Updated
After Lamont’s win over Joe Lieberman yesterday, the far leftist MoveOn moonbats have ratcheted up the rhetoric. Take a gander at Michael Moore’s ultimatum to all pro-Iraq war Democrats. Who will be the next Democrat to face the leftists’ wrath? Hillary Clinton. His message? Get in line or your political career will be over. Ladies and gentlemen, the destruction of the Democratic party has officially begun:
Friends,
Let the resounding defeat of Senator Joe Lieberman send a cold shiver down the spine of every Democrat who supported the invasion of Iraq and who continues to support, in any way, this senseless, immoral, unwinnable war. Make no mistake about it: We, the majority of Americans, want this war ended — and we will actively work to defeat each and every one of you who does not support an immediate end to this war.
Nearly every Democrat set to run for president in 2008 is responsible for this war. They voted for it or they supported it. That single, stupid decision has cost us 2,592 American lives and tens of thousands of Iraqi lives. Lieberman and Company made a colossal mistake — and we are going to make sure they pay for that mistake. Payback time started last night.
I realize that there are those like Kerry and Edwards who have now changed their position and are strongly anti-war. Perhaps that switch will be enough for some to support them. For others, like me — while I’m glad they’ve seen the light — their massive error in judgment is, sadly, proof that they are not fit for the job. They sided with Bush, and for that, they may never enter the promised land.
To Hillary, our first best hope for a woman to become president, I cannot for the life of me figure out why you continue to support Bush and his war. I’m sure someone has advised you that a woman can’t be elected unless she proves she can kick ass just as crazy as any man. I’m here to tell you that you will never make it through the Democratic primaries unless you start now by strongly opposing the war. It is your only hope. You and Joe have been Bush’s biggest Democratic supporters of the war. Last night’s voter revolt took place just a few miles from your home in Chappaqua. Did you hear the noise? Can you read the writing on the wall?
To every Democratic Senator and Congressman who continues to back Bush’s War, allow me to inform you that your days in elective office are now numbered. Myself and tens of millions of citizens are going to work hard to actively remove you from any position of power.
If you don’t believe us, give Joe a call.
Yours,
Michael Moore
[email protected]
www.michaelmoore.comP.S. Republicans — sorry to leave you out of this letter. It’s just that our side has a little housecleaning to do. We’ll take care of you this November.
This is just too delicious for Republicans. Michael Moore and his MoveOn crowd have officially taken over the Democratic party. What will Hillary Clinton and the others do? Will they bow at the altar of the moonbats or will they fight for their party?
Update: Mark Kilmer at RedState comments:
The man has tasted blood, now he thinks he can rip apart the entire Democrat Party. For Republicans, this can be fun to watch. The nuts have a grip on that Party, they are a living, breathing, elected part of it. The erstwhile party of Andrew Jackson, JFK, and the second President Roosevelt are now the party of Howard Dean, Barbara Boxer, Nancy Pelosi, and Michael Moore. (You know the other names which belong on the list.)
Update II: Tom Bevan writing at RCP Blog offers comments regarding Michael Moore’s claim that he speaks for the majority of Americans:
A majority of the public may not be happy with progress in Iraq, but neither do they subscribe to Moore’s view that it is “senseless,” “immoral,” or “unwinnable.” Despite what he may think, Michael Moore’s rabid, far left partisanship is never going to represent the majority view in this country. The problem is that Moore now represents the majority view within the Democratic party – further cemented by Lamont’s victory last night – and that just might cost them another decade or two in the wilderness.
Update III: The far left moonbats have pushed other reasonable and judicious Democrats out of the party. Brendan Loy has announced that he got the message and that he’s leaving the Democratic Party:
But now the voters have spoken. Lieberman may still consider himself a Democrat – he says that, if elected as an independent, he’ll vote to organize with the Dems, and I believe him – but the Democrats don’t consider Lieberman a Democrat anymore. That’s the cold, hard truth of today’s results. He’s been kicked out of the “big tent” because his loyalty wasn’t blind enough, because his conscience wasn’t pliable enough. He’s been replaced by the shiny new millionaire who said all the right things to win over the hearts and minds of the netroots. The war in Iraq is wrong, wrong, wrong; President Bush is bad, bad, bad; and Joe Lieberman is a traitor, a traitor, a traitor. That’s the undeniable message that Democratic voters from my home state have sent out across the land this fateful day.
