Harry Reid, Incompetent Fool

On April 19th, Mr. Reid, you single-handedly declared that the Iraq war was lost.

"I believe ... that this war is lost, and this surge is not accomplishing anything, as is shown by the extreme violence in Iraq this week."

You made that short-sighted statement when some 146,000 Americans were serving under war-time conditions in Iraq. You said that at a time when the troop surge was only a part of the planned additional troops to Iraq.

The fact that the surge hadn’t had a chance to work was less important to you than gaining political mileage by declaring it a failure.

Why do you and your Democrat cohorts refuse to present a pro-American front to the rest of the world - especially to America's enemies?

Why is unconditional U.S. retreat and surrender your only war-fighting strategy in Iraq?

You have also stated,

"The (Iraq) war can only be won diplomatically, politically and economically, and the president needs to come to that realization."

Do you not understand that we are at war with those who adhere to the ideology of radical Islam, who want to kill us and destroy our society?

The war against Islamic terrorism and the nations that sponsor it may not be won in Iraq, but it can be lost there.

Apparently 'retaking' the White House in 2008 is more important to you than winning the war on terror.

American men and women in uniform are risking their lives every day for a war the Democrats are willing to lose. It is because of their courage, patriotism, sense of duty and honor - that they continue to do so.

Being a Democrat politician, you may have to look up the words: courage, patriotism, duty and honor.

You recently called Marine General Peter Pace, the outgoing chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, "incompetent" during an interview with a group of liberal bloggers.

And then you made similar disparaging remarks about Army General David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq.

What is your military experience, Mr. Reid?

Oh, you have none.

So what makes you a 'competent' adviser to our military?

How often have we heard the Democrats insist that they support the troops?

Why then do you continue to show us the true nature of the political left that claims to "support the troops" but in reality despises the military ?

Let's review: professional military men who serve our nation with integrity and honor being called incompetent by a career politician with no military experience who works the system for personal gain for himself and his family (your blatant nepotism is another subject).

Here is another word you need to look up: incompetent. Or maybe not. Just look in the mirror.

Let Mr. Reid know how you feel:

28 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Phone: 202-224-3542 / Fax: 202-224-7327

Racism

I was watching a Best Buy commercial where a young black man switched name cards on two gifts at what appears to be a birthday party for his father.

Here is an interesting, politically incorrect, view: There was not one white person at the party that I could see!

I find this interesting because I've seen numerous commercials (Publix, Old Navy, to name a couple) in the past year, showing "family gatherings" where the primary family unit was white. But guess what? Each gathering had at least one black in the mix!

So, it's ok to have all-black 'family' gatherings in commercials but in white family commercials there must be the obligatory black sitting at the table, be it a holiday commercial or whatever.

The politically correct world is still spinning. Reverse racism, white apologist racism, quotas, affirmative action, etc., are still....racism. When you continue to ram so-called racial equality down peoples' throats, it invokes the gag reflex.

Opinionated Fool
Semper Fi

News Flash! The proverbial Shit Creek has been located!

It is the Rio Grande. And our political leaders are sending the country up it without a paddle!

I am disgusted with this Administration and the Congress, especially over the immigration issue. Bush, Kennedy, et al, are selling us a bill of goods with this so-called 'compromise' on a comprehensive immigration bill.

I used to be a strong Bush supporter. I am afraid I have come to the realization that Bush is weak, ineffective and, much worse, possibly a Dumbo-crat in disguise.

May god save our country...because our elected officials definitely will not!!

Opinionated Fool
Semper Fi

Amnesty by any other name ...

Welcome to los Estados Unidos de América. El Presidente and el Senado leaders have come up with a comprehensive immigration reform compromise. Yeah, right.

The U.S. is well on its way to becoming the northern-most state of Mexico!

Amnesty by any other name is still amnesty! Can we say: Screw the American public.

Why do we keep voting these clowns into Clown-gress. In my case, it does no good for me to even write either of my senators: One is a reproba-lican who helped in developing this abortion and the other is a dumb-ocrat. I lose no matter what.

