Democrats & Liberals Archives

Bush's Last Gasp

President George W. Bush has been trying to perk up his disillusioned base by telling them not to vote for Democrats because Democrats are defeatists and wimps in the face of the “war on terror.” But, unlike the reception he had received in previous years with the same nonsense, nobody seemed to be listening. So, in desperation, he grabbed hold of some words John Kerry said, insinuated that Kerry insulted the troops, and screamed for Kerry to apologize.

Here's what Kerry said:

You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don’t, you get stuck in Iraq.

Bush and practically the whole Republican noise machine shouted that Kerry thought the troops were stupid and that he should apologize to the troops. Even some 'fraidy-cat Democrats have chimed in. Kerry gave Bush and other Republican leaders who had never served in the military hell. He explained that he had botched a joke when he did not properly read his script, which said:

I can’t overstress the importance of a great education. Do you know where you end up if you don’t study, if you aren’t smart, if you’re intellectually lazy? You end up getting us stuck in a war in Iraq.

The joke was on Bush, not on the troops. Kerry apologized for the joke and for inadvertently offending the troops.

The whole incident is an excellent example of how Republicans campaign. They prefer not to talk about the issues. When they find a prominent Democrat, running for office or not, who says anything that may be construed in a negative way, they pounce and spread a defaming story about the chosen Democrat. Then they generalize and defame the entire Democratic Party. Kerry hates the troops and therefore Democrats cannot be trusted to fight the "war on terror."

In truth, the whole incident is nothing but a subterfuge. The Iraq War is going badly. The Shi'ites and the Sunnis are killing each other in a civil war. Both of them are killing Americans. As American Pundit tells us in the previous post, American troops went searching for an abducted American soldier held in Sadr City. So, on the orders of Muktada al Sadr, Al Maliki told Americans to stop the search - and Bush agreed. Who is the wimp here?

The big issue before all of us is the cataclysm in Iraq. Bush misled us into this quagmire with "mushrooming" WMDs, he lied many times about his motivation for the war, he painted a rosy picture of democracy at the same time that Iraq was sinking further and further into chaos.

It has gotten so bad that more than 6 out of 10 people want us to extricate ourselves from Iraq as soon as possible. This little statistic tells us that there are plenty of Independents and Republicans who think the Iraq invasion was a mistake.

The good old Republican standby in such circumstances is to attack Democrats. Kerry pulls a gafe. Bingo! Bush attacks Kerry. It does not matter what the truth is. Just attack, find fault, ask for an apology.

It will not work this time. This time the entire country knows what Republicans have been doing. This time they see with their own eyes on TV the horrible tortures, kidnappings and killings. They hear the generals criticizing the whole adventure. The people are thoroughly upset and want to get out of the Iraq trap.

This is Bush's last gasp. In contradiction to what he told us, the unfortunate Iraq conflict has hurt, not helped, our security. For real security, intelligently executed, vote for Democrats on November 7.

Posted by Paul Siegel at November 1, 2006 5:17 PM
Comments
Comment #192442

Paul,

Nice spin, since you actually believe Kerry’s explanation, I have some swamp land in Florida that I’d like to sell you. It’s a great price.

keith

Posted by: keith at November 1, 2006 7:25 PM
Comment #192444

You know, all three columns now have posts on this. Libs, let’s just let this die.

Posted by: Trent at November 1, 2006 7:29 PM
Comment #192448

Well, the fact of the matter is, if Kerry never had made the attempt at insulting Bush, Bush would never had the opportunity to rag Kerry.

Truely intelligent leaders know the inevitable truth about politics: “If you pretend to like everyone, everyone pretends to like you”.

It worked for Kennedy, Clinton, Reagan, Roosevelt, Lincoln, and Carter. All of who not only were able to brush away critisizm in office, but after as well.

The recent Fox News Clinton interview prooved this, they tried to nail him and he down right schooled them. Even legal assaulted them (physical contact) and walked away ‘the pride of American politics”.

