You Might Be a Commie Pinko

Billboards in Florida Link Democrats to Burning World Trade Center

If you are offended by this billboard in Florida that shows an image of the falling World Trade Center’s Twin Towers alongside the words, “Please don’t vote for a Democrat;” you might be a commie pinko.

Bill Clinton’s policy of appeasement and no military action (outside several cruise missles) directly led to 9/11.  Barack Obama will do the same; he’s already announced his appeasement strategy for Iran.  A vote for a Democrat is a vote for terrorism on our soil.

If you are presently enraged because Pres. George W. Bush and Senator John McCain are using the ‘appeasement’ label to describe the Democratic Party’s usual method of world diplomacy, you might be a commie pinko.

See How to Enrage a Democrat - WSJ.com for a clear description of why pinko’s are enraged.

This is understandable; to quote some ancient scripture, ‘the guilty taketh the truth to be hard, for it cutteth them to the very center.’ (Book of Mormon, 1 Nephi 16:2)

As Sean Hannity points out in his book, “Delivery Us From Evil, Defeating Terrorism, Despotism, and Liberalism,” appeasement under the guise of diplomacy has been the main focus of the last two democratic presidents.

“When President Bush drew his line in the sand, the voices of evil abroad, and appeasement at home, erupted as one in mockery and protest (just like Obama, HIllary, snake-oil Pelosi and other pinkos in the news today)….And regardless of which candidate stands for the Democratic Party in November, America must realize that the candidate who opposes George Bush (insert John McCain) will be the candidate of appeasement. He will be standing for the party of Jimmy Carter, of Bill Clinton, for the party of moral relativism, or toleration, and hesitation in the face of threats at home and abroad.”

Hannity wrote that in 2004, however, it appears to be even more applicable to today’s raft of commie pinko leftist liberals who will surely place our county and live in jeopardy. Either Barak Obama or Hillary Clinton is a Neville Chamberlain waiting to happen.

If you think Clinton/Gore did everything they could to confront the war on terror while in office, keeping us from harm’s way and postponing the 9/11 attacks, you might be commie pinko.

On the contrary, Clinton’s policy of appeasement and working thought the UN, with an occasional cruise missile, actually emboldened Islamic Jihadists world wide and contributed to the 9/11 attacks.

“Clinton didn’t embrace the issue of terrorism; he ran from it. And we’re still paying the price. As Fox News contributor Rich Lowry summarized in Legacy: Paying the Price for the Clinton Years, ‘The September 11 attacks finally gave Clinton the legacy he had yearned for; one that couldn’t be ignored, one that was great it is implications. His could no longer be considered an inconsequential presidency. In leaving the country vulnerable to such an attack after eight years in office, Clinton had achieved the distinction of a monstrous, world-shaking failure.’” (Deliver Us From Evil, Sean Hannity, Regan Books, 2004, p. 129)