BROADSIDES

October 24, 2007

Stark Treason
When Democrat Congressman Pete Stark took to the House floor on October 18 to support overriding the president's veto of Congress' attempt to massively expand the State Children's Health Insurance Program, he just couldn't help proving what's been obvious for a long time -- that he's a modern day Benedict Arnold.

Addressing the Republican side of the House chamber, Stark slobbered and bellowed:

You don't have money to fund the war or children! But you're going to spend it to blow up innocent people if we can get enough kids to grow old enough for you to send to Iraq to get their heads blown off for the president's amusement!

Think about that; a high priest of the pro-abortion party is worried about kids having a chance to grow old enough to do something. Stark certainly has no problem with kids having their heads torn off when they're in the womb. Such glaring hypocrisy should be kept in mind whenever you hear the Democrats' endless phony schmaltz about their concern for "the children". To leftist Democrats like Stark, children who manage to escape the abortionist are nothing more than stage props in their party's twisted campaign to peddle socialist snake oil.

As for Stark's slur that our military men and women are killed in Iraq for the president's amusement, is anyone really surprised that he made such a thoroughly treasonous accusation? (Check out the video of Stark's tantrum and note the reaction of the man -- whom, it's safe to assume, is either another Democrat congressman or a Democrat staffer -- seated directly behind Stark. The guy didn't bat an eye at Stark's comments.) After all, since 9/11 Stark has made a career out of openly aiding and abetting America's terrorist enemies. In 2003, shortly before the United States liberated Iraq, I noted this excerpt from a San Francisco Chronicle article:

In one of the most brutal critiques of the administration's policy toward Iraq by a member of Congress, East Bay Rep. Pete Stark said President Bush would be responsible for "an act of terror" by launching a massive bombing campaign to oust Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. "I think unleashing 3,000 smart bombs against the city of Baghdad in the first several days of the war ... to me, if those were unleashed against the San Francisco Bay Area, I would call that an act of extreme terrorism," said Stark ...

When Pete Stark says that President Bush is amused by the deaths of American soldiers and that preemptive strikes against terrorists is an American "act of terror," he means it. That's why his crybaby apology yesterday (which he only made after narrowly escaping being censured by the House) is laughably transparent.

I'll give Stark credit for one thing, though. At least he doesn't claim to be a patriot while busily striving to ensure America's defeat -- unlike most of his fellow subversive Democrats. That's right, Stark proudly doesn't support our troops; and he even said so with this vote.

B. Sides @ 6:48 PM