So in my opinion, Kerry’s and Bush’s attempt at insulting each other just goes to show how sad, sorry and pathetic they really are.

Posted by: Bryan AJ Kennedy at November 1, 2006 7:34 PM
Comment #192453

Mr. Bush and the Republician’s are just making a big deal out of this, to take attention away from the mess that they have made in Iraq.
Carton:

Posted by: Carson Donner at November 1, 2006 7:50 PM
Comment #192456

Kirk, this is your mother. Get off the computer and come to bed.

Posted by: Mum at November 1, 2006 7:54 PM
Comment #192459

—-Paul—
good post, Just a few more days.

Posted by: DAVID at November 1, 2006 8:00 PM
Comment #192475

Keith,

I imagine you DO actually have quite a bit of swamp land in Florida you’d like to sell at any price.

Over the years, the GOP has shown beyond all doubt that they will buy anything their handlers try to sell.

I’ll bet you “own” several counties by now.

Posted by: Jack at November 1, 2006 8:20 PM
Comment #192492

Ok, at least two comments here.

For Bush, you’re an idiot! You’re the worst puppet we’ve ever had. Do you really believe what the moronic things you say? Do you truly sleep well at night knowing you’re the reason our kids are dying in Iraq for absolutely no apparent reason?

For Kerry, shut the hell up and stay out of it! No one wants to here from you right now! Let Clinton do what he came out to do and shut up before you blow it for all of us!

Posted by: phyl at November 1, 2006 8:53 PM
Comment #192497

What a gaffe! Kerry really messed up that one. His explanation is plausible but seemingly far-fetched. I can’t believe the former vet would
insult troops but purposefully or not that is what he did. See Cons? It’s not so hard to admit a mistake.

However, unlike the vehement protestations from the right about Cheney’s no-brainer slash dunk in the water comments, this one has no serious policy implications. But the pubs are scared now and rightfully so and they’ve found their whipping boy. The politics of distraction.

Posted by: Chris2x at November 1, 2006 9:04 PM
Comment #192508

My note to Kerry:

Please keep your mouth shut around election time!

Sheesh. Kerry stuck one foot in his mouth, stepped in a pile of crap with the other.

He lost running against Bush in ‘04. Nuff said.

Posted by: KansasDem at November 1, 2006 9:24 PM
Comment #192510

Paul

I admire your passion and conviction. For me it is very satisfying to know that the larger percentage of Americans have finally come to the same conclusions in regards to Iraq. I never believed there were wmd’s in Iraq and was against this war from day one. I saw thru the deceptions that George and his cronies laid on us. As a result, dealing with this realization in the wake of so many blind zombies for so long was very frustrating. Unfortunately there will always be a percentage that will live in denial rather than swallow their pride.

One good that may come out of this is that it has raised an awareness among the citizens of this country that maybe our leaders should not always be trusted to be on the up and up with us, and to do the right thing. The antics of George has awakened a nation of careless and apathetic voters. He has, inadvertantly taught many of us that we need to pay close attention to and vote the issues not the party.

Thank you George for raising our awareness and making us smarter and better educated voters.

Sadly because of George and his money grubbing, power hungry cronies many thousands of individuals have lost their lives to no good end.

Posted by: Ric at November 1, 2006 9:28 PM
Comment #192518

I can’t overstress the importance of a great education. Do you know where you end up if you don’t study, if you aren’t smart, if you’re intellectually lazy? You end up in the Democratic Party.

Posted by: PV Bella at November 1, 2006 9:37 PM
Comment #192526

PV Bella-
Are Americans all stupid then, if Democrats get the majority?

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at November 1, 2006 9:54 PM
Comment #192535

Great ad by Wes Clark here. Note to righties who have to spin a joke because their party and their policies have become a joke: not a smidgen of higher education needed to grasp this one.

Posted by: Adrienne at November 1, 2006 10:16 PM
Comment #192537

PV Bella

Intellectually lazy? Democratic Party? Cetainly your name calling an entire party has no basis in fact, especially if it supposes the Republican Party is the party of ideas. Just a comparison of pundits on either side would prove you wrong.

