Yes, I'm still here - and still fuming

Anyone who is a university professor knows that the end of the semester is a crazy time. Thus, from mid-April through mid-May, I was consumed with finals, grading papers, exams, etc. And thereafter, I had to kick into high gear for three solid weeks of doing workshops in entrepreneurship. Whew! And after that, I started having pre-term labor contractions - at 32 weeks along in this pregnancy.

Oy vey - it's been a tough couple of months.

There are so many things I've been wanting to blog about - most notably the three U.S. Supreme Court cases decided in the past month. But those will have to wait. However, for the moment, at least, I have a post from my Townhall Soapbox. That will have to do. (And as soon as this baby is born, I'll have 12 blissful weeks of maternity leave. I intend to do nothing besides take care of our newest little one, try to lose pregnancy weight, and blog!)

And now for something completely different (with apologies to Monty Python):

I was listening to Rush today, and he was playing excerpts from miscellaneous Dems' reactions to President Bush's speech on Tuesday night. They are outraged - outraged, I tell you! - that the president dared to connect the events of September 11, 2001 and the war in Iraq.

It's just like their purported indignation at Karl Rove's comments about liberals not supporting aggressive (read "military") responses to 9/11.

Well, they have to act outraged and indignant, now, don't they?! Because they know full well that Americans will rally behind whatever is necessary to avenge 9/11 and prevent another one. They don't want the footage of 9/11 shown on network television anymore, because they think that Americans are so stupid that we won't make the connection between the terrorist attacks on Americans here, and the conduct of the terrorists (uh -- the MSM calls them "insurgents") in Iraq.

Yes, it was so easy to stand on the Capitol steps and sing "God Bless America," wasn't it? But that's pretty much the extent of the liberal Democrats' commitment to the War on Terror, isn't it? Isn't that what they point to when they huff and puff about anyone "questioning their patriotism"? But it's all blather, smoke and mirrors. After all, what exactly have they proposed that we do?

They don't want us in Iraq, they don't want enemy combatants held in Guantanamo Bay. They don't want Americans to notice that the 9/11 attackers, the persons being detained at Gitmo, and the bloodthirsty individuals attacking GIs and Iraqi civilians (including children) all across Iraq claim the same loyalty (to Al Qaeda), purport to practice the same "religion," [placed in quotes out of respect for peace-loving Muslims everywhere], use the same tactics, and espouse precisely the same objectives.

Bush has never said that Saddam Hussein was behind the 9/11 attacks. Those of us with memories longer than a fruit fly's know this. What he has said is that the same people who attacked us here were - and are - being harbored and supported there. And this has been proven true, over and over again. He also said (famously) that if we do not fight the War on Terror on our terms and their turf, then we will be fighting it on their terms and our turf.

The Dems know all of this, of course. And they are wailing and gnashing their teeth not because it isn't true, but because it is, and Bush knows it, and the majority of American people know it, and because the Dems have absolutely nothing to offer as an alternative in the way of policy. (Damn those terrorists, anyway! If it weren't for those blasted Islamofascists, we could still win elections using race-baiting, discredited Marxist economic theories and class warfare!)

And guess what? Boo hoo! This doesn't bode well for them in 2006, much less 2008. But they don't want you to notice this. So like spoiled toddlers, they think they can deflect attention away from the truth by throwing a collective temper tantrum.

Waaaaa-a-a-a-a-a-ah. We're not stupid. And we're not buying it.