Well, if there’s no room in the Democratic Party for Joe Lieberman, then there’s no room in it for me.
Update IV: Jeff Goldstein‘s fisking of Moore’s letter is a must read.
It looks like this is the first step of the Democrats taking over the Independant Party and allowing the Liberals to whither on the vine….
LoveAmerican Immigrant:
Thanks for admitting that Moore is a propagandist and the liberal democrats were disgraceful for embracing such a proven liar just to win political power.
No problem LAI…my pleasure. However, let’s not pretend that the Bush administration hasn’t lied extensively just to win political power and advance their agenda. Again…they’re all crooks…all politicians, Reps and Dems alike!
It is sad that a strong foreign policy against the enemies of America and the poor/oppressed in the world (like communism and jahadist terrorism) is propagandic.
Strong foreign policy? Are you kidding me? If by “strong” you mean having the balls to engage in a war with complete disregard for logic, intelligence and finance, then yes…I guess that’s strong foreign policy.
What would constitute strong foreign policy in my mind is one that takes history and our past actions into account…One that understands that our government can’t just use terrorist countries/organizations to advance our interests (i.e. providing Saddam with weapons to help fight Iran, or funding Afghan gorillas to help fight the Soviet Union) when convenient, and then turn on those countries/organizations for possessing the very weapons we gave them, and then expect that those countries won’t get pissed off and want to kill us…One that, following the attacks on 9/11, focused on determining why instead of who.
I remember Dian Fossey’s days with the Afghan gorillas, as immortalized in her book, Gorillas in the Dust.
As for Karl Rove…someone that apparently makes all political junkies wet in the crotch (although certainly a different type of wetness depending on which side you’re on)…it amazes me that the right considers this guy a hero.
My sarcasm went right over your head, didn’t it? Oh, well, let me explain: Karl Rove is the left wing’s boogey man. The very mention of his name causes them to curl up into a little ball and start wailing for their mommies. He is the personification of all the evil in the world. Every time you moonbats lose, the machinations of Karl Rove are somehow blamed.
I was parodying this obsession of the left. You guys think everything in the political world is planned by Karl Rove, so I love waving his name in your face; every time Rove says “boo”, you guys crap your pants. I find this amusing.
Frankly, I never knew much about Rove until the left started blaming all their misfortunes on him, but hey, if he’s causing you moonbats that much pain, may his tribe increase.
Somebody earlier compared Moore to Pat Robertson, but ol’ Pat doesn’t ever get this kind of roll-out-the-red-carpet treatment from the GOP.
No, but Coulter does.
Well, that’s because she has nicer legs.
Grumper,
That’s good, quality stuff Foggy.
Thanks for the compliment and for reposting all my comments on this thread. Now, can you actually tell me who constitutes the ‘religious right’ or do you want to play that old children’s game of repeating my sentences to annoy and evade? That’s what I thought: You’ve nothing to say worth repeating.
ok – who has read about, or remembers the destruction of the republican party at the hands of goldwater?
seriously – his people, outsiders who did not understand how politics much less washington worked – destroyed teh republican party coalition for a while – in particular driving some of the people who are today considered part of the democratic vanguard into that camp in the first place.
This is a smaller scale – but its the same thing. I hope.
“A foreign policy that takes history and our past actions into account…”
Well, not ALL history of course. Never mind that bit about the Gulf War in ’91 and the violations of the subsequent cease fire and UN resolutions. Never mind that bit about supporting terrorist organizations. What’s REALLY important is the fact that we supported one enemy over another. THAT ALONE makes absolutely ANY moves we make in the region other than rationally considering their grievences, completely illegitimate.
Faith,
Based on his posts, I’ve come to the realization that Stan’s a fear-based party pooper.
Mantis:
“I remember Dian Fossey’s days with the Afghan gorillas, as immortalized in her book, Gorillas in the Dust.”
Oooo…you got me there, Mantis. Nice work! Way to focus on the important things…like spelling.
OregonMuse:
“My sarcasm went right over your head, didn’t it?”
Not really, but feel free to flatter yourself.
“Frankly, I never knew much about Rove until the left started blaming all their misfortunes on him, but hey, if he’s causing you moonbats that much pain, may his tribe increase.”
