Wednesday, February 28, 2007

I don't know... maybe his dog still likes him.

Murtha's plan to slow-bleed the troops in his never-ending quest to claim defeat in Iraq has met with a quick death. Even Nancy Pelosi was able to see her own political fortunes eroding in the tea leaves:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., meanwhile, said she doesn't support tying war funding to strict training and readiness targets for U.S. troops.

The comments distanced her from Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., who has said he wants to use Congress' spending power to force a change in policy in Iraq, by setting strict conditions on war funding.

Pelosi said she supports holding the administration to training and readiness targets, but added: "I don't see them as conditions to our funding. Let me be very clear: Congress will fund our troops."

Asked whether the standards should be tied to a $100 billion supplemental war spending measure — as Murtha has proposed — Pelosi demurred, saying it was up to the panel that drafts funding bills.

Remember, Nancy Pelosi and Jack Murtha, to use the words of Forrest Gump, were like "peas and carrots." After all, Jihad Jack was Nancy's pick to be second in command. Pelosi has been with Murtha all the way in his efforts to sabotage our war effort and in doing so destroy the Bush legacy.

But then Murtha's big fat mouth (yes, perhaps even bigger than his "big fat backside") engaged, spilling the beans as to what was the real motivation behind his 'slow-bleed' plan:
Chairman Murtha will describe his strategy for not only limiting the deployment of troops to Iraq but undermining other aspects of the president’s foreign and national security policy. Chairman Murtha discusses these steps in a videotaped conversation with former Congressman Tom Andrews (D-ME), the National Director of the Win Without War coalition, sponsor of
Join us here tomorrow for this exclusive interview.
(Heh--Chairman Murtha-- did anyone else get the double entendre?)

Well... I guess loyalty is a relative thing in politics.

But like I said, perhaps Jihad Jack's dog still likes him.

Then again, maybe not.

Is it time to frog-march Murtha out of Congress?

Read this great article by Amelia Gibson at American Daughter!


Sunday, February 25, 2007

As Murtha (and Pelosi) Fiddle...will Iraq burn?

As the Washington Post wrote:
Mr. Murtha's cynicism is matched by an alarming ignorance about conditions in Iraq. He continues to insist that Iraq "would be more stable with us out of there," in spite of the consensus of U.S. intelligence agencies that early withdrawal would produce "massive civilian casualties." He says he wants to force the administration to "bulldoze" the Abu Ghraib prison, even though it was emptied of prisoners and turned over to the Iraqi government last year. He wants to "get our troops out of the Green Zone" because "they are living in Saddam Hussein's palace"; could he be unaware that the zone's primary occupants are the Iraqi government and the U.S. Embassy?
Murtha may have had an honorable career in the military, but in much the same way that Mario Andretti may have driven an Indy car 30 years ago doesn't make him qualified to do so today, the fact that Murtha was in the military years ago doesn't necessarily translate to expertise in today's conflicts; nor is it, unfortunately, a guarantee of his patriotism. As Mark pointed out, and as the header of this blog has indicated since its inception, Benedict Arnold was a decorated soldier before he committed treason.

As a favorite Bible passage of mine points out, "By their fruits shall ye know them." The fruits of Mr. Murtha's labors are more than indicative of gross incompetence, senility, outright treachery, or a combination thereof. At any rate, he has proven himself grossly incompetent and/or even downright dangerous given the position of importance that he holds.


Friday, February 23, 2007

Like a proud parent of a delinquent child...