Intellectually lazy indeed!

Posted by: chris2x at November 1, 2006 10:24 PM
Comment #192550

Paul:

This is a Kerry generated storm.

“I’m John Kerry, I have three purple hearts and I will not apologize!!”

If he would have apologized yesterday the story would have been a one day story. Everyone makes mistakes, and when we do, we should apologize for them and move on. People certaily understand mistakes.

What created the story, was Kerry’s reaction. Now that Senator Kerry has apologized, the air will go out of the story and the world will move on.

In the end analysis, unless Dems loose congress by a seat or two, (which isn’t likeley), there will be few lingering effects.

I do think it hurts Kerry’s chances in 2008. Too many mis statements.

Craig

Posted by: Craig Holmes at November 1, 2006 11:26 PM
Comment #192554

Even if Kerry was intending to insult Bush’s education, it’s pretty hilarious considering that Bush got better grades than he did at Yale. In fact, Kerry got four D’s in his freshman year. Bush reportedly had higher scores on his officer qualification tests than Kerry, and he got over 1200 on his SATS (while Kerry, like so much about his record) has refused to release any of this information.

Additionally, setting out to call someone else dumb and flubbing your attempt so badly makes you look like the real idiot. But Kerry should be used to playing the fool by now when it comes to his attempts to confront Bush.

Posted by: Neo-Con Pilsner at November 1, 2006 11:41 PM
Comment #192558

Oh, come on you know George Bush is stupid. All the coke snorting and drinking killed his 2 brain cells along time ago. Quit defending his dumb ass.

Posted by: lefty at November 1, 2006 11:49 PM
Comment #192562

Lefty, if I were a lefty, I wouldn’t be so quick to call “stupid” someone who has thrashed my side as often as Bush has. If Bush only has two brain cells, then it must be two more than Kerry has.

Posted by: Neo-Con Pilsner at November 1, 2006 11:55 PM
Comment #192566

What a bunch of juvenile crap.

Kerry should not get off his script or tell jokes. His wooden persona only detracts from what he is: a very intelligent and thoughtful American.

The manufactored indignation at his gaff makes me retch.

Hopefully tuesday’s election will bring thoughtful peole to the table (dems and repubs) and find a way out of the hell.

Posted by: tex at November 2, 2006 12:02 AM
Comment #192567

George Bush doesnt have to think he lets Karl Rove do that. Why are you repubs so hyped about Kerry now? What a good distraction from the real issues, huh?

Posted by: lefty at November 2, 2006 12:02 AM
Comment #192569

Our President says,

“We’re winning and we will win, unless we leave before the job is done,”

…umm, apparently Bush hasn’t been talking to his generals. According to this oft repeated statement Iraq is more a state-of-mind than a real place. Bush just lives in a state of denial.

“we’ve never been “stay the course,”

How dumb does George think we are? I’m with lefty, he must be a dumb ass.

Posted by: chris2x at November 2, 2006 12:07 AM
Comment #192571

I thought the whole text of Kerry’s retort was great. Unfortunately it has not been given much play on MSM. So much for liberal bias.

Neo-con : No contention.Just observation that it must be nice to be rich,both Bush and Kerry. Niether one had a stellar freshman year at Yale. How many working class kids do you know that that would not break their backs given that opportunity ?
Another great irony is that anyone that realy driven enough to become president probably should never be allowed to.

Posted by: BillS at November 2, 2006 12:11 AM
Comment #192574

First off, I don’t believe Kerry’s official explanation. It doesn’t make any sense that he would say that to a group of students. I believe he said what he meant.

But here’s the thing. What he said was not so bad. To paraphrase, he was telling them work hard and study hard and you’ll have a lot of choices in life. If you don’t, you’ll be left with few choices, and not necessarily attractive ones.

Furthermore, I think that the American people understand what he was trying to say (not the botched joke thing, which is ludicrous) and would agree with him. He wasn’t calling our troops stupid. The only ones who are stupid are the ones currently buying the Republican spin argument that Kerry hates our troops, or the ones who buy the official Kerry explanation.

