The Local newsletter is your free, daily guide to life in Colorado. For locals, by locals. Sign up today!
The exploits of Rep. Tom Tancredo, who is running for President and seems to never miss an opportunity to say something strange just to get press (most recently Tancredo declared that the federal government shouldn’t send relief aid to Louisiana because the local government is corrupt), have been blogged extensively here and elsewhere. Tancredo is in a safe Republican district and would be a tough out for a Democrat, but there is always the chance that a Republican could decide to challenge him in a primary — particularly since Tancredo has dove off the deep end in the last couple of months.
One of the most frequently mentioned names to go after Tancredo is former Senate President John Andrews, but he’s getting pretty strange himself lately. Andrews has been under fire for flip-flopping on supporting TABOR reforms, and he made headlines a few weeks ago for saying that it wouldn’t be a big deal if Saddam Hussein was writing checks to support the No on C&D campaigns.
The Denver Post lets Andrews rant in a column every now and then, and this weekend he wrote a doozy about the federal government’s failures on terrorism. Sure, the topic sounds good…but read what he wrote:
Why not victory?
The question haunted me all day on Sept. 11, the fourth anniversary of Islamofascist military attacks against America’s seat of self-government, Washington, and our crown jewel of liberty, New York. We are a nation supposedly at war, yet the enemy is not identified, the definition of winning is vague, the national will is weak. The war itself is misnamed and undeclared.
In my town, Centennial, which firmly supports President Bush and the Republican Congress, not one house in 20 flew the flag last Sunday in memory of the Sept. 11 heroes, or in token of the will to avenge them and secure our freedom by defeating the global jihadist enemy. At my church, there was but passing mention of the World Trade Center atrocity, and no mention of the unfinished conflict it ignited.
Okay, that’s pretty strong rhetoric. “The global jihadist enemy?” That’s a bit heavy on the syrup, don’t you think? But wait, there’s more:
Storm devastation compounded with human failings is a tragedy — but a sneak attack on our homeland by foreigners bent on killing us by the millions and subjugating America to Muslim theocracy is not. It is, or should have been, a fearsome warning to mobilize this mighty land militarily, diplomatically, economically and spiritually for total self-defense and ferocious counterattack, never slackening until the enemy is crushed.
Tragedy, hell. This is war, and not just a war on “terror.” Certain Muslim groups and Muslim countries are out to break the U.S. and its free-world allies, dating from at least 1979 when they hit us in Tehran. Their side is bent on victory. Our side, up to this point, clearly is not.
Coping, managing the problem, at most swatting the enemy, seems to be the extent of our objective. While Bush has been far better than Clinton, cleaning the Taliban out of Afghanistan and removing Saddam Hussein, the latter-day Hitler, from Iraq, he hasn’t done nearly enough.
President Bush has muffed the “war on terror” is a tough stance for a Republican, but Andrews is a hard-line guy apparently. Don’t stop reading yet — he saves the real weirdness for the end:
Here’s my “Why Not Victory?” list of what President Bush and the United States should do:
1. Address Congress and call this what it is: World War IV.
2. Send another 50,000 troops to Iraq.
3. Increase the defense budget by $200 billion.
4. Institute a draft for the armed forces.
5. Declare war on Syria.
6. Put Cheney in charge of a task force to find Osama Bin Laden, Ayman Zawahiri and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.
7. Name a Democrat, perhaps Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut or Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana, as Homeland Security secretary.
8. Militarize the Mexican border.
9. Summon the leaders of Muslim nations to the woodshed in Washington.
10. Assemble democracy activists from Muslim nations at Independence Hall.
11. Intensify FBI surveillance of Islamofascist front groups in the United States.
12. Break relations with the Palestinian Authority.
13. Speed up Hussein’s trial.
14. Indict Kofi Annan and notify the United Nations to relocate overseas.
15. Convene a Warsaw summit of the democracies toward replacing the U.N.
Where to start? First, he suggests changing the name of the “war on terror” to “World War IV.” Did I miss something? Was there a World War III that I slept through? That wasn’t in my history books.
Next, Andrews wants to increase the defense budget by $200 billion – yes, BILLION – and institute a draft. Apparently he wants to go back to the good old days of World War III, when defense budgets far exceeded reality and we were drafting American boys and girls for the winner-take-all battle over…um, remind me, what was World War III about again?
Number five is: “Declare war on Syria.” Really? Syria? What about Argentina? Let’s declare war on them, too. Maybe instead we should start with the easier countries, like Luxembourg. We could kick Luxembourg’s ASS!
“Militarize the Mexican border.” Can we afford that? We’ve already declared World War IV.
“Summon the leaders of Muslim nations to the woodshed in Washington.” A quick digression – what the hell is a woodshed, anyway? Why do we take people to the woodshed to give them a stern talking-to? What if I don’t have a woodshed? Can I take people to my garage instead, or does that not work as well?
“Assemble democracy activists from Muslim nations at Independence Hall.” For what, a barbecue?
“Intensify FBI surveillance of Islamofascist front groups in the United States.” Now he’s just making up words. Didn’t anybody at the Post copy-edit this thing?
“Break relations with the Palestinian Authority.” Ah-ha! A point that you could actually have an argument for.
“Speed up Hussein’s trial.” So he can come to Colorado to stump for Referenda C&D?
“Indict Kofi Annan and notify the United Nations to relocate overseas,” and “Convene a Warsaw summit of the democracies toward replacing the U.N.” I played this computer game called “Civilization” a few years ago, and if you had the U.N. in your country then the other nations couldn’t attack you. I’m not sure if this works in real life or not, but what would be the point of kicking the U.N. out of the country? Just “because?”
I’ve got to be honest, here…I’m really rooting for a John Andrews-Tom Tancredo primary. They could stage the single most nonsensical debate in the history of politics. I would buy a ticket. Hell, I would scalp tickets outside. The only losers would be the people of the 6th Congressional District. Everybody else wins!