Infinite Monkeys

Rep. Pete Stark, who hates the troops, is a contemptible human being

No. That is not me going overboard in my description of the House of Representatives’ most radical, rude and liberal member. If you Google “Pete Stark” and “disgrace” you get nearly 10,000 hits. So I’m hardly alone in applying that label.

Indeed, Fortney “Pete” Stark’s record of being a contemptible ass in his official capacity as a member of Congress is long and distinguished.

And here is the latest classless stunt from the representative from a suburb of San Fran-Sicko.

WASHINGTON (AP) — An anti-war Democratic congressman is demanding to know why there were uniformed Defense Department personnel watching House proceedings from a public gallery Thursday, who they were and what they were doing.

"If they were here on official duty, this was an abhorrent misallocation of our military resources at a time of war," Northern California Rep. Pete Stark asserted Friday in a letter to Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

"At a time when our nation is at war, our troops are overextended, and the administration is literally asking for emergency military spending, what good to the 'war on terror' is having U.S. generals and other top-ranked officers — who were likely accompanied by staff and escorted by their chauffeurs — spending hours sitting in the gallery of the House of Representatives?" Stark asked.

Stark’s insulting letter is soaked in so much ignorance and sanctimony that it is, literally, breathtaking. Who is Stark, in the words of the AP headline, to “question” the “presence” of military officers in the public gallery of the House of Representatives? Who is Stark -- who has done nothing to protect America from the terrorist threat -- to say that these military men had better be observing on their "own time" the Congress they risk their lives to protect? How dare he all but spit “Get lost baby killers!” while demanding answers to his asinine, bad-faith questions:

Please provide for me the name, rank, branch, and duties of each of these officers, as well as the number of additional staff and drivers that were used to facilitate their attendance yesterday. I would like this information by Monday, May 19.

Stark, whom Barack Obama put in his endorsement quiver this month, didn’t have to wait until May 19. The Pentagon wrote and delivered their response to Stark within hours. As it turned out, the 20-some men in military uniforms that made Stark so angry, were students at the Army War College. And Stark’s response to the truth -- something he could have learned himself simply and honorably by sending a House page up to ask -- was in tune with his typical condescension.

"I appreciate the swift response," Stark said in his follow-up statement, without retracting or apologizing for his earlier complaints. "However, if these officers were hoping for a lesson in how Congress ought to work, then perhaps the Iraq supplemental wasn't the best debate for them to witness."

No, that’s the exact debate for them to witness. Because undermining the military, its mission and our national security are the hallmarks of this Democratic Congress. They continually play games with bills to support the troops on the front lines. They refuse to give the federal government the tools to prevent another 9/11. They can’t even be bothered to demand that Stark raise his maturity level above that of a 3rd grader -- let alone issue a resolution of censure against him or merely ask him to apologize. But we’re supposed to believe that anti-war clowns like Stark and his enablers in the Democratic Congress “support the troops.”

I’m amazed that military exceeds its retention goals when our troops know they are risking their lives to protect the hides and freedom of scumbags like Stark.

Go to Hell, you jerk.

(HT: McQ at Q&O and Brian Faughnan at The Weekly Standard)

Posted by Dr. Zaius at May 21, 2008 12:47 AM | TrackBack