Murtha Honored As Friend Of Labor

POSTED: 1:36 pm EST February 23, 2007
UPDATED: 1:43 pm EST February 23, 2007
Johnstown's Central Labor Council and the AFL-CIO honored veteran 12th District Rep. John Murtha.Murtha was honored as a "true friend of labor."He was cited as one of the co-sponsors of the Employee Free Choice Act, a bill that would make it easier for workers to unionize by giving companies less control over the union election process.The meeting was one of four held across Pennsylvania thanking members of Congress who are co-sponsors of the act....
Murtha may be a true friend of labor; but with regard to American soldiers and Marines, well-- with a friend like Murtha, who needs enemies?
Mr. Murtha has a different idea. He would stop the surge by crudely hamstringing the ability of military commanders to deploy troops. In an interview carried Thursday by the Web site, Mr. Murtha said he would attach language to a war funding bill that would prohibit the redeployment of units that have been at home for less than a year, stop the extension of tours beyond 12 months, and prohibit units from shipping out if they do not train with all of their equipment. His aim, he made clear, is not to improve readiness but to "stop the surge." So why not straightforwardly strip the money out of the appropriations bill -- an action Congress is clearly empowered to take -- rather than try to micromanage the Army in a way that may be unconstitutional? Because, Mr. Murtha said, it will deflect accusations that he is trying to do what he is trying to do. "What we are saying will be very hard to find fault with," he said.

Mr. Murtha's cynicism is matched by an alarming ignorance about conditions in Iraq. He continues to insist that Iraq "would be more stable with us out of there," in spite of the consensus of U.S. intelligence agencies that early withdrawal would produce "massive civilian casualties." He says he wants to force the administration to "bulldoze" the Abu Ghraib prison, even though it was emptied of prisoners and turned over to the Iraqi government last year. He wants to "get our troops out of the Green Zone" because "they are living in Saddam Hussein's palace"; could he be unaware that the zone's primary occupants are the Iraqi government and the U.S. Embassy?

If the Washington Post (no conservative rag by any stretch of the imagination) has the balls to call Murtha for what he is, would it not also be incumbent on Murtha's hometown newspaper to present this side of Murtha to those who saw fit to send him to Washington for another term?

Or would that be a bit too demanding of their "journalistic integrity" to do that to their delinquent, albeit favorite son?



I erroneously attributed the original story to the Johnstown Tribune-Democrat.

In reality, it was a story from WJAC-TV in Johnstown.

I apologize for the error.

Thursday, February 22, 2007

Tuesday, February 20, 2007

What real statemanship is.... (and what it isn't)

Check out the video on Eric Cantor's web page (click on "Historic Debate"). There you will see shining examples of statesmanship, untainted by the politically expedient caterwalling to which we have become so accustomed as of late.

There has been opposition voiced to our efforts in Iraq based on the notion that our troops have been fighting a politically-correct war, with both hands tied behind their backs. This has, in their view, led to unnecessary American casualties, and a war drawn out far longer than it would otherwise have been. At the same time, these people have not thought about capitulation, surrender, cut and run, and/or "redeployment;" rather, their point is that we haven't gone far enough to achieve victory in the most efficient manner possible. There are, of course arguments to be made on their behalf.

But, to the democrats and willing RINOs--the Murthas, the Pelosis, the Kerrys, (and yes, the Hagels)-- opposition to our efforts in Iraq has never been, nor is now, about "supporting the troops" nor of the successful completion of their mission.

Rather, it has, and has always been about a Machiavellian quest to obtain and to maintain power, no matter the cost, no matter who or what is jeopardized in the process; even to the extent of throwing the security of their own nation under the bus to achieve their nefarious political ends.

Some have been afraid to say it, but I'll say it unabashedly and scream it from the rooftops:

The "antiwar" democrats (and their willing RINO accomplices), who offer capitulation as the only alternative, are TRAITORS, in the most pejorative sense of the word.

They deserve no quarter, and deserve to be called out for who they are.

It's about time that the light of truth is shown upon these cockroaches for all the world to see.

Take Britt Hume, for instance:
That sound bite from John Murtha suggests that it’s time a few things be said about him. Even the “Washington Post” noted he didn’t seem particularly well informed about what’s going on over there, to say the least. Look, this man has tremendous cachet among House Democrats, but he is not — this guy is long past the day when he had anything but the foggiest awareness of what the heck is going on in the world.
And that sound bite is naivete writ large, and the man is an absolute fountain of such talk, and the fact that he has ascended to the position he has in the eyes of the Democrats in the House and perhaps Democrats around the country tells you a lot about how much they know or care about what’s really going on over there.
Amen, Britt.

h/t Newsbusters

A must read from Rick Francona can be found here.


