Commentaries, Global Warming, Opinions   Cover   •   Commentary   •   Books & Reviews   •   Climate Change   •   Site Links   •   Feedback
"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." - John 8:32
WEBCommentary Contributor
Author:  Michael J. Gaynor
Bio: Michael J. Gaynor
Date:  August 14, 2006
Print article - Printer friendly version

Email article link to friend(s) - Email a link to this article to friends

Facebook - Facebook

Topic category:  Other/General

Why Terrorism Terrifies Democrats

Democrats aspire to take control of the White House and both houses of Congress, especially the United States Senate, so they can control the executive and legislative branches of the federal government and pursue their political agenda through judicial activists who refuse to follow the law and twist or fabricate it instead. That's why they must not be allowed to realize their aspiration.

Democrats aspire to take control of the White House and both houses of Congress, especially the United States Senate, so they can control the executive and legislative branches of the federal government and pursue their political agenda through judicial activists who refuse to follow the law and twist or fabricate it instead.

That's why they must not be allowed to realize their aspiration.

Ironically, Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda, America haters, have helped President Bush and Republicans, their fiercest adversaries,instead of leftist Democrats, who either just don't appreciate the threat of terrorism in this age of weapons of mass destruction or really believe that it's more important that a telephone call to America from a terrorist abroad not be surveilled without a judicial warrant than that a terrorist plot be monitored and foiled.

September 11, 2001 allowed President Bush to put the Democrat attacks on the legitimacy of his presidency aside (he won, fair and square, but the Democrats did not care about that and began the 2004 election campaign immediately after Election Day 2000) and rally America behind him in retaliating against the terrorists.

The Taliban, which then ruled Afghanistan,had harbored Osama and al Qaeda, so President Bush did the right thing: he ousted the Taliban, by force, and began the process of democratizing Afghanistan, which is difficult and expensive,of course.

Likewise, President Bush ended the tyrannical rule of Saddam Hussein in Iraq (Saddam's in prison and on trial and his sons are dead), and began the even more difficult process of democratizing Iran. In doing so, he made Iraq instead of the United States the central front in the War on Terror. That protected the homefront. The subsequent attacks in Spain and Great Britain and the basing of the foiled terrorist plot to explode over the Atlantic airplanes headed from Great Britain to the United States are powerful proof.

In 2002, Democrats were shocked when the American people expressed their approval. Republicans increased their majorities in both the Senate and the House of Representatives. The party out of power is supposed to make gains in the off-year elections.

In 2004, President Bush won re-election. He won even more electoral votes than he had won in 2000 and a majority of the popular vote too. And Republicans increased their Senate majority (making the task of repopulating the judiciary with strict constructionists a bit easier, but far from easy, because Democrats decided to filibuster either loudly or silently, many qualified nominees, all of whom were entitled to be confirmed by a simple majority instead of blocked by a willful minority).

Osama appeared on tape shortly before Election Day 2004.Thrilling President Bush and his top political adviser, Karl Rove. Senator John Kerry, President Bush's Democrat opponent, probably wished that his wealthy wife had paid Osama to delay his reappearance until AFTER Election Day.

As 2005 and 2006 proceeded, Democrat hopes to take control of the House of Representatives and perhaps even the Senate too seemed more and more realistic.

On Tuesday, August 8, 2006, three-term Democrat Senator and 2000 Democrat vice presidential candidate Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut lost a Democrat primary. 52 to 48, to a wealthyanti-war candidate. Senator Lieberman is a realist in the War on Terror and a firm friend of Israel (like President Bush). That made him anathema to the Far Left Democrats.

Then the political landscape shifted as the very real threat ofterrorism again reared its ugly head. A plan to explode ten airplanes flying from Great Britain to the United States while they were over the Atlantic Ocean was not only foiled, but publicized.

Fact: The terrorists have not stuck America since September 11, 2001.

Conclusion: The Bush Administration has done very well in protecting the homeland, in large measureby taking the fight to the terrorists in the Middle East.

Fact: The British have a more robust version of The Patriot Act than the United States does (mostly due to Democrat dumbness) and they discovered the latest terrorist plot (aimed at both Great Britain and the United States) and, with help from the United States and Pakistan, foiled it.

Conclusions: (1) The United States would benefit from a more robust Patriot Act, as President Bush and most Republicans would prefer; (2) Democrats have endangered the security of the United States by trying to kill The Patriot Act and then compelling renewal in a weaker form; (3) President Bush acted lawfully and wisely in ordering warrantless surveillance and monitoring of international banking transactions as part of the War on Terror; (4) The New York Times acted recklessly and perhaps criminally, if not treasonously, in publicizing thereto secret measures taken to protect the United States, particularly the monitoring of the banking transactions, which even Democrat Representative John Murtha urged The New York Times to keep secret; and (5) President Bush did a wonderful job in recruiting the President of Pakistan, an Islamic country,as an ally in the War on Terror.