Well, if you’re including me in the group of liberal “moonbats”, I guess you haven’t been reading my entries very carefully, but that’s ok. Regardless, that you don’t care who Rove is, what he stands for, or how he gets what he wants…just as long as he inflicts pain on the liberals…is a pretty typical sentiment among all of the idiots (on the right and left) in this country who are so passionate about defending their respective positions.
None of it matters. It’s all a game. We’re all puppets, and Washington gets the last laugh.
Three reasons Republicans should NOT cheer that Michael Moore has hijacked one of America’s two major parties: (1) America needs two viable sane paries. We need campaigns with healthy debate, not the current moonbat nonsense. (2) When Republicans have no sane opposition, they feel free to spend freely and raise taxes on the supposition that you have no choice but to vote for them. (3) Sooner or later Republicans will be thrown out of power. It’s inevitable. When it happens, the crazies on the Left will be America’s only choice by default. That is not good for America.
Heralder wrote:
“Lefty,
I see. I guess I’m mathmatically retarted, because I don’t get how CNN asked 1,047 Americans specific questions over the phone and from that, extrapolated that 60% of 297 million Americans felt a certain way.”
This is the “DEMOCRATS PERPETUAL FRAUD” DEMOCRATS ARE PROVEN LIARS.
And Stan, stut up stupid. You phony POS. You call the President a liar and whine about the Constitution.Shut up and go polish Clinton’s lying pecker you loser.The Democrats and their Media’s Perpetual Fraud is crumbling all around the world.
Lefty Minority loser,
“Stan, the conservatives repeat their lies and mantras in order to comfort themselves in front of the resounding defeat they face in the polls in November.”
I laugh when I hear bed wetters like you Lefty. To prove just how stupid you are , it’s your 90% lefty liberal media who repeat the dumasscraps party lies as mantras because that is all they are , a bunch of Godless Liars.
Don’t you ever tire of being stupid liar? You must really enjoy your MINORITY status, you’ve earned it and don’t worry , nobody is going to take it from you.
Grumpier,
None of it matters. It’s all a game. We’re all puppets, and Washington gets the last laugh.
Wow, did you major in philosophy at truckin’ skool? I’ll have to ponder the profundity of emotional ambivalence there Socrates.
Answer just one simple question: Who is the ‘religious right’ that you use as a mantra? Afraid to answer, goat?
You mean Bush repeated the “lies” of Bill Clinton and the prominent Dems when they proclaimed Saddam was a nuclear threat and Clinton even signed the Iraq regime change policy. Or do you mean that Bush should have treated the democrats as liars and not serious about national security? In the end, you don’t like the Rep and Dem, so you are for the communists and the jihadists? Cheap rhetoric with no real solution.
So you meant FDR was wrong for aligning with Stalin in fighting against Hitler? So we have to wage war against both communist Russia and fascist axis at the same time? Is this the logic that you meant? Who are going to make sure that you will be alive to figure out the why?
I know the logic of Bush strategy. I can explain to you if you really don’t know it. What I don’t understand is why the liberals are willing to provide propaganda service for the most depraved terrorists (like Reuter, AP, NYT, CNN, Durbin, Murtha …)?
None of it matters. It’s all a game. We’re all puppets, and Washington gets the last laugh.
————————————————
So which country you are moving to now since America is obviously so bad?
Gumper… Rove is no one’s hero. We just think it’s really *really* funny that the left has created this boogy-man. That’s why we joke about being on the payroll and joke about getting our secret orders and joke about how every stupid thing done by Democrats is really a super-secret Rovian plot. I don’t care much about him. He’s a man, not a super man. All presidents have advisors who are presumably good at what they do.
But (and with apologies to mantis) the left needs a grand vizier to manipulate the population because a good wide chunk of it *doesn’t* allow diversity of opinion or thought. People can’t legitimately think that Iraq was a necessary step in the global war on terror (or even legitimately think that there *is* a global war on terror) so there needs to be a reason. Either they’re stupid or they’ve been manipulated… or both.
What’s more, it’s become doctrine, absolute and immutable doctrine, that Bush is stupid. In order to believe that Bush is an imbecile a puppet master has to be created. Ta Da! Rove.