Monday, February 19, 2007

Murtha continues to labor

to show Pennsylvanians the depth of their mistake in reelecting him.

As this editorial on Investors Business Daily clearly reveals:

. . . Sen. Hillary Clinton, who was for the war before she was against it, has denied she supports cutting off any money for U.S. forces. But she has admitted she would cut off funds to our Iraqi allies to "get their attention." Such a move would likely lead to a collapse of the fledgling Iraqi democracy and a withdrawal of U.S. forces amid chaos similar to what happened when the 1974 Watergate babies cut off aid to our allies in South Vietnam.

If Clinton and Murtha et al. have their way, we may yet see U.S. helicopters lifting off our embassy roof in Baghdad and a jihadist bloodbath like the killing fields of post-Vietnam Cambodia. If her husband's cowardly withdrawal from Somalia after the bodies of U.S. soldiers were dragged through the streets of Mogadishu inspired Osama bin Laden to plan 9/11, imagine what a Democrat-led defeat in Iraq might spawn.

Clinton would leave us with an Iraq as the new base camp for terror, replacing Afghanistan under the Taliban. She has already warned the Bush administration that it must come to the Democratic majority in Congress for permission to deal with an Iran that is providing high-tech explosives to kill American soldiers and developing nuclear weapons and missiles to deliver them.

It's not that the Democrats think we're losing or that the war is unwinnable. They simply don't want to win it. As House Minority Leader John Boehner said of Murtha's proposals: "While American troops are fighting radical Islamic terrorists thousands of miles away, it is unthinkable that the United States Congress would move to discredit their mission, cut off their reinforcements and deny them the resources they need to succeed and return home safely."

At his press conference last week, Bush warned Congress against tying his hands on the war: "I make it very clear to the members of Congress, starting now, that they need to fund our troops and make sure we have the flexibility necessary to get the job done."

Give us the tools and we'll finish the job, said Winston Churchill in the dark days before our official entry into World War II. America delayed its entry into both world wars, but once in, we were committed to win. Hillary thinks that applies only to her campaign, not to the war on terror.

Neville Chamberlain's naivete may have helped bring on World War II, but at least he supported his country when war began. Norway's Vidkun Quisling and France's Vichy government under Marshal Petain may have collaborated with the Nazi enemy, but after their countries' defeats, not before.

We'd have to go back to Benedict Arnold to find Americans as eager as Murtha & Co. to see an American defeat on the battlefield.

They are working on the game plan of al-Qaida's No. 2, Ayman al-Zawahiri. In October 2005, Zawahiri outlined al-Qaida's plan in a letter to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, late head of al-Qaida in Iraq:

"The first stage: Expel the Americans from Iraq. The second stage: Establish an Islamic authority . . . over as much territory as you can spread its power in Iraq . . . in order to fill the void stemming from the departure of the Americans."

John Murtha and his perfidious friends are working on creating that void and completing Zawahiri's first stage. They are the appeasers Churchill warned about who hope that by feeding the Islamofascist tiger, it will eat us last.

What must be stressed in order to keep all of this in context is that Murtha and his Democrat allies know all of this. They want footage of helicopters lifting the last desperate people off the roof of the US embassy in Baghdad to be broadcast all around the world - so long as they can blame it on a president of the other party.

That the consequences of their actions will be to finally convince the islamofascists that America has finally reached the level of corruption and weakness which will allow it to fall into their hands like the proverbial overripe fruit and so invite the kind of terrorism into America's cities which has become commonplace in the cities of Israel and Iraq does not seem to matter to Murtha and his accolytes.