Anyway, none of that matters. What matters is that Bush lied us into an unnecessary war and we have brave youngsters over there dying because of it.

Posted by: Stan at November 2, 2006 12:14 AM
Comment #192585

Be afraid. Be very, very afraid. And never speak your mind:

“We must be mindful that people around the world are listening to these discussions”

OK Laura!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/first_lady


Posted by: KansasDem at November 2, 2006 1:13 AM
Comment #192588

Paul,

Nice spin, since you actually believe Kerry’s explanation, I have some swamp land in Florida that I’d like to sell you. It’s a great price.

keith

Posted by: keith at November 1, 2006 07:25 PM


Nice try but spin my ass, Kerry blows a joke, Bush blows a war…..which is relavent when there are Americans dying today in Iraq?

Posted by: expatUSA_Indonesia at November 2, 2006 1:45 AM
Comment #192589

I can⦣x20AC;™t overstress the importance of a great education. Do you know where you end up if you don⦣x20AC;™t study, if you aren⦣x20AC;™t smart, if you⦣x20AC;™re intellectually lazy? You end up in the Democratic Party.

Posted by: PV Bella at November 1, 2006 09:37 PM

And this from one who supports a party that has as it’s base those who believe biblical creation is science and TBN is an entertainment channel.

Posted by: expatUSA_Indonesia at November 2, 2006 1:50 AM
Comment #192592

I thought this might be interesting to some of those who say they care about what Soldiers think of our “friend” on Capitol Hill. I just got a forward from a buddy of mine that has a large group of Soldiers holding a banner. I can’t copy it here for some reason, but it says, and I’m writing this verbatim:

Halp us Jon Carry-
We R Stuck (K is written backwards) Hear N Irak

I’d post the picture, but seeing how I’m an uneducated moron with no attractive choices in life, I guess I’m just to stupid to figure it out. Maybe that’s why I’m stuck here in Iraq.

Posted by: 1LT B at November 2, 2006 2:24 AM
Comment #192598

1LTB:

Wow! You’ve come up with irrefutable evidence that our troops were ALL insulted by Kerry’s comments. Case closed. The Dems hate our soldiers and love our enemies. I guess there’s nothing more to say about that.

Isn’t it funny how that entirely irrelevant comment got communicated to our soldiers, but the president’s concession that there was no tie-in between Iraq and 911 did not. According to polls, the majority of our soldiers in Iraq still believe they are fighting to avenge the attacks of 911.

Posted by: Stan at November 2, 2006 2:51 AM
Comment #192599

Kerry’s an idiot for even thinking of linking education and Iraq duty in *any* sense. Bush or not. You gotta know to stay away from that sort of thing. Even if he’d said it right (by the script) he’d be dissing military service. Face it — Kerry’s an elitist. Always has been. Always will be.

Posted by: Charles Adams at November 2, 2006 2:58 AM
Comment #192615

Lefty please explain to me how you can get three purple hearts in three months without spending one day in the hospital. Perhaps kerry knew that three purple hearts gets you out of Viet Nam.

Posted by: Thomas at November 2, 2006 7:22 AM
Comment #192622

Thomas-
It’s easy: get a documented wound in combat. That’s all it takes. That’s the reason Max Cleland never got a Purple Heart for his devastating injuries.

I think Kerry knew. But if he were wanting to get out of Vietnam early, he could have taken his hits a lot earlier, and spared himself months of getting shot at, blown up, etc.

The SwiftVets have few people in a position to have personally witnessed Kerry’s behavior in combat, and the one person who did see him earn a medal, says he deserved that medal(The medal was his Silver Star, where he turned his boat into the line of fire, charged the position, and took out an RPG armed soldier.)

The accounts of other SwiftVets come into doubt when comparisons are made with the other Eyewitness and even with official Navy citations of their own medals.

Two of the SwiftVets supported him in a tough Senate race a few years ago. Apparently, whatever he did wrong wasn’t so bad or memorable that it soured them on sending him to Washington to a national elected position.

