Thursday, June 8, 2006

D-Day Revisited

A couple of conservative bloggers have offered their revisionist history (via the cowardly Neil Boortz) regarding D-Day, suggesting that liberals would have been worried about offending the mussels with the invasion force.

And one oblivious blogger named Chris even suggested that because he could not find any references to the passing of the anniversary of D-Day on any liberal blogs that we don't care about the sacrifice.

What a pathetic attempt. Let alone the fact that his site was the only one to carry any pictures or commentary that I could find, I guess the bulk of the neocon bloggers are lame asses too.

I would like to suggest to wingnuts who tried to revise history, and to Chris, you are all wet. If I recall from my history, the Dems were in power, which would have made the conservatives the opposition party. Thus, the conservatives would have been in the position of whiner.

Having got that off my chest, the fact is the country was united in its goal to defeat the curses named Hitler and Hirohito. To compare the fiasco in Iraq, as some have, with that noble event is absurd and dishonest.


  1. The US was united at the start of both WWII and OIF. You just forgot to mention that you voted for the war before you voted against it.

  2. I, personally, didn't get a chance to vote for either for a couple of reasons ... I wasn't born yet in the case of the former, and the latter occurred without my permission or chance to vote. And I certainly didn't vote to continue it.

    We were united about the need to go after the bastards in Afghanistan, not Iraq. We went to battle in Iraq (it is not a legally declared war) because of a lie. No amount of spin can change that, though I give credit for trying.