It’s FUNNY.
(While Bush may not be the sharpest knife in the drawer I bet he got higher scores on his military intelligence evaluations than Kerry did… or why else would Kerry not release that information?)
And on the subject of Moore’s letter.
“P.S. Republicans — sorry to leave you out of this letter. It’s just that our side has a little housecleaning to do. We’ll take care of you this November.”
That’s not how it works. You don’t win elections by pruning your ranks of the apostate. Unlike religion, politics can’t survive doctrinal purity.
Stan:
Was it my unconscionable assumption that you agree we should leave Iraq immediately? If this assumption is correct, then could you tell me if there are terrorists in Iraq?
If we can then agree that there are terrorists in Iraq then the equation looks pretty simple:
Cut and run from Iraq = Running from terrorists.
Of course, if my assumption off the mark I apologize.
I don’t believe everything is connected to terrorism, Stan. If Bush told me it was, I wouldn’t believe him.
Is/was Iraq tied to terrorism? I believe it to be the case. There’s alot of information about those connections in the form of unclassified documents that came out of Iraq. There was inarguably slipshot information gathered going in, but many have conveniently forgot that they believed our reasons to be just when we deployed. But later, when it bacame apparent that they felt they could attack the administration with a reasonable amount of impunity, they didn’t dissapoint. No, this doesn’t mean Bush lied, it means he made mistakes, mistakes the left continue to try and crucify him for.
We would be so lucky to think this whole problem was as easy as punching the other guy right back in the face, dusting off our hands and waiting for the next attack, but its not. There’s a wider, more complex problem here, and that problem is, dare I say, Islamic terrorism.
Contrary to Lefty’s belief this problem didn’t magically infest the planet six years ago when a republican took office.
I’m getting tangental though, back to your post:
I agree laws are a slippery slope and vigilance is of the utmost importance, but undermining out of bipartisan spite (which is largely what I see happening) does no one any good, and frankly, in many cases compromises people’s safety.
You eloquently danced around calling me a chickenhawk didn’t you?
Well, if support for the war makes me a chickenhawk, then you better be on the next flight to Iraq to help expel the coalition, or you’ll be a chickendove.
I have no illusions about my infinitesimal part in the grand scheme of things. I don’t fancy myself some heroic “terrorist fighter” because I string a few words together into a coherant sentence and debate sometimes useless points on the internet.
I’m just a citizen as are you, exercising his right to speak. I have what I believe is right and so do you, the difference is what I happen to believe is right is condescendingly labeled as blindly following the president and treating everything he says as gospel. Would you be surprised to find that I voted against Bush twice? I’d imagine you would be…just as I’m not religious either.
If you want a less combative post, and more “well-thought” opinions, try not barging into the thread and calling people “pussy asses” at the end of your blustering opening rant.
Oooo…you got me there, Mantis. Nice work! Way to focus on the important things…like spelling.
Repeat after me Grumper: “I will try to get jokes; they will not hurt me. I will try to get jokes; they will not hurt me.”
Speaking of moonbat killers, check out this bright, independent riser who is sure to give Dennis Kucinich a major run for his 10th Congressional seat.
Ever since I started following politics in the early 80’s I’ve always wondered what it must have been like to watch the anti-war crowd of the late 1960’s – early 70’s tear down this country and in the process sending the Democratic party into the wilderness.
Now I know.
This is absolute insanity.
More Moore!
Stan,
“We also need to be smart diplomatically, which this president has not.”
You are serious in asserting that France, Russia, etc. and the UN are honest participants I the International community? That negotiation and diplomacy have any chance whatsoever? To seriously suggest such is to reveal yourself to be, at best, naïve.
“Iraq was not the battle and never should have been. No amount of rhetoric will make that right.”
Avoiding ‘rhetoric’, Iraq was and remains presisely the ‘correct’ country to ‘plant’ within the Middle East the ’seed’ of democracy.
“All I’m saying is that our President’s assessment of how to combat terrorism is a failed one – as the outcomes have shown.”
A limited perspective, demanding a quick victory, so that we can all get back to our personal lives, will reach that conclusion. A more mature perspective would consul that conflict with nations and regional society’s employing terrorism, in a geopolitical environment opposed to meaningful confrontation, would necessitate a protracted conflict. One that would show little concrete progress in its initial stages.
