It depends on how you define safety
HART: A lot of us supporting Barack Obama have pretty long history of experience in national security matters. And I for one would yield to no one in this country in terms of my commitment to this country's national security, and new ways to achieve it. We're not living in the Cold War anymore. And to pretend that simply spending a lot more money on the Pentagon is going to make us safer was proved false by 9/11. This was an administration that was warned that terrorists were going to attack this country, and they did nothing. I am not going to listen to anybody in this administration talk about Democrats being weak on national security. They let this country down.
Finally! Shall we all say it again, and again and again? I've had quite enough of leaders who live by the old 1960s rule of let's not, and say we did, who live in a fantasy world in which what one says or calls something or someone is more important than how people and things really are, a world in which appearances trump actualities, in which spend-thrifts are called conservatives, a world in which the duped people of America buy this load of crap. It's over. It's time to call a reckless spendthrift a reckless spendthrift.
Our nation is dangerously in debt. Our defenses are worn thin and frayed from fighting a war for the benefit of Big Oil, Halliburton, KBR & Blackwater. The numbers of our enemies in the world are greatly increased. These are the threats to our security. It's time for the war-obsessed corporate plunderers to leave our looted treasury alone. It's time for some reality-based leadership to come in and clean up their mess, for the sake of national security. This time, our safety depends upon change.
Not to mention how low our reputation in the world community has dropped.
Excellent piece! Succint and terse!;] Unfortunately for McCain his going
up against Obama often makes him look very old. I'm not an ageist; I know
a lot of old folks with energy - including my Mom. McCain's a war hero I
respect, but that doesn't translate into his becoming President. In McCain
we have too much of the status quo. He dropped 5 lobbyists from the top
tier of his campaign (what took him so long?) and when Obama talked about
his connection to lobbyists, McCain threw in the name of William Ayers who
was connected to some bombing that happened in the '60's when Obama was 8
years old. Is he nit picking?
Great post and to the point! We can only hope that enough people have
broken through the brainwashed state they have been in over the past years
and elect to set us on a new course and renew our future. If not there
will be no future!
Here! Here! (Or is that "Hear! Hear!"? I'm really not sure. Either way, you
know what I mean.)
Sophmom, YOU ROCK!
Sorry, y'all, that it's taken me so long to respond! It was a rush
finishing up my work in N.O., and another to get home, and another once
here. I still haven't even unloaded the car after getting in Thursday late.
Yesterday's a blur. Today I'll get a chance to settle back in.
Preach it, sister! I just hope everyone else gets it. I felt a little
discouraged after canvassing this weekend.
Thanks for the excellent points! It's so maddening to hear the unside down
claim that the Bush Administration is 'tough on terror' (or whatever).
Go girl, you are definitely on the right page. As an observer from the
Great White North we are cheering you and like minded people on. Throw the
bums out!!!
Paula, I just read your canvassing post. Yikes! It frightens me to think
that's out there still.