posted June 12, 2008 06:51 AM            

Ann Coulter

In a conversation recently, I mentioned as an aside what a great president George Bush has been, and my friend was surprised. I was surprised that he was surprised.

I generally don't write columns about the manifestly obvious, but, yes, the man responsible for keeping Americans safe from another terrorist attack on American soil for nearly seven years now will go down in history as one of America's greatest presidents.

Produce one person who believed, on Sept. 12, 2001, that there would not be another attack for seven years, and I'll consider downgrading Bush from "Great" to "Really Good."

Merely taking out Saddam Hussein and his winsome sons Uday and Qusay (Hussein family slogan: "We're the Rape Room People!") constitutes a greater humanitarian accomplishment than anything Bill Clinton ever did – and I'm including remembering Monica's name on the sixth sexual encounter.

But unlike liberals, who are so anxious to send American troops to Rwanda or Darfur, Republicans oppose deploying U.S. troops for purely humanitarian purposes. We invaded Iraq to protect America.

It is unquestionable that Bush has made this country safe by keeping Islamic lunatics pinned down fighting our troops in Iraq. In the past few years, our brave troops have killed more than 20,000 al-Qaida and other Islamic militants in Iraq alone. That's 20,000 terrorists who will never board a plane headed for JFK – or a landmark building, for that matter.

We are, in fact, fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them at, say, the corner of 72nd and Columbus in Manhattan – the mere mention of which never fails to enrage liberals, which is why you should say it as often as possible.

The Iraq war has been a stunning success. The Iraqi army is "standing up" (as they say); fat Muqtada al-Sadr – the Dr. Phil of Islamo-fascist radicalism – has waddled off in retreat to Iran; and Sadr City and Basra are no longer war zones. Our servicemen must be baffled by the constant naysaying coming from their own country.

The Iraqis have a democracy – a miracle on the order of flush toilets in that godforsaken region of the world. Despite its newness, Iraq's democracy appears to be no more dysfunctional than one that would condemn a man who has kept the nation safe for seven years while deifying a man who has accomplished absolutely nothing in his entire life except to give speeches about "change."

(Guess what Bill Clinton's campaign theme was in 1992? You are wrong if you guessed: "bringing dignity back to the White House." It was "change." In January 1992, James Carville told Steve Daley of the Chicago Tribune that it had gotten to the point that the press was complaining about Clinton's "constant talk of change.")

Monthly casualties in Iraq now come in slightly lower than a weekend with Anna Nicole Smith. According to a CNN report last week, for the entire month of May, there were only 19 troop deaths in Iraq. (Last year, five people on average were shot every day in Chicago.) With Iraqi deaths at an all-time low, Iraq is safer than Detroit – although the Middle Eastern food is still better in Detroit.

Al-Qaida is virtually destroyed, surprising even the CIA. Two weeks ago, the Washington Post reported: "Less than a year after his agency warned of new threats from a resurgent al-Qaida, CIA Director Michael V. Hayden now portrays the terrorist movement as essentially defeated in Iraq and Saudi Arabia and on the defensive throughout much of the rest of the world, including in its presumed haven along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border."

It's almost as if there's been some sort of "surge" going on, as strange as that sounds.

Just this week, the New York Times reported that al-Qaida and other terrorist groups in Southeast Asia have all but disappeared, starved of money and support. The U.S. and Australia have been working closely with the Philippines, Malaysia and Indonesia, sending them counterterrorism equipment and personnel.

But no one notices when 9/11 doesn't happen. Indeed, if we had somehow stopped the 9/11 attack, we'd all be watching Mohamed Atta being interviewed on MSNBC, explaining his lawsuit against the Bush administration. Maureen Dowd would be writing columns describing Khalid Sheik Mohammed as a "wannabe" terrorist being treated like Genghis Khan by an excitable Bush administration.

We begin to forget what it was like to turn on the TV, see a tornado, a car chase or another Pamela Anderson marriage and think: Good – another day without a terrorist attack.

But liberals have only blind hatred for Bush – and for those brute American interrogators who do not supply extra helpings of bearnaise sauce to the little darlings at Guantanamo with sufficient alacrity.

posted June 12, 2008 08:48 AM            

*falls down laughing*

Oooooooooooh, *soils self*hahahahahaha, waaaaaaahhhhhh, heheheheheheheheeee, *tears springing forth*, bwaaahahahahahaaaaa haaaaaaaa *bent double*

On what basis can that bint pronounce that particular piece of effluent?

posted June 12, 2008 08:50 AM            

Urrr? Did they catch Bin-Laden then? I must have missed that lil newsflash?

posted June 12, 2008 08:56 AM            

Aaaah, safer than Detroit eh? That'll be numero uno on the "Most Murderous City" billboard then?

