Triple Shot

Townhall.com has a triple shot of columns that are must reads today.

The first is by David Limbaugh. Kerry reminds voters why they rejected him.

This election was about the sovereignty of the Iraqi people, the rejection of terrorist brutality, and God willing, the potential transformation of the Mideast. But it was not about France, Germany, or any other nations that stubbornly, and wrongly, refused to join the right side of history in the War in Iraq. But you'd never know that from listening to John Kerry, who, sadly, is still imprisoned in the pathetic quagmire of his "multilateralist" mindset.

Even on the heels of this profoundly gratifying election en route to liberating the long-oppressed and beleaguered Iraqi people, John Kerry couldn't resist the perverse temptation to resurrect his manufactured criticism of President Bush's "unilateral" approach to the war. It was a phony, desperate after-the-fact charge then, and it is even more so now. If you didn't understand before that Kerry was always just blowing smoke about President Bush's supposed alienation of the global community, you should see it clearly now.

Kerry said, "This election is a sort of demarcation point, and what really counts now is the effort to have a legitimate political reconciliation, and it's going to take a massive diplomatic effort and a much more significant outreach to the international community than this administration has been willing to engage in. Absent that, we will not be successful in Iraq."

This nonsense was bad enough during the election, but we can't let Kerry get away with this kind of inane, destructive rhetoric now. What in the world does he mean by a legitimate political reconciliation, a massive diplomatic effort, a significant outreach to the international community?

Dennis Prager weighs in with The Left is worth nothing.

But the non-Muslims who fail to acknowledge and confront the evil of Muslim terror and the evil of those monsters who cut innocent people's throats and murder those trying to make a democracy -- these people are truly worth nothing. Unlike the Muslims raised in a religious totalitarian society, they have no excuse. And in my lifetime, these people have overwhelmingly congregated on the political Left.

Since the 1960s, with few exceptions, on the greatest questions of good and evil, the Left has either been neutral toward or actively supported evil. The Left could not identify communism as evil; has been neutral toward or actually supported the anti-democratic pro-terrorist Palestinians against the liberal democracy called Israel; and has found it impossible to support the war for democracy and against an Arab/Muslim enemy in Iraq as evil as any fascist the Left ever claimed to hate.

There were intellectually and morally honest arguments against going to war in Iraq. But once the war began, a moral person could not oppose it. No moral person could hope for, let alone act on behalf of, a victory for the Arab/Islamic fascists. Just ask yourself but two questions: If America wins, will there be an increase or decrease in goodness in Iraq and in the world? And then ask what would happen if the Al Qaeda/Zarqawi/Baathists win.

It brings me no pleasure to describe opponents of the Iraqi war as "worth nothing." I know otherwise fine, decent people who oppose the war. So I sincerely apologize for the insult.

The final round comes from Robert Novak and has a very appropriate title: Gambling with Dean.

A prominent financier who has been a stalwart of Democratic fund-raising the past half-century told me last week his patience has been exhausted. He has remained a loyal Democrat while lamenting his party's periodic lurches to the left, but says he will neither contribute nor solicit a dime for the party so long as Howard Dean is chairman of the Democratic National Committee (DNC).

This is not one sorehead issuing idle threats. Many other longtime contributors are telling DNC fund-raisers to count them out if Dean is elected chairman at the DNC's meeting in Washington Feb. 12. Thus, the growing momentum for Dean represents a gamble by Democrats that money from "Deaniacs" on the Internet will compensate for money no longer coming from traditional contributors.

This looks less like a calculated risk than a mad roulette player's tossing everything on double-zero and hoping he gets lucky. Ordinary primary election voters last year were fascinated by Dean at first, but soon abandoned him. He lost 17 out of 18 Democratic primaries (winning only his own state of Vermont) after his Des Moines rant following defeat in the Iowa caucuses. A recent Wall Street Journal-NBC poll shows only 27 percent of Democrats are favorable toward him.

A long time Democratic supporter to cut funds if our favorite primal screamer is selected to chair the DNC? “Deaniacs” making up for the financial withdrawal of stalwart Democratic supporters? Not likely. Why does the far left continue to not only alienate itself from the rest of America, but its party also? Why does the Democratic Party play the fringe when clearly few support Dean as the DNC chair?

I see a new political group forming sometime soon with Dean, Kennedy, and Kerry leading the Kool-Aid swilling maniacs in a charge against the rest of America.