Democrats Are Immoral

Democrats Are Immoral

Forget the Marxist leanings of Democrats and their naked desire to punish producers via increasing taxation, regulations, litigation, confiscation & incarceration of producers – including the brass desire to seize earned profits from big oil and spend it on global warming projects. Whatever you may think about this, Democrats simply are misguided in the realm of economics.

As to religion, they simply are immoral. Leftists in general and Democrats in particular attack Christianity & Judaism; I’ve personally witnessed numerous attacks on Christians, Jews & the state of Israel by American Democrats. Okay, I think the world would be much better off as a secular civilization and so I applaud the attacks on Christianity & Judaism (although I cringe when seeing Democrats ardently demand the end of Israel).

The major problem of Democrats is their support of Islam – including the radical elements of Islamic fundamentalism. I’ve observed many Democrats openly support Islam, Islamic fundamentalism, and the “right” of Islamists to attack and murder “Zionists”, “Imperialists”, “Occupiers” and the whole panoply of Western Enlightenment values. They, leftists & Democrats, rarely if ever denounce the vicious throat-slashing activities of Islamists yet they constantly denounce Bush, the Bush Administration, Cheney, Rove, Republicans & US military personnel. Democrats are driven by hatred – not hatred of our enemies but hatred of GWB and his defense of America.

I’ve even witnessed Democrats side with Saddam. And now, leading Democrats such as John Murtha are working on legislation to protect Iran’s Ayatollah & his nuclear development program. But Iran’s Ayatollah and his mouthpiece Ahmadinejad have publicly and repeatedly said Israel’s days are numbered and so is “The Great Satan” America.

Why do Democrats side with the enemy in this most important war on terrorism? For one reason: to regain power. Democrats hope that by sinking Bush, his war on terrorism & the Republican administration, the public will vote Democrats into the Presidency and both houses of Congress in 2008. From there, they – Democrats – can rule everyone with their Marxist, anti-business agenda.

Now to be sure, not all Democrats are bad and many serve as a valuable counterbalance to the irrationality of the religious right. But it would be suicidal to sweep Democrats into full power in 2008 as Islamic terrorists will see that as a victory for Islamic totalitarianism. Hence they will accelerate their nuclear programs to arm their proxy agents in Lebanon, America, Britain and elsewhere for the cataclysmic end of Western civilization.

What is the solution? Certainly do not sweep the Republicans back into full power. If Democrats are immoral and parasitical, Republicans are irrational and cowardice. The key is to maintain a balance of power among both parties – Democrats & Republicans – so their immoral & irrational actions cancel out one another. This way while there is infighting & scandals occurring inside Washington DC, the real action of killing Islamic terrorists and producing capitalistic wealth can continue unimpeded.

Fireball

Your essay would be more effective if you provided at least one example from reality.

I am going to assume that by Democrats, you mean Democrats who are actually in office or are running for office. In other words, not some monster who endorses the Democratic Party but does not represent the views of the politicians.

Specifically, could you please provide examples of the following:

* Democratic politicians “ardently demanding the end of Israel.”

* Democratic politicians “openly supporting Islam, Islamic fundamentalism, and the “right” of Islamists to attack and murder “Zionists”, “Imperialists”, “Occupiers” and the whole panoply of Western Enlightenment values.”

* Legislation proposed by leading Democrats designed “to protect Iran’s Ayatollah & his nuclear development program.”

With regards to Representative John Murtha’s bill, last I checked it was designed to prevent a troop increase in Iraq. Even several of the more senior members of this forum have questioned if it is in the rational self-interest of the United States to continue to stay in Iraq.

I am going to assume that by Democrats, you mean Democrats who are actually in office or are running for office.

By Democrats I refer to members of the Democrat Party who financially support Democratic politicians and who vote for Democratic politicians in elections and who spread the political ideology of the Democratic Party.

With regards to Representative John Murtha’s bill, last I checked it was designed to prevent a troop increase in Iraq.

I was referring to Democrat John Murtha’s approach to Iran:

“The United States has no realistic military options available against the nuclear ambitions of Iran, Rep. Jack Murtha said yesterday”

"Asked about the prospects for military action against Iran, the congressman said: “It’s not going to happen. I do not believe we have the conventional capability.”

"At another point in his lunchtime address at the Doubletree Hotel, the former Marine said of a potential strike against Iran: “We could not do it conventionally – cannot be done.”

“Mr. Murtha said if the United States were to use nuclear arms against Iran, ‘there’d be a worldwide anger at the United States. … There’d be more and more terrorism, and the terrorism would be directed at us.’” (Source)

Hence Murtha wants to insert a provision into Bush’s $100 billion spending bill for the war on terrorism “to prohibit any military action against Iran without specific congressional approval.” (Source) But Murtha does not have a legal right to prohibit Commander-in-Chief Bush from bombing Tehran.