Many of the SwiftVets, if not most, got their information about Kerry’s “misdeeds” second-hand, which presents the possibility that the first Swiftboating may have been to members of the SwiftVets themselves. What would you do if somebody you trusted took you aside and said, “This Kerry guy, they’ve got this evidence here; I think he may have done this, this and the other. If that’s right, then…”

There’s also his undoubtedly controversial testimony, which a number of vets disagreed with. That said, two things are the case: Kerry did undertake a program after he got back interviewing Soldiers who fought in the war. He did have real testimony to relate, and other history sources back the assertion that there were serious atrocities committed in Vietnam.

If Kerry really wanted to blast his fellow soldiers, he didn’t have to take aim at command, or make most of the speech about their failure to properly train and employ the soldiers under their command. He doesn’t pin the blame on the soldiers, he pins it on those who put them in a position where’s there’s little moral guidance, yet the pressures of an winning a war with inherently flawed strategy put upon them.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at November 2, 2006 8:17 AM
Comment #192648

Many of these posts seem to be anger motivated as opposed to intelectual thought. Almost bordering on juvenile.

Kerry made a fraudien slip, plain and simple. He had a major major brain fart. He is running for nothing and speaks only for himself. It is obvious that he is trying to help his party at a critical time. He did not succeed. He served in Nam and did so honorably. The latter can not be sensibly and honestly disputed. A bunch of republican recruited swiftboaters claiming otherwise means nothing. The documented medals and honorable discharge tell the whole story. In essence there is no story, unless of course certain people wish to spin a fairy tale from obviously biased claimants.

I served in Nam about the same time he did. And I can understand his motivations upon returning home. People needed to be made aware of the atrocities going on over there. And I applaud him for having the balls to do so. The fact that anyone speaks up against atrocities in the military does not in any way make them a traitor or any less the soldier. It makes them a concerned individual with the integrity and guts to try and instill awareness and change. Not just another apathetic puppet watching from the sidelines and accepting all wrongs because somebody above them said they are acceptable.

Bush, Cheney, Rumsfield and the whole lot have no children serving in Iraq. And for that matter never served in battle themselves. And from what I understand George barely served here at home. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black!

Of course Kerry did not intend to insult our troops. He is not stupid. A bit wishy washy but not stupid by any means. I believe he is hoping to run for the presidency again. Lets face it, to say our troops are less than educated would be political suicide. The last thing he would be wanting two years away from the big show. And to be honest I personally do not believe he has a snowballs chance in hell of winning any primary again.

It is blatantly obvious that the republicans jumped on this verbal slip hoping to sway some votes back in thier direction and make the democrats appear as though they look down on our troops. This is total rubbish and spin politics at its best. If you can not see it then you are either blind or do not want to see the truth. The only people who are looking down on the troops are the ones who led them into this malay via their own personal greedy agenda. Our troops should be offended and deeply concerned that they are being used in an ill gotten battle.

It is only human nature to hope and expect that battles fought are for some common good. Unfortunately this is not always the case. No one wants to go into battle and not feel as though they are making a difference. Soldiers need self justification to maintain their morale and sense of accomplishment. Your job is to go where your leaders tell you and do as told without question. Sadly our leaders do not always make good and competent decisions. This is the case with this war much the same as Vietnam. I am sure there are many goods being done in that country and there are many grateful Iraqis who want this democracy thing to work. Unfortunately there seems to be just as many or more who do not care or feel just the opposite. It is painfully obvious that this war never was and never will be a successful story for us or them. Our cultures are just too alien to each other to ever mesh into a common understanding. I applaud our soldiers who are bravely fighting this battle. It is not your fault that you were led into an ill concieved battle. If things do not work out you can still return home with your heads held high knowing you did your part and did it well. The final words will put the blame and shame on the leaders who led you there.

Posted by: Ric at November 2, 2006 10:15 AM
Comment #192651

1 LTB,
The soldiers with the banner weren’t insulted. They didn’t like kerry to begin with and are now having fun with it.

