Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Andy's point
Andy McCarthy tells us something that the enemy-controlled media didn't: Scott Brown won in Mass because he actually expressed loyalty to the people of America. The Republican establishment in 2008 deleted all candidates who were loyal to the people of America and gave us Manchurian Candidate McCain, who explicitly stated that he would rather watch millions of Americans die than offend his own delicate prissy enemy-loving feeeeeeeeeeeelings. Traitorous bastard. In a sane country his oath of disloyalty would have led to prison or hanging, not eligibility for President.
McCarthy says:
Yes. Yes. Yes.
Of course one Senator won't be able to do much about this, since the Senate is the worst of the worst. The Upper Nuthouse is an unbreakable gang of blackmailers and traitors**, with the single shining exception of James Inhofe. Best chance for redemption: Brown uses his Senate seat as a springboard to run for Pres in '12.
= = = = =
** I have to say "blackmailers and traitors" now instead of my previous phrase "blackmailers, murderers and traitors." Now that Emperor Kennedy is in the ninth circle of Hell, eternally drowning over and over in a sunken Oldsmobile, the only known murderer has been removed from the Upper Nuthouse.
¶ 6:14 AM
McCarthy says:
The opposing position, espoused most prominently by Sen. John McCain, was counterfactual and incoherent. Senator McCain pronounced both that enhanced interrogation (which he called “torture”) never works (which is patently untrue) and that an interrogator might at most use it in a ticking-bomb situation (the last situation in which you’d want to use it if, in fact, it never works).
...Scott Brown went out and made the case for enhanced interrogation, for denying terrorists the rights of criminal defendants, for detaining them without trial, and for trying them by military commission. It worked. It will work for other candidates willing to get out of their Beltway bubbles.
Yes, the Left will say you are making a mockery of our commitment to “the rule of law.” MSNBC will run segments on your dark conspiracies to “shred the privacy rights of Americans.” The New York Times will wail that you’re heedless of the damage you’ll do to “America’s reputation in the international community.”
The laws of war are the rule of law. They are not a suspension of the Constitution. They are the Constitution operating in wartime. The Framers understood that there would be wars against enemies of the United States — it is stated explicitly in the Constitution’s treason clause (Art. III, Sec. 3). The American people understand that we have enemies, even if Washington sees them as political “engagement” partners waiting to happen.
Yes. Yes. Yes.
Of course one Senator won't be able to do much about this, since the Senate is the worst of the worst. The Upper Nuthouse is an unbreakable gang of blackmailers and traitors**, with the single shining exception of James Inhofe. Best chance for redemption: Brown uses his Senate seat as a springboard to run for Pres in '12.
= = = = =
** I have to say "blackmailers and traitors" now instead of my previous phrase "blackmailers, murderers and traitors." Now that Emperor Kennedy is in the ninth circle of Hell, eternally drowning over and over in a sunken Oldsmobile, the only known murderer has been removed from the Upper Nuthouse.
¶ 6:14 AM