Thursday, February 15, 2007

Murtha: From 'Hawk' to Defeatist

John Murtha has sold his soul to the anti-war devil. It's common knowledge that he's writing legislation that would lead to defeat in Iraq. This Washington Post article now provides a glimpse into Murtha's legislation.
Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.), chairman of the House Appropriations subcommittee on defense, will formally outline the Democrats' plan today to antiwar groups agitating for binding action against the war. Rep. James P. Moran Jr. (D-Va.), a subcommittee member who helped arrange the Internet event, said the plan is aimed at tamping down calls from the Democrats' liberal wing for Congress to simply end funding for the war.

The Murtha plan, based on existing military guidelines, includes a stipulation that Army troops who have already served in Iraq must be granted two years at home before an additional deployment, Marines must be given 14 months at home, and any troops sent to Iraq must be those deemed fully trained and equipped under existing military standards. The idea is to slowly choke off the war by stopping the deployment of troops from units that have been badly degraded by four years of combat.

"They won't be able to deploy troops unless they extend troops overseas. And if we limit the extension, then it'll be very difficult for them to continue this surge, which the American people are against and the Iraqis don't want," Murtha said yesterday on National Public Radio.
Murtha isn't letting the success of the President's surge plan get in the way of his sellout to anti-American anti-war groups. As I said here, Muqtada al-Sadr and his militia's top commanders have run like scared little boys to Tehran. Does this matter to Murtha? Absolutely not. He isn't about to let positive facts on the ground get in the way of his selling his soul to anti-American groups like Code Pink, UFPJ and NION.

I hope that President Bush takes this time to expose Murtha's plan while telling the American people that the source of Iraqi violence has fled to Tehran. That would turn people against Murtha's plan in a heartbeat.

Murtha's plan is based on his need for the limelight. He's now exposed as the most pacifistic Marine in history. He's obviously more concerned with having his time in the spotlight than he is with getting policy right. This also proves that he's the Democrats' point man in their quest to lose the Iraq war. They're invested in defeat because they can't win in 2008 if Iraq is a success.

Another reason why they're trotting John Murtha out for this online press conference is to keep the anti-war Left's campaign contributions flowing in. This legislation also guarantees these organizations' cooperation for their GOTV operation in 2008.

The good news is that this legislation doesn't stand a chance of being considered, much less adopted, by the Senate. In fact, if the House passes this legislation, they'll put a noose around every freshman's neck that votes for it.

It's time that the people of PA-12 put Murtha out of our misery. He's a defeatist and a pacifist at a time when we need a can-do warrior. This is a perfect example of why Murtha MUST GO!!!

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , ,

Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog

What hath Murtha wrought?

John Murtha: NO WORSE ENEMY!
Justin Sharratt - My Son
by Darryl Sharratt

I am the father of L/Cpl Justin Sharratt. On August16th, 2003 the dreams of a little boy became reality. My son Justin enlisted in the United States Marine Corps after high school graduation. Since the age of six, Justin dreamed of a military career. The combat boots, camouflage fatigues and helmet he wore as a child would soon become his uniform of the day as a United States Marine. To serve and protect the United States of America from all enemies both domestic and foreign; a duty he did not take lightly.

Justin’s first combat tour of duty was the city of Fallujah, Iraq. It was here, in the heat of the Iraqi desert, a boy became a man. Sharratt, Stone, Mitchell, Stevens and Wolf soon became ‘brothers by different mothers.’ In a battle known as “Hell House” they fought toe to toe with Iraqi insurgents bent on the destruction of U. S. Marines. They formed a bond forged in the furnace of combat; a bond that will last a lifetime. Semper Fidelis.

Upon his return from Iraq Justin joined us while on leave. He was transformed into the man all fathers dream and hope they will be. While on leave, Justin broke his ankle and was put on medical leave. It was at this time I realized what it meant to him to be an infantry rifleman, a grunt. He stared me in the eyes and said “Dad, all I want to do is get my ankle healed. I have to return to Iraq with 3-1 Kilo Company. The guys are counting on me to cover their six and I will never let them down.” Discussion ended—my son the warrior.