“Problem is, he’s lied so many times he’s lost everyone’s trust and his motives are now suspect”
If you swallow the distortions of the MSM, self-serving democratic politicians ‘pronouncements’ and the rhetoric of the far left, it is no wonder that you’ve lost your sense of trust in a man who is doing his level best to protect you and yours.
To paraphrase Churchill, “Never have so many been so ungrateful to so few”
Whats that ugly goastfaced moron up to besides being stupid? SQUAWK SQUAWK
Michael Moore is an idiot. He agrees with a majority of Americans, who now oppose the war. Obviously Michael Moore is as stupid as the rest of this country. Only the enlightened minority understand what it means to be a patriot, and what it means to care about national security.
Why does 60% of America hate America?
Heheh, what a self-righteous, melodramtic, cocky little son of a bitch [Moore] is.
Whaddaya mean, little?
…and to those of ya’ll who would take Ann Coulter over Michael Moore, rather than feed ’em both to sharks, would you also take her Adam’s apple? ‘Cuz it’s big, and you might lose an eye.
Does Mikey still have that Halliburton stock?
“Fall in line or well destroy You“??
Whats He gonna do?? sit on them?
Does He mean the line at Burger Chef or what?
What a crackpot..
Wow, the trolls are out and feeding!
And who’s Michael Moore?
Heralder,
Thanks for the eloquent response. After reading it, I’ll tell you that I respect your opinion and, while we disagree on facts, many of them, you’re clear on your stance. There are, of course, alot of gray areas in the way people look at these issues and one thing I’d never think – despite how words can sometimes be interpreted – is that everyone is a blind, mindless follower. Some certainly are, just like some on the far left have opinions I can’t stand behind and never will.
So Kerry and Edwards are no longer accepted because they once supported the war but Hillary can still be president if she’ll just waffle on back to opposing it. Is Moore so desperate for the “first best hope” for a woman pres that he’ll relax his standards for ol’ Hill?
Stan,
Thanks for the response. Yes, we may disagree…but the most important thing is that we can debate it with civility. I agree that it’s important to not succumb to extremism in either direction. Stick around, perhaps we can joust on another thread.
James:
Heh heh. Take your pick, there are many things about Moore’s character that are little.
d-brit,
A few things:
“You are serious in asserting that France, Russia, etc. and the UN are honest participants I the International community? That negotiation and diplomacy have any chance whatsoever? To seriously suggest such is to reveal yourself to be, at best, naïve.”
So, what you’re saying is it’s us against the world. No one is an honest broker. Diplomacy and negotiations should not even be part of the process because they do not “have any chance whatsoever?” Whatever your misgivings about the hypocracy of other countries, we’re hypocrites too, my friend. We support and tolerate regimes like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan because it is in our current interest to do so. Is it right? Doesn’t matter. They are “strange bedfellows” and foreign policies aren’t always about what’s right and wrong in the world. It’s usually about what is right for us. Are France and Russia in bed with countries we are – depending on the moment and time in history – opposed to? Sure they are. Maybe they are not honest participants, but every country has it’s skeletons and diplomacy has to be part of the process no matter what. To suggest we simply bully our way throughout the world without incorporating it – well – there’s enough evidence of how poorly that approach works now. Diplomacy isn’t everything, but it’s naive to suggest it be scrapped completely.
“Avoiding ‘rhetoric’, Iraq was and remains presisely the ‘correct’ country to ‘plant’ within the Middle East the ’seed’ of democracy.”
Seed of democracy. As they say, you can’t force democracy on people at barrel of a gun. Some of these countries may someday become democracies, some may not. But to suggest that we can force it around the world is just stupid. Is it an ideal? Sure. But even George Sr. knew what would happen if we tried to overthrow Hussein. Things are not so black and white in this world and you’ve been believing too much of what you hear.
“A limited perspective, demanding a quick victory, so that we can all get back to our personal lives, will reach that conclusion. A more mature perspective would consul that conflict with nations and regional society’s employing terrorism, in a geopolitical environment opposed to meaningful confrontation, would necessitate a protracted conflict. One that would show little concrete progress in its initial stages.”