The Kerry explanation that some don’t buy would seem a little far-fetched except the written copies of the speech handed over right after the gaffe back up his explanation.

Maybe the Republicans are the party of political correctness.

Posted by: Schwamp at November 2, 2006 10:31 AM
Comment #192653

Stephen

Kerry got three purple hearts in three months not one day in the hospital. Why doesnt kerry want us to see his military documents. All he has to do is sign a simple release like George W Bush did. Sick and tired of you libs parading your victims ie cindy sheehan, michael fox max cleland kerry. Max lost his limbs in an accedent not in combat. Libs seem to think we are not alowed to respond to these people.

Posted by: Thomas at November 2, 2006 10:38 AM
Comment #192659

Bella,

We don’t need to call people in the Democratic Party stupid. In fact, my guess is that the IQ’s, education, and thoughtfullness of the membership and representatives from both parties both adhear to the normal curve pretty well. Both parties want what is best for America; however, we disagree on what that it is and how to achieve it.

Trying to represent our opposition otherwise, just takes us down to their level. The Democrats do themselves a disservice when they trot out pedantic remarks like expat’s “And this from one who supports a party that has as it’s base those who believe biblical creation is science and TBN is an entertainment channel.”

In my time on reading and writing on Watchblog, I’ve come to believe that many Democratic posters here can not understand how rational, intelligent people can disagree with their positions. They are convinced that they are either too stupid or too brainwashed to understand. The same can be said of some conservatives too, but on the whole, my perception is that these responses tend to be more reflective of Democratic/ Liberal posters; (however, I clearly have my own interpretive bias here).

Overall, this feeling of intellectual superiority allows for the mistatements like the one Kerry made. He tried to make a joke about Bush being stupid and uneducated. He bungled it. He opened him self up to the fall out as well as reopening the comparisons of their academic achievements (where Bush comes out marginally ahead). There were lots of ways to make the joke, but he tried to take the route that said I’m smarter than you.

In the end, I think that is indicative of the Democratic Party’s view of the Republican Party. That is a shame. There is pleanty of room to debate the issues on the merits. While it is certainly valid to debate the intellectual qualifications of two opponents in a race, it takes a leap to make the comparison between the parties. One that Democrats seem willing to do more often than the Republicans. My gues is that it harms them more than helps them, and I hope the Republicans won’t resort to trying to play intellectual one upsmanship if/ when they become a minority party. It’s demeaning to all.

Posted by: Rob at November 2, 2006 10:53 AM
Comment #192680

i can see how you could construe the fact that without a good education you could end up stuck in iraq. since the economy sucks unless youre rich-you have friends in high places[right wing]- or happen to get real lucky-youre not going to get a job with pension - retirement- or health care coverage. the republican party has tried to make sure of that with outsourcing-union busting tactics-and a general ripping away of workers rights and of course not even wanting to increase the minimum wage coming up on 10 yrs. now. what other choice do you have to take care of your family except to join the military. nice job “bush” railroad our society with your control freak techniques so you can pad halliburton- line your pockets and those of your cronies-and act like the moronic money grubbing -selfish -lying piece of crap that you are!. and dont do it in the name of GOD. i have the utmost respect for GOD so dont even try to take his name down with you when you go!. and just wait until the truth comes out with what the rebublican party really got away with . i hope they really prosecute them to the hilt!. and it will go into history-the party of GOD -no. only the party of the godless!. stay tuned!.-paul ps. kerry meant nothing malicious and it was regarding the white house weasel-im just putting another take on it that also holds true.