The city of Haditha, Iraq was the destination of 3-1 Kilo Company on Justin’s second deployment. Known to be a hot bed of Iraqi insurgency, the Marines of 3-1 Kilo Company could only envision what to expect. Seasoned from their tour in Fallujah, most of the Marines were on their second Operation Iraqi Freedom deployment, many their third. They were experienced combat veterans, drilled on the Rules of Engagement yet sensitive to their alien environment and the Iraqi populace.

On November 19, 2005, a convoy of four Marine humvees was ambushed on a city street in Haditha. A massive IED explosion ripped the fourth humvee in the column apart. One Marine was killed and two were seriously wounded. 3rd platoon, 3-1 Kilo Company, my son’s unit, was now in a firefight for their lives. There was no time for rage or revenge. Justin needed to apply his Marine Corps training and experience to preserve the lives of his fellow Marines. All the Marines in 3rd platoon responded in like manner- to preserve the lives of fellow Marines. Reinforcements were called in and an ambulance was needed to attend the wounded. Marines were positioned to defend their precarious position and a comm link was established to FOB Sparta. All done in the best of Marine Corps tradition and training while taking enemy fire.

In the aftermath of this engagement, 24 Iraqis were killed. A U.S. Congressman has called these Marines murderers. Time magazine has enlisted the propaganda of foreign journalists to sell its political agenda. Iraqi civilians have been schooled in making false statements. An Iraqi girl missed a day of school because she was afraid the bomb blast would injure her. Interesting reading, but I truly believe the American people can see through this barrage of media conjecture. I ask you not to prejudge my son, not to prejudge these Marines. They have served this country with honor, truth and diligence. I say unto you. the Few, the Proud, the Marines………..

War is a tragic thing. The enemy we are fighting has had centuries to prepare. They wear no uniforms, fight by no Rules of Engagement or follow the Geneva Convention. Using civilians as human shields is a common practice and their hatred for non-Islamic cultures is endemic.

The United States government has taken 12 months and spent millions of dollars and countless man-hours investigating the Haditha engagement. On December 21st, 2006, four NCOs and four officers were charged with violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. My son, LCpl Justin Sharratt faces three counts of unpremeditated murder. This is not the forum to discuss these charges but my son stands strong in the fact he followed the Rules of Engagement, protected his fellow Marines and did nothing wrong. All of these men are innocent of these charges. In the aftermath of 9-11, these men have risen to honorably serve their country. Some have given a lifetime of dedicated service, others were just beginning. They have demonstrated to the world there is “No better friend, No worse enemy” than a U.S. Marine.

For now, the handshakes will be tighter, the hugs will be longer and the tears sliding down my face are not a sign of weakness- they affirm a father’s love for his Marine son.

Darryl Sharratt Canonsburg, Pa.
Never forget. Always remember.

Wednesday, February 14, 2007

Murtha: A "slow bleed" for our troops?

How do you sabotage a war effort for political gain, but keep your hands clean at the same time?

Ask Jack Murtha.

Top House Democrats, working in concert with anti-war groups, have decided against using congressional power to force a quick end to U.S. involvement in Iraq, and instead will pursue a slow-bleed strategy designed to gradually limit the administration’s options.

Led by Rep. John P. Murtha, D-Pa., and supported by several well-funded anti-war groups, the coalition’s goal is to limit or sharply reduce the number of U.S. troops available for the Iraq conflict, rather than to openly cut off funding for the war itself.

You see, this way they can bleed our troops and have the conditions under which they fight deteriorate gradually, with no one being the wiser.

And then blame it on Bush.

I don't want to hear one more fucking word how the dems "support" our troops.

Not. One. More. Fucking. Word.

Traitorous blood-sucking bastards.

I hope they rot in hell.

(h/t And Rightly So; also see My Vast Right Wing Conspiracy)


Tuesday, February 13, 2007

Murtha "joins chorus"-- sings horribly.

It appears that the senile old seditious coot John Murtha is mad at Australian P.M. John Howard for being more of an American than he is.

US veteran joins chorus of

outrage at Howard

Michael Gawenda Herald Correspondent in Washington
February 14, 2007

THE leading critic of the Iraq war in the US House of Representatives has demanded that John Howard stay out of US domestic politics.

