A huge hat tip goes out to Jack Kelly for his brilliant Sunday column on why Democrats can’t be trusted with national security matters. I’ve read alot of Jack’s stuff over the years and I’ve always been impressed but this might be Jack’s best work yet.

Judge Anna Diggs Taylor illustrates why Democrats cannot be trusted with political power in time of war. Judge Taylor, who is the chief judge of the federal district court in Detroit, ruled Aug. 17 that it is unconstitutional for the National Security Agency to listen in, without warrants, on telephone conversations between terror suspects abroad and people in the United States. Her ruling was praised by Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid, House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi and other prominent Democrats.

I wrote about Taylor’s ruling last week. I thought it was flimsy then and I’ve seen nothing to change my opinion since. In fact, I’m more convinced now than ever. the fact that Pelosi and Reid think that this was a great ruling is telling.

Let’s not forget what Russ Feingold said about the Democrats filibustering the renewal of the Patriot Act:

“Today’s vote is a great moment for our Constitution and our democracy and a great moment in the fight against terrorism.

If you don’t have the confidence of the American people when it comes to this fight against terrorism, if they fear that somehow we’re going too far and going after the rights of law-abiding citizens, it will weaken our ability to win in that all-important battle.”

And Democratic strategists wonder why they lose the national security debate?

President Bush has made mistakes in his conduct of the war on terror. But thanks in part to Judge Taylor’s ruling, voters this November will be asking themselves whether they would rather be governed by a political party that thinks Islamic terror is the greatest threat to Americans, or by a political party which is more concerned about Wal-Mart.
I don’t think Democrats will like their answer.

Jack, I’ll bet a tidy sum of money that they’ll not only not like their answer but that Democrats will be positively beside themselves with their answer.

Technorati: National Security, NSA, Patriot Act, Feingold, Pelosi

Cross-post at LetFreedomRingBlog

1. [...] Cross-posted at California Conservative Categories: The Constitution, Homeland Security, National Security, Moonbats, Terrorism, Pelosi | [...]

   Pingback by Let Freedom Ring » Blog Archive » Why Dems Can’t Be Trusted — August 28, 2006 @ 12:09 am

1. This is pretty funny considering how often the R’s have dropped the proverbial ball on national security issues….

   Comment by BillyJoeJimBob — August 28, 2006 @ 9:26 pm

2. BJJB: Do the donkeys even know there’s a ball in play re: national security?

   Now, the R’s have dropped the ball big-time re: spending. My gosh, the only bill GW’s vetoed had nothing to do with drunken-sailor spending! But unless the United States stands firm on winning the GWOI (Global War on Islamofascism) it won’t make a whit’s bit of difference who spends what, ’cause there won’t be a budget to argue about.

   And that’s exactly what the donkeys are missing. The Islamofascists are bent on destroying our country and won’t stop until they have complete victory or they themselves have been completely destroyed.

   BTW, does anyone know why it’s referred to as the Global War on Terror, when in fact it’s a Global War on Islamofascism? I know that, should God grant us victory over those animals, there will be another “ism” that will win over the weak minds of weak people in the world and we’ll have to do it all over again, but the war right now is not with “terrorists” per se, but with Islamofascists. That is the driving force behind the terrorists, not envy or greed or any of the other things apologists try to use as excuses.

   Comment by Carlos — August 29, 2006 @ 9:06 am

3. “Do the donkeys even know there’s a ball in play re: national security?”

   Yes, I believe most of them do. I know plenty of Dems and none of them seem particularly stupid about national security or the threat of fundamentalist groups with political agendas. However, I happen to disagree with a number of Reps who happen to think that Bush’s prosecution of the GWOT has been anything less than brilliant. I think he’s done a pretty shoddy job of it.

   Comment by BillyJoeJimBob — August 29, 2006 @ 10:17 am

4. Oh, with the incompetence of GW’s execution of the war I agree totally. It’s the implication in your first post that the donkeys would come into town and clean it up!? that I have a problem with.

   GW doesn’t have a clue, obviously, on how to run a war. On the other hand, the donkey “leaders” don’t even seem to realize there is a war, a real one, with guns and rockets and IEDs and death and carnage that goes with war. They even believe, apparently, that one can actually negotiate with people whose brains have been eaten away with hate.

   It would help tremendously if the Commander-in-Chief were a military genius. GW is no genius (military or otherwise), and is too stubborn to realize the pitfalls of running a war blind. He’s also subject to politics, a dangerous facet in a war.

   If the military had been allowed to run the war in the beginning, and the Commander-in-Chief had only had veto power over any particular action (with stated and valid reason), the Iraqis would be a fairly comfortable and prosperous people today. But had Mr. Gore been Prez after 9/11, or if Frenchy had won in 2004, we wouldn’t even be having this conversation - we would be blissfully talking the islamofascists to sleep while they stockpiled tremendous amounts of new death and destruction at our borders.

   The donkeys believe theory works because it “makes sense”. Fanatics are not subject to the whims of theory or the facts of reality. They just want their purpose fulfilled. Donkeys are fanatics in that way: they just want their theories to work, reality be damned.

   Comment by Carlos — August 29, 2006 @ 11:07 am

5. BillyJoeJimBob, Why do Dems cry fro peace from war, but say nothing when Bill Clinton created the tremendous Saudi military machine, now ranked within the top 10 tech-armies in the world ( thanks’ to him) sold China duel-use nuclear technology, why taking their campaign donations at private dinners, and building F-16s for Pakistan? Tried to build a small-water nuclear reactor for N. Korea with the Australians ( Before repub-controlled congress stopped him) and proliferated other tech by stupidity as firing Top-Secret cruise missiles into the Afghanistan desert which one did not blow up so the Taliban sold it to the starved hungry Chinese to dissect for the technology?

   I love the democruds’ War Slogans of Peace, and No-War = Democrats banter when their spiritual leader proliferated the most high-tech U.S. war- technology to other war-hungry countries in the ‘90s.

   You clowns, are for a good laugh. ;)

   Checkmate.

   Comment by fred — August 29, 2006 @ 7:06 pm