betsy's Page
  • Blue Crab Boulevard
  • Blogs For Condi
  • Bob the Corgi
  • Brainster's Blog
  • BuzzMachine
  • Captain's Quarter's
  • Cinnaman
  • Coalition of the Swilling
  • CWA-NJ
  • Dino's Forum
  • Daily Mail
  • Don Surber
  • DynamoBuzz
  • eCache
  • Exit 4
  • Fausta's Blog
  • GOP Bloggers
  • Instapundit
  • Joe's Journal
  • Kate Spot
  • Kausfiles.com
  • Little Green Footballs
  • Michelle Malkin
  • More Mnmouth Musings
  • Parkway Rest Stop
  • Patrick Ruffini
  • Polipundit
  • Power Line
  • Right Wing News
  • Roger L. Simon
  • The Blue State Conservatives
  • Riehl World View
  • Red Jersey
  • Right, Wing-Nut!
  • Sid in the City
  • Tiger Hawk
  • The Truth Laid Bear
  • Tim Blair
  • Wizbang


  • Sid in the City



    Majority Accountability Project

    MAP

    New Jersey Blogs

    Enlighten-Carnival-small

  • 11th and Washington


  • A Blog For All
  • A Planet Where Apes Evolved From Man?!?
  • Armies of Liberation
  • Atlantic Highland Muse
  • Attack of the 15.24 Mete


  • Barista of Bloomfield Avenue
  • BeLow Me
  • Big Windbag
  • Blanton's and Ashton's
  • Blue State Conservatives
  • Burning Feathers
  • BuzzMachine


  • Clifton Blogs
  • Coalition of the Swilling
  • Cobweb Studios
  • CoffeeGrounds
  • Constitutional Conservative
  • Confessions of a Jersey Goddess
  • Corzine Watch
  • Crazy Jackie
  • Cresting Acrocorinthus
  • Cripes, Suzette!


  • Daniella's Misadventures
  • Did I Say That Out Loud
  • Dojo Mojo
  • Dossy's Blog
  • Down the Shore
  • DynamoBuzz


  • eCache
  • Enlighten-NewJersey
  • Eye On Hoboken
  • Exit 4
  • Exit Zero
  • Extreme-Psychosis


  • Fausta's Blog
  • Fausti's Book Quest
  • Fractals of Change
  • Frenchtown NJ Blog


  • GiggleChick
  • Gregg Gethard's Amazing Personal Journey
  • goethe re scape


  • Hoboken Rock City


  • IamBillPower
  • If this is paradise, I wish I had a lawn-mower
  • Imaginary Therapy
  • Inadmissible Evidence
  • INCITE


  • Jersey Beat
  • Jersey Perspective
  • Jersey Side
  • Jersey Style
  • Jersey Writers
  • Joe's Journal


  • Karl's Corner
  • Kate Spot


  • Laughing At The Pieces
  • Likelihood of Confusion
  • Liss Is More


  • Mamacita
  • Mary's Lame Attempt at Fame
  • Media in Trouble
  • Michael Carroll
  • Mister Snitch!
  • MucknMire
  • My Life as a Rabid Blog
  • My New Jersey


  • New Jersey Eminent Domain Law
  • NJ Conservative
  • NJ Fiscal Folly
  • New Jersey For Change
  • New Jersey Weblogs
  • NJ Spoken Word
  • Northeast Corridor


  • Parkway Rest Stop
  • Philly2Hoboken.com
  • Poetic Leanings
  • Poor Impulse Control
  • Professor Kim's News Notes
  • Property Tax NJ


  • Rain Angel
  • Riehl World View


  • Shamrocketship
  • Shipwrecks
  • SloppyDawg
  • Sluggo Needs a Nap
  • SmadaNeK
  • Static Silence


  • Tami,The One True
  • Tammany on the Hudson
  • Tequila Shots For The Soul
  • The Art of Getting By
  • The Center of New Jersey Life
  • The Daily Fry
  • The Duc Pond
  • The Jersey Shore Real Estate Bubble
  • The Joy of Soup
  • The Mark(ings) of Zorro
  • The New Wisdom
  • The Nightfly
  • The Opinion Mill
  • The Pink Panther
  • The Political Dogs
  • The Rix Mix
  • This Full House
  • Tiger Hawk
  • Tomato Nation
  • Toxiclabrat
  • Twisty


  • Unbillable Hours
  • Usdin.Net


  • Where Is The Remote
  • Wine Goddess


  • Xpatriated Texan


  • Links

  • NJ Governor
  • NJ Legislature
  • GOP GOTV
  • Bob Menendez Information


  • Blog Rings

  • Blog Explosion
  • Blog Directory
  • Blogsnow
  • Blogwise
  • Blogstreet
  • Blogshares
  • Blogarama
  • Blog Digger
  • Daypop
  • Globe of Blogs
  • Blog Search Engine


  • Ecosystem Status


  • Who Links Here






  •