So much for Democrats being pansies

I guess the Republicans, to whom bloodlust is a nectar, are going to have to paint another picture. So they had better buy more paintbrushes. Plenty of them.

For decades the GOP has portrayed Democrats as weaker than a posse of 96-year-olds frail with the flu when it comes to national security.

You would believe all Democrats wet their pants whenever George McFly walked into the room.

You would think that all Dems since LBJ were born wimps who shiver with revulsion over the mere thought of violence, as if a snake had just crawled across their breakfast plates.

It’s a wonder the Democrats didn’t rename themselves the Quakers, considering they all supposedly were allergic to the disfiguring after burn of military operations.

Of course, President Obama has somewhat changed that notion. First, he ramped up the war in Afghanistan even though some of his base broke out in hives big enough to climb. And then there was the macho testosterone takeout of Osama bin Laden.

Yep, the Republicans had better start scripting a new narrative to attack Democrats.

By the way, Obama opted for the most aggressive option — a commando attack worthy of Hollywood action films — rather than antiseptic missile strikes. And he used our elite commandos instead of outsourcing them.

After all, outsourcing special forces isn’t quite the same as outsourcing call centers. Besides, who would trust the Pakistanis, who had to know that bin Laden was living in a palatial compound in their midst and not hiding his 6-4 frame under a rock?

In contrast, George W. Bush made the opposite choice: deploying Afghan rather than American forces because he feared American casualties. And bin Laden got away.

Imagine that! A reality lit with the celebration of truth.