Well that's just lovely.
http://www.forbes.com/2007/11/08/murder-city-danger-forbeslife-cx_de_1108murder.html

posted June 12, 2008 08:59 AM            

Kept it safe.... by bombing the crap out of it? Sort of in the manner of bombing for peace is like f****** for virginity?

posted June 12, 2008 09:02 AM            

Oooooh, that says it all.

posted June 12, 2008 09:58 AM            

Al-Qaeda is virtually destroyed. They're whining in Iraq about lack of support from Iraqis. Further, both Shia and Sunni have turned against al-Qaeda and started killing them. They've been pushed out of most Iraqi cities and into one northern city where they are under attack now. 20,000 and I think the number is much higher, have been killed among al-Qaeda and other terrorists who were making war on Iraqi civilians. What's not to like about that? Even bin Laden is whining and trying to show he's still relevant.

It's a statistical fact that US military forces are safer in Iraq than citizens in Detroit. Further, for the last several years some major cities in the US had higher murder rates per capita than all of Iraq combined...including the murders committed by terrorists. Facts are facts.

Our nation wheels has been kept safe which is the number one job of any President.

As for the Iraqi government, it's now functioning better than the chairwarming demoscat Congress of the United States.

Yes, we did fight them over there...after they showed a willingness to attack us here. History will record the al-Qaeda sneak attacks on the WTC and Pentagon as perhaps the most disastrous mistake ever made by an enemy. On the same level as the attack on Pearl Harbor by the Japanese...and with the very same result.

Why should we have a war with an enemy right here in the US. Don't your know all those aircraft carrier task forces, task forces of troop and equipment carriers not to mention all those giant military aircraft in the US arsenal are there to project US military force anywhere in the world? We didn't need to do it right here in America.

Not to mention that al-Qaeda was invited to Iraq. Oh, not in so many words but bin Laden decided to make Iraq the central battlefield in their war against the US. Dumb, dumber and dumbest. Concentrating his forces in Iraq meant we didn't have to go dig them out of their caves and from under the rocks where they usually hide.

There were good and sufficient reasons for removing Saddam Hussein...many such good reasons. Fortunately, your PM, Blair agreed. Sometimes I wonder if Blair wasn't the only wide awake leader in Britain.

Yeah, I could see Ann Coulter with an M-16 fighting terrorists. There's no question in my mind that Coulter has a higher level of testosterone in her system than any demoscat in the Congress of the United States...and that includes the balls challenged Barack O'Bomber.

Now wheels, I think your real problem with America is that after years of a Marxist, Red Ken, as Mayor of London; they finally threw him out of office and elected an American as Mayor of London.

posted June 12, 2008 10:22 AM            

Did you get your facts from the White House Fact Sheets? I didn't even know they existed until today. To coin a phrase by MysticMel 'Frickalarious'. The White House says This is True. So it must be true then.

quote:

---

attack on Pearl Harbor by the Japanese

---

And dude, dude.... quick geography lesson. I'm Welsh love. I give as much of a frick about London as you do about Ottawa.

posted June 12, 2008 11:51 AM            

I just make this stuff up off the cuff to annoy demoscats here.

Everyone knows Saddam was a ruler loved and admired by all Iraqi citizens and definitely not the murderous torturing, rapist bast@rd I painted him to be.

It's a fact that most days the Iraqi children could be found in the parks flying their little kites without a care in the world and their parents there with them on family picnics. Michael Moore said so.

And, of course when Harry Reid, John Murtha, Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry and all the other foreign policy experts say America lost the Iraq war they're absolutely right. The US military has been getting their as$es kicked in Iraq. Those terrorist casualty figures are bogus. Not one terrorist has been killed by US military personnel in Iraq. In fact, al-Qaeda is close to taking the country over for use as a terrorist staging nation. They'll be attacking America soon.

Yep, any day now the Iraqi government will collapse and America will be dragging it's tail home between it's legs.

Everyone knows that.

Except for one newspaper, the Washington Post which is now advising O'Bomber to back off on his rhetoric that he's going to bring the troops home first thing. Apparently the Washington Post hasn't gotten the word...yet and actually thinks the US is winning in Iraq. Go figure.