Posted by: paul at November 2, 2006 11:42 AM
Comment #192681

i can see how you could construe the fact that without a good education you could end up stuck in iraq. since the economy sucks unless youre rich-you have friends in high places[right wing]- or happen to get real lucky-youre not going to get a job with pension - retirement- or health care coverage. the republican party has tried to make sure of that with outsourcing-union busting tactics-and a general ripping away of workers rights and of course not even wanting to increase the minimum wage coming up on 10 yrs. now. what other choice do you have to take care of your family except to join the military. nice job “bush” railroad our society with your control freak techniques so you can pad halliburton- line your pockets and those of your cronies-and act like the moronic money grubbing -selfish -lying piece of crap that you are!. and dont do it in the name of GOD. i have the utmost respect for GOD so dont even try to take his name down with you when you go!. and just wait until the truth comes out with what the rebublican party really got away with . i hope they really prosecute them to the hilt!. and it will go into history-the party of GOD -no. only the party of the godless!. stay tuned!.-paul ps. kerry meant nothing malicious and it was regarding the white house weasel-im just putting another take on it that also holds true.

Posted by: paul at November 2, 2006 11:43 AM
Comment #192686

My My Paula arent we the angry one. I take exception to the way you describe my President. I suggest that you control your temper Paul. Your man bubba screwed things up. He had more than one opportunity to get ben ladin. He didnt and I will tell you why. Bubba was to concerned about his cigar if you ketch my meaning. Lies under oath the oath he swore to uphold. My my Paul maybe now you can direct your anger to the real creep “bubba”.

Posted by: Thomas at November 2, 2006 12:02 PM
Comment #192738

Did someone say “juvenile?”

Posted by: tex at November 2, 2006 1:06 PM
Comment #192744

Okay, Kerry misread his prepared remarks. Truth is, he’s right. Our all-volunteer military is made up largely of lower socio-economic groups of young men and women who haven’t done all that well in school.

Back in the 1970s, Kerry spoke out against ending the draft and adopting an all volunteer military, warning then that it would no longer be a citizen-soldier military drawing people from all walks of life, but a mercenary military. He was right in his assessment then, and he would be right today.

We lost a whole lot of good in the country when we abolished the draft. We should have adoped “national service” for everyone. It’s never too late.

Posted by: James at November 2, 2006 1:16 PM
Comment #192756

Thomas, your president is a moron.

As far as draft vs. volunteer, I’m not so sure I agree. While I don’t like the fact that our militray draws much more heavily from those with fewer opportunities, I like the opportunity it provides those people to receive technical training and discipline they will need to succeed in the world. The problem arises when an idiot president takes advantage of those people by sending them off to fight a pointless war.

Posted by: David S at November 2, 2006 1:41 PM
Comment #192757

Wow
its truly amazzing how virtually every one on here can always bring john kerrys statements to george Bush …all this really is ,is the opening salvo in democrats attempting to impeach pres Bush who if elected will spend hundreds of millions on trumped up false and misleading charges to pay back republicans for impeaching pres clinton.am really begginning to wonder what happened to democrats who actually care for thier country and in protecting its citizens.How ever ,2 years of the dems in control ,who will start with both a huge tax increase on all of us ,magor investigations ,stoping the ability of the government to listen to terrorists and we will probibly have another major terrorist attack .how can the party of John F Kennidy and FDR have regressed to the state of hate america and regain power at all costs …is truly shameful what this party has degenerated into.
Disgusted Ex Dem.

Posted by: J. at November 2, 2006 1:42 PM
Comment #192761

David S
So the entire war in Iraq was (The problem arises when an idiot president takes advantage of those people by sending them off to fight a pointless war.) I might begin by asking a simple question ..would the us ,the middle east ,and the world be in a better position today if saddam and his henchmen were still in power ?…As a leader saddam started several regional based conflicts and stated over and over again he would do as he pleased ,shooting at our pilots on a regular basis ,as well as continuing to pay the family of each suicide bomber in isreal 25,000 dollars creating an incentive to get others to blow up innocents while helping the rest of thier family have the money needed to get by.when we are faced with an enemy who has no morals ,and doues not care for thier own life it makes for one of the more diabolical and determined enemys we have had as a nation.Democrats have no stated mission change for iraq other than we can do better ,leave now ,let them take care of it .That ladies and gentlemen is a recepie for disator and we will all pay the price if dems some how manage to take control.if they do i predict with in 2 years the us will suffer a nuclear explosion in one of our cities due to less abiltiy of government to moniter and apprehend potential terrorists prior to them attacking.Senator clinton Kerry and the likes would rather fund fire dept and first response teams so we can pick up the bodys of dead americans,Republicans would rather kill the terrorists prior to them attacking us.

