The Biggest Flip-Floppers

Not to sound biased, but the Democrats are the biggest flip-floppers. No matter what Bush says or does, they are opposed to it, even when he has changed his mind and gone along with what the Democrats say they believe. When Bush goes along with the Democrats, they conveniently change their minds and spout another idea. I do not believe there is any pleasing the Democrats even when they get their way, so what do they really want? I don’t understand .

I am not defending Bush so much as I am questioning the Democrats. Can you please make a statement and stick to it? I need to know what you are really about to know if I can agree with you. In case you readers don’t know what I mean, here is just one example:

Both parties voted to send the military to Iraq. Then Democrats (on the record), en masse stated Bush did not send enough troops to get the job done. Now that Bush is sending in more troops, the Democrats are complaining that Bush is sending in more troops to be killed and it will not get the job done.

I am confused.

Advertisements

6 Responses to The Biggest Flip-Floppers

  1. Ken Larson says:

    USA Today reported on 16 January 2007 in its Washington Section that the CIA plans to utilize more open sources and blogs in its intelligence work and outsource more of its intelligence software development to commercial contractors in an attempt to re-establish itself as the premiere world intelligence agency.

    The “Strategic Intent” is posted on the CIA public web site. Defense Industry Daily further reports that General Electric is gobbling up Smith’s Industries for $4.8B.

    http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/2007/01/ge-buys-smiths-aerospace-for-48b/index.php

    I am a 2 tour Vietnam Veteran who recently retired after 36 years of working in the Defense Industrial Complex on many of the weapons systems being used by our forces as we speak. Let’s look at this for a moment and do our patriotic duty by reading along with the CIA (after all, they have announced they are reading this blog)

    1. The new CIA approach comes exactly at the formation of the agency’s new “External Advisory Board”, which consists of the following:

    * A former Pentagon Chairman of the Joints Chief who is now a Northrop Grumman Corporation Board Member

    * A deposed Chairman of the Board of Hewlett Packard Corporation (HP)

    * A Former Deputy Secretary of Defense who now heads up a Washington think tank with Henry Kissinger

    2. Northrop Grumman Corporation and Hewlett Packard are two huge government contractors in the Pentagon and CIA custom software development arena. Their combined contracts with the government just for IT are in the multiples of millions. I wonder what the advisory board is filling the CIA’s ear with?

    3. Washington “Think Tanks” are fronts for big time lobbies, sophisticated in their operations, claiming non-partisanship, but tremendously influential on K Street. If a lobby cannot buy its way in, why not sit on the advisory board?

    4. GE already has the military aircraft jet engine market. In buying Smith’s, it takes one more major defense corporation out of the opposition and further reduces the government’s leverage through competition. GE now joins the other monoliths such as Lockheed Martin, Boeing, General Dynamics, Northrop Grumman and Raytheon with tremendous leverage in the $500B +++ per year defense market.

    5. Note the synergy that now exists between the Pentagon and the CIA. Note the influence by the major corporations.

    6. Also note the balance in your bank account and your aspirations for the generations of the future. Both are going down.

    7. The huge Military Industrial Complex (MIC) continues to march. Taxes and national debt will be forced to march straight up the wall to support it. Do you have any “Intelligence” to offer the Pentagon, the CIA and the MIC? For further inspiration please see:

    http://www.rosecoveredglasses.blogspot.com

  2. Tompaul says:

    Good question re the difference between Democratic positions past and present. I guess it’s a bit like wearing your seatbelt. If you’re speeding it’s a good idea to wear your seatbelt–like fighting a war, you’re doing something dangerous and you need all the coverage you can get. However, if you crash the car and it just caught on fire, you probably want to unbuckle. Would you describe that change as a flip-flop? I don’t think I would.

    Anyway, this war isn’t ours anymore. Well technically it hasn’t been a war since we won it back in 2003; it’s been an occupation, and another war has popped up beside it.

  3. You got it going on girl!

    Enjoy!

  4. Sean Wilson says:

    As I have said elsewhere concerning Democrats, I know schizophrenics who are more sure of who they are.

  5. I concur with Tompaul on this one. I am not really a defender of the left but the Democratic Party was advocating for an overwhelming force when we went in to Iraq, to get the job done. Now that it is all F’ed up they are fighting against an increase of troops. Plus we don’t have an overwhelming number of battle ready troops to send in anyway. In addition, I think many military advisers also supported, or actually initiated, the overwhelming force idea and now they also do not support a increase in troops. I don’t think this is a “flip flop”.

  6. The Dude says:

    Democrats sound like my ex-wife alot……. I think I know how GW might feel sometimes. He never stood a chance….

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: