Monday, October 30, 2006

Murtha's bill of goods

The Pittsburgh Tribune, on the "cutting edge" of "cut n run"?
What a terrible mistake! I was shocked and extremely disappointed to read that my daily newspaper, the Trib, has endorsed Jack Murtha.

Over the past three years, Murtha has strongly spoken against the mission of the troops and endangered their lives. To say he is a "stronger, more steadfast voice for this nation's military" borders on a journalist lie. To say he was "well ahead on the learning curve" and "recognized the fallacy of pursuing Iraq's welfare through U.S. supplied warfare" is ridiculous and alarming.

When the U.S. began this Iraq campaign, everyone knew it was going to be a long, difficult effort. It sounds like the Trib thinks the war is over and we should pack up and come home. It really sounds like the Trib has joined the cut-and-run crowd.

Ken Ruzich

...and not to disappoint Ken Ruzich, Jack Murtha, our enemy's best friend, chimes in with this diatribe.

Far from "supporting our troops", Jack Murtha misses no opportunity to demoralize their efforts.

Diana Irey says, "‘He’s not the Jack Murtha I used to know.’"

But Jack Murtha counters with, "“The only thing that’s changed is, I disagree with the policy of the president.”

If that's so, then Jack Murtha has always thought it prudent to play judge, jury and executioner to Marines without formal charges being filed, even without so much as reading a report.

If that's so, then Jack Murtha's sentiments have always been aligned with radical leftist groups like Code Pink.

If that's so, then Jack Murtha would always have thought it fitting to say he supports the troops via regular visits to Walter Reed, while accepting an award as "Man of the Year" from Code Pink, a radical socialist antiwar group that regularly protests in front of our wounded soldiers at Walter Reed.

If that's so, then Jack Murtha has always thought it fitting that he should seek ways to accept a $50,o00 bribe without getting caught. (then again, perhaps this was the case, since Jack Murtha saw it fitting to throw a party for a staffer who just got done being convicted for taking a bribe).

If that's so, then Jack Murtha would have always thought it fitting that he should vote against the Patriot Act, and to say that we should be without the tools necessary that may prevent another 9/11 (showing that he is in fact to the left of the ACLU).

If that's so, then Jack Murtha would have always thought it fitting that he should, in another of his famous "political deals," vote against funding research that would improve prosthetics for wounded soldiers.

If nothing about Jack Murtha has changed, then Jack Murtha would have always thought it fitting to be against measures that would strengthen the security at our borders, and to vote against stiffer sentences for illegal aliens who have committed felonies.

I don't know. Maybe Jack Murtha has truly not changed. Maybe we should take him at his word.

But if that is indeed the case, then it seems safe to say that for the past 31 years, the voters of PA-12 have been sold a bill of goods.