He defended the presidential contender Barack Obama's suggestion that if Mr Howard was keen on the war, he should send more Australian troops to Iraq.

John Murtha, a decorated Marine veteran who is close to military commanders (I still want to see the list of military commanders that Murtha is "close to"--ed), and who galvanised leading Democrats into demanding a phased withdrawal from Iraq, said he appreciated that Australia had been a good ally, but that it was US soldiers whose lives were being sacrificed in Iraq and US taxpayers who were paying for the war.

Murtha to Howard (much as a wife beater to a neighbor who has called him on it): "Hey--I'm doing a good job of betraying my own country and selling out its soldiers, thank you! I don't need no stinkin' Aussie to wreck my buzz!"
Question: If Murtha is so concerned about the money we're spending and about our soldiers, why is he so hell-bent on our defeat and on undermining their mission at every turn?

It is precisely because Australia has been such a staunch ally in the GWOT that Murtha has his fatboy panties in a wad.

What's the matter, Jihad Jack-- does the truth that Prime Minister Howard Speaks hit a little too close to home?

Murtha not only has "joined the chorus" of America-haters and seditionists who advocate for our defeat for political gain;

Hell--he's the fucking conductor.

Sunday, February 11, 2007

Murtha's Thuggish Threats...

That's the byline to this OP-Ed in the New York Post:

Then the thuggish, ethically challenged Murtha weighed in - saying it would be a "mistake" to deny her request, "since she decides on the allocations for the Department of Defense."

He'd be the expert.

Murtha's history of manipulating defense appropriations for personal gain is long and distinguished. In a 1989 defense bill, then-Speaker Tom Foley was shamed into redlining a Murtha-authored provision requiring the speaker have a C-20 jet available at all times.

The Pennsylvania Association for Individuals With Disabilities, a charity founded by Murtha's longtime aide, has a board of directors largely made up of lobbyists and contractors who've received millions off Murtha-directed government largesse. In turn, notes The Washington Post, those same officials "have kept Murtha's campaigns flush with cash."

Despite such egregiously hamhanded behavior, Murtha now chairs the House Defense Appropriations Committee, a position he evidently envisions using in the same invidious fashion.

"I don't need to pressure them. I just tell them what they need to do," Murtha said of his efforts to secure from the Pentagon a plane for Pelosi.

Like we said: thuggish.

Was somebody saying something about a "culture of corruption"?

Yep... and I believe that PA-12 voters have enabled it to go on for at least two more years. Hopefully for the last time.

Wednesday, February 07, 2007

Jack Murtha supports our troops...

Like an arsonist supports firefighters.

The U.S. Marines accused of murder and other charges in the case of the Haditha killings in Iraq cannot get a fair trial, says retired Air Force Lt. General Thomas McInerney.

Commenting on Rep. John Murtha's outrageous charges that the Marines of Kilo Company had committed cold-blooded murder of civilians in Haditha on November 19, 2005, McInerney said that the Pennsylvania Democrat's declaration "has certainly prejudiced the case."

In an exclusive interview with, the general who served 35 years in the United States Air Force as a pilot, commander, and Joint Force Commander and retired from military service as Assistant Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force said: "The Marine Corps leadership who informed Murtha of this have, I feel, used undue command influence and these people cannot get a fair trial."

According to military law experts a charge of undue command influence, which is akin in civilian courts to the pollution of a jury pool from pre-trial publicity, is quite valid. If an appeals court determines undue command influence existed, all related punitive or legal proceedings can be overturned.

In United States v. Thomas, 22 MJ 388, 394 (CMA 1986) the court held that unlawful command influence was an error of constitutional dimension. Specifically, Thomas applied the test for constitutional error and held that an appellate court may not affirm the findings or sentence "unless it is persuaded beyond a reasonable doubt that the findings and sentence have not been affected by the command.

