Why the Democrats are in the Sewer
36th Dist. Dems Endorse Military Recruiting Ban at SCCC
The 36th District Democrats in Seattle have sent out their resolution in support of free speech for student groups AND the banning of military recruitment at Seattle Central Community College, where students shamefully chased off a recruiter during presidential Inauguration Day anti-festivities earlier this year. The text of the resolution, sent out by the 36th Dist. Democrats Chair Peter House, is below. (NOTE: "whereas" deleted from each graf, for scrolling purposes). Be forewarned. The resolution contains the spurious claim of 100,000 Iraqi civilians killed by the U.S. and allies, which Brian Crouch debunked here yesterday. It also declares, "Military recruitment during an illegal war is morally repellent, inasmuch as it aids and abets 'the supreme international crime.'" After the resolution comes a revealing post about House at the organization's web site.
The Democrats wonder why their stock is down to a few pennies, and still falling. Most believe it's because they "didn't get their message across", or "the Republicans didn't play fair". The following statements explain just exactly why the Democrats have become a minority party, and may reach the point where they're on par with the Green Party - or even below them.
The 36th District Democrats recognize that our colleges and universities are highly valued by the entire community;
Colleges and universities have been taken over by the Left, and exert unremitting pressure on students to conform to the Democratic "ideals". Proof: Harvard University's behavior against the President of Harvard, Lawrence Summers; the pattern of behavior inherent in the entire "Ward Churchill" flap; and countless other patterns of behavior such as the Dartmouth Alumni election and the abovementioned behavior at SCCC.
The 36th District Democrats uphold our nation's traditional value of free intellectual discourse;
As long as it's Politically Correct, backs only Democratic traditions, and doesn't include requiring the Democrats to give up any of their failed socialistic ideas. "Political Correctness" is an attempt to stifle free speech - one backed strongly by the University crowd. "Diversity" is the trump of every other requirement, including honesty and integrity. Oh, and only ideas that agree with the Politically-Correct, leftwing worldview can be accepted. Anything such as the proposition that some differences may be genetic has no place on American University campuses.
The 36th District Democrats abhor and reject extremist groups who would suppress the freedom of student groups to assemble and petition their government;
That is, any Republican group, or other group that might express such ideas as individual freedom, personal responsibility, belief in a higher Being (unless they're Muslim, Native American, or Wiccan), true freedom of speech and debate (debate is CLOSED, haven't you learned that yet?), or support for the current President or his cabinet.
The 36th District Democrats encourage student groups to organize public forums in which to debate the vital issues of our time;
"Of course, there's no need for an opposing viewpoint, since they're wrong, and we don't want to hear them anyway."
The 36th District Democrats oppose the deceitful tactics of targeted military recruiting on college campuses;
The Military is Evil, the CIA is Evil, the FBI is EVIL, any REPUBLICAN GOVERNMENT is EVIL, and all have to be banned, so the "Good Guys" (I.E., Democrats) won't be contaminated.
The 36th District Democrats reject the option of preventive war and make nonviolence the primary organizing principle of foreign policy;
"We reserve the right to dictate foreign policy to the President, since he's a Chimpy McHitler Fascist, and is too stoopid to make his own policy". After all, Osama Bin Laden did NOT declare war on the United States, and had nothing to do with crashing four jetliners filled with passengers, killing more than three thousand people in the United States.
The Iraq war was undertaken as a preventive war, which is considered a war of aggression in violation of international law under provisions of the Kellogg-Briand pact, the Nuremberg Charter, the United Nations Charter, and the International Criminal Court;
Still dredging out that old lie, because they can't think of a better one. Afghanistan was an attack to dislodge a terrorist organization so interwoven into the local government it was impossible to do anything but crush both. We struck against both the Taliban and AlQaida because they were so intertwined, and AlQaida, in the form of its leader, Osama bin Laden, ordered, planned, and helped execute an attack upon our soil. Gulf War I wasn't over, just on "hold", just as the Korean War isn't over, there's just a cease-fire in effect. Hussein refused to live up to his part of the cease fire agreement. There was no such "preventive war" - there was the culmination of the response to Iraq's aggression against Kuwait and its refusal to dismantle and destroy its offensive military capacity, including the destruction of Weapons of Mass Destruction (chemical, biological, and radiological weapons).