I won’t disagree with what you’re saying in the abstract, but your own government misrepresented this war to you, continues to, and a protracted civil war in that country was not their aim. Since it was not what they planned, their planning was wrong. It was a mistake.
“…it is no wonder that you’ve lost your sense of trust in a man who is doing his level best to protect you and yours.To paraphrase Churchill, “Never have so many been so ungrateful to so few”
Are you suggesting I should be “grateful” to my president for doing a job I’m paying him for? He works for us, you and me, and the minute you lose track of that fact you disregard the binding principle of what this country is about.
I have a stockbroker. He’s done fine for me, but if he loses money for me three times in a row, I’m gonna get rid of him. If I discover he’s misrepresented some of the stocks or has a personal relationship with some of the companies, I’m going to distrust him. Whatever the case, he gets no second or third chances. He wants the job, he’s got to perform. Sound harsh? Who cares. It’s mine and my family’s money and our future. That, my friends and my country – these are the things I’m on this planet for – and sympathies for those not doing as well as me.
He wanted this job and this job has a higher standard. Failure will happen now and again but when it becomes endemic, this man has to go. And as far as him doing his level best to protect me, take a look at Katrina and the Dubai ports deal. It’s not an issue of being grateful. It’s an issue of performing and what the degrees of success are. Everyone should be harsh about that, no matter who’s in office.
Will I thank him for his successes, certainly I will. But it’s not a get out of jail free card. If he screws up the next day, I have the right to not like him.
Rob LA,
You’re a simple man, aren’t you. Don’t be afraid, you can admit it. Your simple deductions give you away.
It’s alright.
We know you enjoy the simple pleasures like widdling a fine walking stick, playing your jews harp and buggering your 3rd cousin, Grizzelda Mae. Heck, who don’t enjoy them thangs!
Stan,
“So, what you’re saying is it’s us against the world. No one is an honest broker.”
That is a mischaracterization of my view. I am saying we not pretend to ourselves that ‘friends’ are in fact, friends.
“support and tolerate regimes like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan because it is in our current interest to do so. … It’s usually about what is right for us.”
There is a difference between ‘toleration’ of those we need in fighting a far greater threat and active opposition by presumed ‘allies’.
“Are France and Russia in bed with countries we are …opposed to? Sure they are.”
Terrorists seeking nuclear capabilities, actively supported by rogue nations capable of achieving that goal makes ‘enabling’ nations covert enemies.
It is unfortunate that the reality of the situation makes you uncomfortable.
“To suggest we simply bully our way throughout the world without incorporating it – well – there’s enough evidence of how poorly that approach works now.”
Again you misunderstand and/or misstate my position. As for the evidence of how ‘poorly’ Bush’s approach has worked, the Media bears much of the responsibility for this state of affairs. As they are overwhelmingly of the leftist mind-set and actively engaged in advocacy ‘journalism’, it is hardly objective evidence of your assertions.
“Diplomacy isn’t everything, but it’s naive to suggest it be scrapped completely.”
As things stand, ‘Diplomacy’ is futile, requiring sincere parties. It’s only purpose is to waste time until the situation evolves to the point where overwhelming active Military response is undeniable. When that occurs, many, many more will die and those who seek to appease will have the unnecessary deaths of fellow citizens upon their hands.
You hold Bush to a ‘standard’ that only a Washington, Lincoln or Churchill could meet and even they had many detractors…you offer no alternative, nor can you.
Impeachment is not a realistic goal so living with the man, foibles and all, is our only course.
It’s fine to point out that the ‘glass is half empty’ but intellectual dishonesty to deny that it is half full as well.
Michael Moore is an idiot. He agrees with a majority of Americans, who now oppose the war. Obviously Michael Moore is as stupid as the rest of this country. Only the enlightened minority understand what it means to be a patriot, and what it means to care about national security.
Sixty percent of Americans have not made a movie suggesting that George Bush attacked the World Trade Center by proxy. Give me a fucking break.
From Michael Moore’s letter:
I realize that there are those like Kerry and Edwards who have now changed their position and are strongly anti-war.
This isn’t even close to being true! This list of Iraq war votes proves it: Kerry hasn’t voted against a single war funding bill. Not one. (And Edwards hasn’t even been around to register his opposition, other than to verbally support continuing the occupation for another 12-18 months.
This is just Moore being a front for the Democratic Party.