This can be good news, in much the same way that a technicality can cause the charges against an already innocent man to be dropped; however, even if the charges are dropped based on a technicality, it still does a monumental disservice, since such a technicality does nothing to exonerate these soldiers from a crime that was not committed in the first place:

McInerney said the real issue "is the way the information was [obtained] through information deception by terrorists and forwarded to Time Magazine. We cannot have terrorists using disinformation on our troops and our system and our military overreacting to it."

"We need to give our people more latitude and not put handcuffs on them. This is despicable conduct by our leadership over there and I think that we've got to get with it and tell America what needs to be done.

"These poor guys [the Marine defendants] have been under a cloud for over a year and they still do not have an Article 32 hearing [to determine if a court martial is warranted] and that tells you something.

"I am very, very displeased with the Marine Corps on this issue."

As reported previously by, Haditha Accusations Unmasked, the Marine Corps has adopted highly restricted rules of engagement based on false information about the Haditha incident, a fact that disturbed Gen. McInerney.

Not only are there spurious charges, thanks in no small part to Murtha's rantings in his no-holds barred quest for majority leadership in the House, but the charges also served to handcuff our soldiers currently in harm's way:
"Now every time they fire a weapon they have to fill out paper work," he said. "When guys are being fired upon in combat the oversight is unbelievable. We cannot fight a war like that. We just cannot have such perfect, strict peacetime thinking in wartime rules of engagement. We're not taking care of our people."

This, he said "is one of the reasons why we have not had more decisive results [on the ground in Iraq].

And I can point to one corrupt, fat-backsided, megalomaniacal congressman from PA-12 for allowing that to happen.

Can anyone say, "Jihad Jack" Murtha?

Saturday, February 03, 2007

Murtha--a legend in his own mind?

It would appear that Jack Murtha has his own version of a web cam:
JOHNSTOWN - U.S. Rep. John Murtha took a few minutes following a Wednesday press conference to take reporters sitting in three different counties on a live tour of his Washington, D.C., office through a video conferencing system.
One wonders how they got a lens wide enough to contain Murtha's entire big phat backside. But I digress.
Spinning the camera from his office, Murtha centered the picture first on a portrait of Theodore Roosevelt. “My favorite president,” he said.
Murtha's favorite president? Perhaps Murtha was a bit dyslexic while reading his history books in grade school. Mr. Murtha--President Roosevelt charged up San Juan Hill; not down it.
From there it was on to a portrait of Marine Sgt. Michael Strank, a Johnstown man who was in the famous photograph of the Feb. 23, 1945, flag raising on Mount Suribachi, Iwo Jima.
Again, does anyone else see a major disconnect here? Mr. Murtha, you are definitely getting senile. After heavy casualties, the Marines took Suribachi--they didn't redeploy to Newark!
Another stop on the tour featured a model of the USS Bonhomme Richard, a Navy aircraft carrier active in three U.S. conflicts, including World War II, Korea and Vietnam.
Sorry, Jihad Jack. You're not fooling anyone here. Why don't you be honest with yourself and get some momentos fitting of your real mettle.

Like a flag of France, for instance.



Filed under Murtha Watch, The Fifth Column, FOT-WA

Thursday, February 01, 2007

Will these idiots ever get it right?

From here:
There hasn't even been a broad political shift in favor of the doves. The most important war critics are military types like Jack Murtha, Chuck Hagel and Jim Webb, who hate this particular war but were superhawks in other circumstances.
Jack Murtha never--I REPEAT NEVER-- has been a "superhawk."
And now he wants to cut and run from Iraq. During each one of these instances, the net result was that, seeing that we were nothing but "paper tigers." our enemies became emboldened to attack again and again and attack harder. Totally oblivious to the aims of and dangers presented by our enemies, Murtha continues to elect the coward's way out--a motus operandi that has netted disastrous results.

The only "hawkish" bent that Murtha has ever had was to give millions of dollars in sweetheart defense contracts to those who would reward him handsomely with campaign contributions so as to enable him to keep his sorry "fat backside" in his House seat.

But I guess the Left needs their "hawks," even wannabe ones, to try to give their "surrender at any cost" stance credibility.

Note the operative word--Try.