The Nuremberg Tribunal stated that "to initiate a war of aggression. . . is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole";
To pontificate upon things beyond one's intellectual capacity is the height of folly and is the extreme evidence that one is a blithering leftist moonbat idiot. The Nuremburg Tribunal has nothing to do with the resumption of war against a tyrant who has failed to acknowledge his responsibilities under a United Nations-brokered cease fire. There is NO "War of Aggression" - there is only the culmination of the previous war, properly acknowledged and properly authorized by Congress, the only governing body that has any jurisdiction in this matter. Get over it.
The United States has repeatedly and unrepentantly violated the Third Geneva Convention and the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment in its treatment of prisoners;
Neither the Third Geneva Convention, nor any prior to it, granted any protection to terrorists, guerilla warfare participants, and their ilk. Any people captured by the United States in Afghanistan or Iraq that were not citizens of a country engaged in war with us under the terms established by the Geneva Convention, are not covered. That horse was beaten to death two years ago. The continued exhumation of this putrid carcass is idiotic.
The US-led invasion of Iraq, according to an international study published in the British medical journal Lancet, resulted in an estimated 100,000 Iraqi civilian deaths during just the first eighteen months of the war;
This study has been totally discredited by Instapundit and others. It's a sick joke, not scientific evidence - kind of like the crap used to "justify" Kyoto.
During just the first two months of the 2003 Iraq war the US-led coalition used, according to Pentagon and United Nations estimates, 1.1-2.2 thousand tons of munitions hardened with depleted uranium, which, in its aerosolized form, is a known radioactive and heavy metal toxin associated with cancers and grotesque congenital malformations; and
Depleted uranium is NOT a "known radioactive" material. It is "depleted" by removing 99.9% of the radioactive isotopes of Uranium from it. It IS a toxic heavy metal, but you'd have to ingest several POUNDS of the stuff, rather quickly, for it to adversely affect you (See here and here). There is no peer-reviewed documentation linking depleted uranium to genetic or congenital deformities.
Military recruitment during an illegal war is morally repellent, inasmuch as it aids and abets "the supreme international crime";
Congress, and Congress alone, has the power to authorize war. Congress gave President Bush authority to wage war against Iraq and those involved in "state-sponsored and supported terrorism". The United Nations authorized the use of "whatever means necessary" to force Saddam Hussein to obey the terms he agreed to at the end of Gulf War I. This group of half-baked "internationalists" have no authority to declare the war illegal, or to interfere with the legitimate activities of the United States Government, or any of its agencies. The US Military is STILL an agency of the US government.
BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED THAT the 36th District Democrats declare solidarity with Students Against War (SAW); support their peaceful civic engagement; defend their right to object to military recruiting on their campus; applaud their efforts to organize affiliated groups on other college campuses; and exhort Chancellor Mitchell and President Ollee to permit SAW to exercise the right of free speech and assembly on the campus of Seattle Central Community College.
Basically, the 36th District Democrats say it's ok to physically assault an Army recruiter on campus, because that's "defend(ing) their right to object to military recruiting on their campus". When physical force is used to ensure only one side of a debate is heard, it's called tyranny. When physical force is used to prevent the lawful activities and duties of a government agent, it's called tyranny. When one group successfully uses force to prevent a government agent from performing his or her lawful duties, and coordinates with others to ensure the same outcome, it's called conspiracy to commit acts of tyranny. This isn't "free speech" - it's tyranny and intimidation.
Free speech for me, but not thee, in other words.
The 36th District Democrats represent the mainstream message of the Democratic Party. Yet neither they, nor Democrats at large, understand that the message is the poison. Howard Dean, speaking to the convention of Democrats Abroad in Toronto, made these comments, found in the Toronto Star:
Spreading the message
Toronto STAR STAFF REPORTER
"Keep it simple" is the key to the White House, failed Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean told members of his party from around the world last night.
