Thursday, December 07, 2006

More Evidence That "Bipartisanship" and "Compromise" Mean the Liberal Way

The Iraq Commission report that was released yesterday is further evidence and proof that bipartisanship and compromise means to go the Liberal way of thinking.

The report basically says we screwed up, continue to screw up, are losing the war, cannot possibly win, and must pull out to save face. The spineless Republicans on the Commission completely caved in to their Democrat colleagues. It's especially frustrating when Republicans like these are touting bipartisan and compromise and bringing the American people together when all they are doing is caving in to the Liberal point of view.

Compromise means to settle differences through mutual concessions. What have the Democrats conceded?

The New York Post got it right. They slam the report! Appeasement and surrender will only make matters worse.

I'm hoping President Bush rejects this report and continues to fight the war on terror in Iraq and Afghanistan.


  1. Reality has a clearly liberal bias.

  2. George's father learned about Bipartisanship the hard way....

  3. All war is ugly and this one has been no different. They wouldn't call it War if it went smoothly. The fact is that we are in this war now and there are only two options, win or lose. I would like to ask all liberls which outcome has their actions promoted?

  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

  5. The simple fact that a Liberal (Mr. Singer), claims he was right shows his complicity in propagating a loss. Once a war is started (voted on by most democrats) a responsible person lets history judge right or wrong. During a war the only goal should be to win.
    Liberals make the mistake to thinking conservatives are pleased with how the war has gone. In reality, we are just responsible enough to hold our tongues unless we can say something that will help us win. Ask yourself a few questions. Do the following items make winning harder or easier?

    Constant drum beat about WMD?
    Constant drum beat about links to Al Qeada?
    Excessive unending claims of torture?
    Rampant publicizing of every mistake made?
    Claims of ulterior motive like stealing oil?
    Claims of no bid contracts?

    Once a war starts those issues only serve the purpose of emboldening the enemy and demoralizing our troops. If someone really carried about victory and not political gain they would let history sort things out.