To those thinking about voting for a Democrat for United States Senator: Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, Democrat of Nevada, boasted that he had killed The Patriot Act before it was renewed. Fortunately, he was wrong. Equally fortunately, he showed what kind of person he really is when he made that boast. DO YOUR REALLY WANT HIM TO BECOME SENATE MAJORITY LEADER? And Jay "The Sieve" Rockefeller of West Virginia to head the Senate Intelligence Committee? And Patrick "The Far Left Secular Extremist" Leahy to chair the Senate Judiciary Committee?

If you are thinking about voting for a Democrat for United States Representative: It's true that Representative Cynthia Mckinney, Democrat of Georgia, who assaulted a Capitol policeman, hates Israel and thinks that the September 11 attacks were a great conspiracy instead of al Qaeda being al Qaeda, won't be part of the next Congress, but some of her good friends will become Committee chairmen if the Democrats win the majority. Do you really want House Minority Leader Nancy "San Fran Nan" Pelosi as Speaker of the House? Charles Rangel of New York, who complained that Hitler isn't described as a "Christian fascist" when President Bush took to calling Islamo-fascists Islamo-fascists, as Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee? John Conyers of Michigan, who wanted to impeach President Bush and Vice President Cheney, to become Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee? Alcee Hastings of Florida, who was impeached and removed from office as a federal judge, to become Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee? John Dingell of Michigan, who called for a premature cease fire in Lebanon andobstinately opposes America accessing its own oil in Anwar (thereby reducing price and dependency on foreign oil), to become Chairman of the Committee on Energy & Commerce? John Murtha of Pennsylvania, who wants toretreat from Iraq to Okinawa and calls Marines cold-blooded murderers long before trial (in trying to make the case that winning in Iraq is too hard for America), for House Majority Leader? Maxinbe Waters of California as "the conscience of the House"?

It's too terrible to contemplate.

The bad news is that President Bush and Republicans generally are not perfect.

The good news is that President Bush was still greatly preferable to his Democrat adversaries, Republicans are generally preferable to Democrats and President Bush and Congressional Republicans will do a better job of doing what the people who wrote and ratified the Constitution of the United States envisioned would be done: "form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity".

The unalienable, God-givenrights declared in America's Declaration of Independence are "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." In that order. Republicans understand that much better than Democrats. Terrorism terrifies Democrats because it makes the world too dangerous for them to be in control.

Michael J. Gaynor

Send email feedback to Michael J. Gaynor

Biography - Michael J. Gaynor

Michael J. Gaynor has been practicing law in New York since 1973. A former partner at Fulton, Duncombe & Rowe and Gaynor & Bass, he is a solo practitioner admitted to practice in New York state and federal courts and an Association of the Bar of the City of New York member.

Gaynor graduated magna cum laude, with Honors in Social Science, from Hofstra University's New College, and received his J.D. degree from St. John's Law School, where he won the American Jurisprudence Award in Evidence and served as an editor of the Law Review and the St. Thomas More Institute for Legal Research. He wrote on the Pentagon Papers case for the Review and obscenity law for The Catholic Lawyer and edited the Law Review's commentary on significant developments in New York law.

The day after graduating, Gaynor joined the Fulton firm, where he focused on litigation and corporate law. In 1997 Gaynor and Emily Bass formed Gaynor & Bass and then conducted a general legal practice, emphasizing litigation, and represented corporations, individuals and a New York City labor union. Notably, Gaynor & Bass prevailed in the Second Circuit in a seminal copyright infringement case, Tasini v. New York Times, against newspaper and magazine publishers and Lexis-Nexis. The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed, 7 to 2, holding that the copyrights of freelance writers had been infringed when their work was put online without permission or compensation.

Gaynor currently contributes regularly to,,, and and has contributed to many other websites. He has written extensively on political and religious issues, notably the Terry Schiavo case, the Duke "no rape" case, ACORN and canon law, and appeared as a guest on television and radio. He was acknowledged in Until Proven Innocent, by Stuart Taylor and KC Johnson, and Culture of Corruption, by Michelle Malkin. He appeared on "Your World With Cavuto" to promote an eBay boycott that he initiated and "The World Over With Raymond Arroyo" (EWTN) to discuss the legal implications of the Schiavo case. On October 22, 2008, Gaynor was the first to report that The New York Times had killed an Obama/ACORN expose on which a Times reporter had been working with ACORN whistleblower Anita MonCrief.

Gaynor's email address is

Read other commentaries by Michael J. Gaynor.

Copyright 2006 by Michael J. Gaynor
All Rights Reserved.

[ Back ]

© 2004-2024 by WEBCommentary(tm), All Rights Reserved