In my opinion, our elected officials really do not have the AMERICAN interests at heart. They say they do, but words are very cheap to a politician. Maybe the American voter IS getting what it deserves.

Admittedly, I have not had a chance to read this thing, but here are some excerpts:

1. It will create a 400,000-employee-a-year guestworker program and a system for issuing over 1 million permanent visas annually on the basis of job skills, education and family ties to legal residents.

My opinion: This will focus on 'family ties', screw job skills and education. End result: more illegals allowed to be 'legals.' Can we say AMNESTY?

2. It will would provide a path to citizenship for millions of illegal immigrants.

My opinion: Can we say 'line-jumper'? Can we say 'fast-track'? Can we say AMNESTY?

3. The guestworker program could not begin until the enforcement provisions under the bill were implemented. It includes a doubling of the border patrol and the construction of the fence along the Mexican border.

My opinion: Yeah. Right. Ok. And do you have any Florida swamp land you care to sell me?

Correct me if I am wrong: Wasn't there a fence 'promised' in S. 2611 last year? And an increase in Border Patrol personnel 'promised' in S. 2611?

So basically, nothing happened with last year's great compromise bill that so much time was wasted on, why should I think things will be different with this compromise?

4. An estimated 12 million illegal immigrants who arrived before Jan. 1 of last year could receive a "work authorization" immediately after enactment and subsequently be granted a "Z visa" putting them on a path to citizenship.

My opinion: Amnesty! Amnesty! Call it what you want, it is still AMNESTY!

5. Heads of households would have to first pay a $5,000 fine and return home within eight years to become eligible to file a citizenship application.

My opinion: We can't find the illegals right now, how do these pols expect us to find them later AND get $5,000 from each them? If we can't find them, if we can't get the $5000 from them, how are we going to get them to go home and file for legal citizenship? Do my clown-gressmen think I am stupid? Evidently they must.

6. The deal also carves out of the point system all families that applied for green cards before May 2005 -- the "backlog" of applicants. All other applicants now awaiting green cards would have to reapply under the new point system

My opinion: I haven't figured this one out yet! But it does sound like they are punishing those who attempted to do things legally in order to give preference to illegals!!

7. Upon enactment, 1.1 million of the green cards issued under the new point system would be family-based, and 140,000 would be merit-based

My opinion: Amnesty for individuals and their families (however many THAT might be!)

8. Have to learn English.

My opinion: Duh!

No mention of the 14th Amendment issue - the much mis-interpreted 'anchor-baby' concept. Surprise there. NO ANCHOR-BABIES!!!!

Grrrr!!!!!

Opinionated Fool
Semper Fi

Once again the negroes get something for nothing

In 2005, JPMorgan Chase issued a letter apologizing to negroes for its participation in slavery issues way back when. It also established a $5 million scholarship fund for negroes in Louisiana.

Now the stockholders at JPMorgan have gotten into the fight - because the then-Chairman & CEO William B. Harrison Jr. and then- President & COO Jamie Dimon used stockholder money! My opinion: if these two felt the need to cough-up $5 million to the negroes, they should have written a personal check, not use stockholder money.

The apology and scholarship was wrong then and is still wrong now. It seems the negroes continue to prove my basic belief about them: they can't seem to get by on their own, always needing the white people giving them something.

Any company/organization that feels the need to apologize/pay extortion money to any group for historical issues is weak. In this instance, I am not aware of any whites currently owning slaves. It happened in the past, get over it.

Why is white America so afraid of negroes? Negroes represent just under 13% of the population. Their annual income per capita is one of the lowest of any other ethnic group in the country. So why do American corporations fear a boycott by negroes? If I were a business, I would be more afraid of losing my white customers (you know, the ones who represent the majority as well as having the money) or even the Asians or Hispanics (both of whom have a higher per capita income).

So, call me racist, bigoted, whatever. That just puts me on equal footing with others like the Rebrobates - oops, Reverends - Jackson, Sharpton, et al.

Opinionated Fool
Semper Fi