I know text books say Japan won WWII wheels but there are some boneheads who think otherwise and go so far as to say the sneak attack on Pearl Harbor was a colossal mistake by the Japanese military. Probably the same boneheads who say the al-Qaeda attack on the WTC will one day be written up by historians as a similar colossal blunder on the part of Islamic terrorists.

posted June 12, 2008 12:39 PM              

just dont stop...

loved the foillowing ( its a pun not a typo )

quote:

---

Kept it safe.... by bombing the crap out of it? Sort of in the manner of bombing for peace is like f****** for virginity?

Does the name wheelsofcheese have a sort of Pavlov's Dog Effect on you kid? WHEELSOFCHEESE = MUST TALK ABOUT SECOND WORLD WAR.

And dude, dude.... quick geography lesson. I'm Welsh love. I give as much of a frick about London as you do about Ottawa.

---

posted June 12, 2008 03:18 PM            

quote:

---

Yep, it's true that Bush has failed in his primary duty to keep America and Americans safe.

---

He did stop hunting Bin Laden. He did go to war with Iraq under the guise of the War on Terror whilst the terrorists were elsewhere. His decisions have lead to increased recruitment by Al Qaeda.

posted June 12, 2008 05:05 PM            

You're soooo right acoustic that it's scary.

Have you gotten that al-Qaeda RPG pulled out of your rectum yet acoustic.

I know you must have one stuck there...since Bush made America less safe. Got any al-Qaeda AK-47 bullet holes in your hide acoustic?

Surely, there must be someone here who's an American in America who has horror stories to tell about their own personal experiences of being attacked by al-Qaeda right here in America...since Bush made America...less safe.

posted June 12, 2008 05:52 PM            

US fears al-Qaeda attack from Pakistan

quote:

---

To suggest this administration has somehow bested terrorism because of the absence of an attack domestically since 9/11 is akin to suggesting the administration has bested natural disasters because we haven't yet been hit with another Hurricane Katrina.
Geoff Geis
Alexandria, Va.
Link

---

posted June 12, 2008 07:28 PM            

Speculation. Yes, I disagree. al-Qaeda has been reduced to a shadow of it's former self and bin Laden has been reduced to whining about the non support from Iraqi citizens.

Now acoustic, when are you going to stop whining that Bush made us less safe, disregarding the fact there have been no further attacks on the United States since 9/11.

posted June 12, 2008 07:39 PM            

quote:

---

Now acoustic, when are you going to stop whining that Bush made us less safe, disregarding the fact there have been no further attacks on the United States since 9/11.

---

Perhaps when the terrorist threat disappears. It hasn't. Read the news.

"Haqqani's remarks came a day after the top U.S. military officer said al Qaeda leaders believed to be hiding in Pakistani tribal areas were planning new attacks." http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSN11259598

posted June 12, 2008 08:45 PM            

Just more bullshiiit rhetoric from bullshiiting leftists.

posted June 12, 2008 09:00 PM            

quote:

---

how has Bush made the US less safe?

---

By inspiring terrorists.

quote:

---

How long did they have to train you to repeat that line like a little parrot?

---

posted June 12, 2008 09:02 PM            

quote:

---

There have been no further attacks on the United States.

---

posted June 12, 2008 10:08 PM            

quote:

---

By inspiring terrorists...acoustic

---

I just love it when people try out illogical arguments on me acoustic.

Let's see, going back to 1998 terrorists starting planning to attack the United States...but they weren't really angry at the United States. On 9/11 they attacked the WTC and Pentagon...but they weren't really angry at the United States. They were just doing what terrorists do.

Then, Bush really pi$$ed them off by attacking them in Afghanistan, overthrowing the Taliban and killing untold numbers of Taliban and al-Qaeda...and that's when they got really angry at America. Hahahahaha

Nice try but that doesn't pass the giggle test.

Sorry, I find I'm not repeating the positions of Limbaugh, Hannity or anyone else. In fact the things they're saying now are things I've been saying for some years. Perhaps they're reading my stuff.

On the other hand acoustic YOU ARE REPEATING verbatim the nonsense of leftists...Bush made the US less safe...when the facts are the opposite and everyone in the known universe knows it's nonsense....and the proof acoustic is all around you. Polly wanna cracker?

Open your eyes. There have been no further attacks against the United States since 9/11 and Bush is responsible for that.