I don't know why

I bother listening to the radio in the car - it just makes me mad.

Harry Reid is either the biggest dunce in a carnival of dunces, or he's a disingenuous sack of horse manure. Granted in the senate it's all one and the same, but this jerk is supposed to be helping lead the free world.

Schmuck says this morning on Imus that he's "not going to defund the war, but he wants Bush to change course from our failed path"; in other words, he doesn't have the guts to use the power he's been given to actually make the change - he wants to dance away and not have to commit to anything.

Far more serious in my mind, coming from the #1 guy in the senate, was his observation that the way to solve the Iraq problem, and the Middle East in general, is "we have to go talk to all of them. Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iran, Iraq, and make it a regional issue, where we don't have to carry all the burden and they take some responsibility for resolving these things."

You read that right.
Saudi Arabia.
Syria.
Iran.

The exporter & financier of the Wahabbist Islam we're fighting, the supporter of destabilization forces in Lebanon & Iraq, and the single most pernicious influence on the Middle East (sponsors of terror and exporter of Jihadists) are where we need to look to solve the very problems they created. These people LOVE what's happening in Iraq; they want us to lose; they want us to suffer.

How can Reid be considered the leading light of half the country? How can anyone so simpleminded be given control over an automobile, much less the foreign policy of this nation? He seems not to understand how our enemies think, assuming he believes they are our enemies. Talk is a gambit to Iran, not a serious discussion of resolving problems. Talk is weakness to them. Talk is a way to buy time, and a sign that your opponent has no real interest in beating you.

Reid quoted Baker - "sometimes we had to go back there [the Middle East] fifteen times just to get them to sit down. You have to try & talk to them." So you went back 15 times - what did you get out of it? An agreement on a round instead of rectangular table? You certainly didn't negotiate peace with them; you simply encouraged them to attack us, by showing them we will take all kinds of punishment and not respond. Talk to Syria? Why? They're suddenly going to wish us well? Why do you people think you're dealing with people who want the same thing we do? I'm sorry, it's not universal. Not all men desire peace above all else. Some want power, influence, and an Islamic world more than they want peace. And they don't care how many people die in the process.

One other note - the bastard had the nerve to bring up Ronald Reagan (darling of the left throughout his existence, right?) Reid said "Reagan had his people talking to the Soviets all the time, he didn't just use military force. We should talk too." Look, stupid, let me say this only once. Reagan could talk because he told the Soviets that he was fully prepared to step outside if he had to. Reagan also had to deal with a power that had nuclear weapons - you have to step differently than with these terrorists. And finally, Reagan was dealing with an opponent who felt the same way as we did in one key respect - they actually wanted somebody to survive the Cold War. You can negotiate with people who agree on that basic premise. Our enemies today don't care about who lives or dies, them or us, and it makes a hell of a lot of difference.

May God protect us from leaders who talk as Harry Reid does, and from the head-in-the-sand policies they choose.