The Clinton-Obama Debate

from a very smart man, Paul Hollrah:

Before the Clinton-Obama California debate went on the air last week I jotted down five names and phrases on a ruled pad. I wrote: Usama bin Laden, al-Qaeda, Islamic fundamentalism, Islamic jihad, and Muslim extremists... intending to count how many times those names and phrases were used during the two hour debate. The Democrat candidates and their CNN questioners did not disappoint me. Not a single one of those names and phrases were used, either by questioners or by candidates, in the entire two hours. Is it possible that, during World War II, Clement Atlee or FDR could have gotten away with failing to mention Adolph Hitler or Emperor Hirohito during the course of a two hour debate?

Not likely.

I suppose this is just one more indicator of how far the Democratic Party has fallen.

Wearing Blinders

by Paul R. Hollrah

The Clinton-Obama debate from California promised to produce a lot of interesting “fireworks,” but it didn’t. With Wolf Blitzer moderating, it turned out to be just another CNN “softball game,” proving nothing more than that CNN actually does stand for “Clinton News Network.”

As usual, what the CNN questioners didn’t ask, and what Clinton and Obama didn’t say, was far more important than what they said. For those who are new to the political trenches and who are just beginning to understand liberals and Democrats, this is the most important thing to know about them. Liberals and Democrats will jump through hoops, turn themselves inside out, trying NOT to address the really important issues or actually tell the truth about anything if the truth will not help their cause.

For example, just minutes before the California debate, I jotted down five names and phrases with the intention of counting the number of times those names and phrases were used during the two hour debate. I wrote down: 1) Usama bin Laden, 2) al-Qaeda, 3) Islamic fundamentalism, 4) Islamic jihad, and 5) Muslim extremists.

Inasmuch as Islamic fundamentalists are sworn to either convert or slaughter every non-Muslim man, woman, and child on Earth, and since it is left to the United States to play the major role in preventing the total destruction of western civilization, one would think that Islamic jihad and the War on Terror would merit at least a mention in a debate between the leading candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination… but it didn’t. There was not a single mention of any of those five topics.

Instead of addressing the most deadly enemy ever faced by the civilized world, Clinton and Obama chose to ignore the threat and, instead, tossed bone after bone to the surrender monkeys of the radical left who now own their party. Ironically, less than twelve hours after Clinton and Obama walked off the stage at the Kodak Theater in Los Angeles, two mentally retarded Muslim women walked into the Ghazil animal bazaar and the New Baghdad bird market in eastern Baghdad. And when they had reached the most crowded section of the markets their radical Islamic handlers pressed the buttons on their remote devices and exploded the bombs strapped to the women’s bodies.

Ninety-nine innocent people… men, women, and children… were killed, and more than 115 were injured. A great many of those killed at the bird market were children who like to gather around the pigeon stalls to watch the birds.

These are the brothers of the suicide bombers who hijacked airplanes and flew them into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on September 11, 2001, killing 3,000 innocent people. These are the people that Democrats try very hard to ignore because they simply do not have the will or the courage to confront them. It is as if they were wearing blinders, their eyes focused on everything but the ugly realities of our day and time.

Instead, they compete to see who can be first to surrender to the Islamic fascists… to see who can be the fastest in getting American troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan where they are working very hard at ridding the world of religious fanatics… the kind of religious fanatics who would strap bombs to the bellies of mentally retarded women and send them to blow up crowds of children whose greatest crime is that they appreciate the beauty of birds.

These are the people that Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and their friends in the radical anti-war movement prefer to coddle. These are the people that Barack Obama thinks he can “sweet talk” into behaving themselves. As the New York Post said in a January 31 editorial endorsing Obama over Clinton, “For all his charisma and his eloquence, the rookie senator sorely lacks seasoning. And on national security, his worldview is beyond naïve – blithely unaware that America must defend itself against those sworn to destroy the nation.

“Meanwhile, Obama’s all-things-to-all-people approach to complex domestic issues also arouses scant confidence. ‘Change!’ for the sake of change does not a credible campaign platform make.”

(Remember, these are the things the Post said about the man they endorsed. We don’t have the space here to repeat what they said about Hillary Clinton, the candidate they oppose.)

Yes, it is the radical leftists of the Daily Kos, Moveon.org, and Code Pink, who tell Democrats what to think and say, who will decide who gets to represent their party and who does not. But they represent only a small percentage of the voting population. And when the American people finally focus their attention on either Clinton or Obama in the fall election, and they are finally confronted with the stark reality that one of these two people could actually be charged with the responsibility for protecting all of us, they will finally take off their blinders and make the right decision.