One major reason his party lost the 2004 race to the "brain-dead" Republicans is that it has a "tendency to explain every issue in half an hour of detail," Dean told the semi-annual meeting of Democrats Abroad, which brought about 150 members from Canada and 30 other countries to the Toronto for two days.
No, Howard, that's not the problem at all. The problem is reflected in the behavior of the 36th District in Seattle. The problem is the Democratic Party message. The problem is the unwillingness on the part of the Democrats to accept the reality before them, and work to overcome the threats to this nation. The threats to the nation aren't coming from the Republican Party. Nor is the Republican Party a threat to the Democrats. What IS a threat to the Democratic Party and its supporters is the Democratic Party's failure to address anything but the Party's lack of power and presence in Washington. The Democratic Party is no longer shielded behind a wall of protective concealment provided by the Mainstream Media. The sooner you realize this, and start to understand that two parties means two parties working TOGETHER for the security and well-being of the American People, the sooner the Democratic Party (or its successor) becomes a major player in American politics again. If it isn't the Democrats and the Republicans, it will be the Republicans and someone else.
Dean's party is struggling to recover from the Nov. 2 American election, in which George W. Bush's team not only won the White House but also took firm control of the Senate and House of Representatives.
Dean's presidential campaign was propelled by Web communications. And he's promoting a "bottom-up" Internet-connected party, run by state organizations rather than the centre. He has called for an end to the "consultant culture" ? the legions of paid advisers employed by defeated candidate John Kerry that, critics complain, confused the candidate's thinking and messages.
`The majority is on our side. We need to figure out how to talk differently about these issues.'
The first paragraph totally refutes the last one here. If the "majority" was on their side, why did they lose the Presidency and both houses of Congress? It wasn't just "how they talked about these issues", it was the issues themselves, as other reporting - and other voting - illustrated. The same tired, worn, and exhausted ideas that have been trotted out for the last 50 years are so thin you can read a blog through them. Yet the Democrats are so tightly entwined with the extremists in their party they can't be separated. Those extreme positions - unlimited abortion on demand, national health care, continued social lock-step in public education, unionist extremes, internationalism, political correctness, socialist behavior, and dozens of other major demands from the "core" of the Democratic Party - was what was rejected as much as, or moreso than, the Democratic candidates.
The Democrats won't be distracted by other issues, "as long as we're kicking the living daylights out of them on Social Security."
"The Democratic Party will not win elections or build a lasting majority solely by changing its rhetoric, nor will we win by adopting the other side's positions," he said when he announced his bid to become party chair. "We must say what we mean ? and mean real change when we say it."
While Dean wants focused policies, he acknowledged some issues aren't clear-cut and his party must work hard to come up with effective messages.
It will be difficult to win over the many Americans who appear to disagree with Democratic policies on social and moral issues, such as abortion, he said.
"The majority is on our side. We need to figure out how to talk differently about these issues."
Keep repeating that line, Howard. I'm sure it will comfort you the next time you lose. You WILL lose, you know, because you still don't understand. You still think it's the way you talk, not the message you offer. Social Security is a problem. Medicare/Medicaid is a problem. Unrestricted entitlement spending is a problem. Higher taxes will not work - Clinton tried that, and it eventually bit him - hard. The truth is, Americans have finally seen the Democratic Party as the party that wishes to restrict their personal freedoms, wants to enslave them to international opinion, wishes to disarm them and make them harmless. We saw what disarming the British led to. We understand the permanent criminal class that exists in this nation would have a field day once Americans surrendered their personal weapons. And we don't trust you to defend us, to keep us from harm. Talk only works when you've got the power - and the will to use it - behind you. Democrats haven't learned that yet.
Don't go spending all your salary from that new high-fallutin', high-sounding job you've got - you're going to need some of it to look for a new job in 2009.