Posted by: J at November 2, 2006 1:54 PM
Comment #192768

J-

The world is a better place with Saddam out of power, unless whoever fills the vacuum is just as bad. Right now it looks like Ahmadenijad will be pulling the strings on whichever puppet ends up running Iraq.

Democrats have several ideas, which should be discussed and debated, rather than BushCo’s blatant failure to address the fact that their plan is failing. They’re fear of showing political weakness is killing our troops.

Posted by: David S at November 2, 2006 2:04 PM
Comment #192816

If the Democrats win, I do hope the attempt to impeach Bush. Why? Becuase the truth of where he got his intelligence from will come out.

Where did he get the intelligence?

How about Bill CLinton’s Administration. In 1998, Clinton tried to declare war on Iraq. It happened at the same time as the Lewinsky affair. Albright, Sandy Berger and the Secretary of Defense held a town hall on CNN. Here is the transcript:

http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9802/18/town.meeting.folo/


“No one has done what Saddam Hussein has done, or is thinking of doing. He is producing weapons of mass destruction, and he is qualitatively and quantitatively different from other dictators.” - Madeline Albright 1998

So what happens if during the Impeachment hearings we find out Bush used the same intelligence that Clinton did? We’ll get the same thing we got when we found out Rove wasn’t the leaker for the Plame case. We’ll get a big ignore.

Those that said Bush lied will have to admit that Clinton lied too. I’m not interested in who is right or wrong. I’m interested in the whole truth ugly or not. Those calling for impeachment better be prepared to accept the truth if it doesn’t fit their agenda.

Islamic Jihad and the Islamic Brigade have just weighed in on who they want to win the election and why.

This site details the Hussein atrocities including the Hallabjah bombing of WMD where 5,000 people died.

http://www.indict.org.uk/ - This site was put together by a Liberal PM. Equivalent to the House of Representatives in the US. She went to Iraq and witnessed atrocities first hand.

Saddam tried to build a nuclear facility and was bombed by the Isreali’s. Saddam tried to build a giant gun to shoot Isreal. Saddam launched SCUD missles into Isreal during the first Gulf-War. Saddam’s troops killed, raped, and tortured Kuwaiti’s, Saddam declared war on Iran resulting in the death of 1 million Iranians and Iraqi’s combined. Saddam set fire to the Kuwaiti oil wells causing major environmental damage. Saddam drain the marshes in the south of Iraq driving the Marsh Arabs out of their native land and causing untold environmental damage.

There are over 1 million documents recovered from the Iraqi Government currently being translated. I encourage you to read them to see for yourself how death orders where handed down. This project is being done by Harvard University.

http://www.fas.harvard.edu/%7Eirdp


Stop with speculation, and start with the facts.


Posted by: JEiden at November 2, 2006 3:14 PM
Comment #192821

J said,

That ladies and gentlemen is a recepie for disator and we will all pay the price if dems some how manage to take control.if they do i predict with in 2 years the us will suffer a nuclear explosion in one of our cities due to less abiltiy of government to moniter and apprehend potential terrorists prior to them attacking.

How exactly does the Iraq war help us monitor terrorists? Dems or no, we will continue to have a presence in Iraq.

And 2 years before Nukes?! Yikes! Just in time for the 2008 presidential election no doubt. Besides panic and fear mongering what do you base this on? If terrorists could get there hands on a nuke in 2 years why wouldn’t they use it successfully against us with a Republican led government exactly? Are you saying the Iraq war will stop North Korea from giving the bomb to some terrorist?

Just more of the same from the extremists in the Republican party.

Posted by: Chris2x at November 2, 2006 3:29 PM
Comment #192822

David S said,

Democrats have several ideas, which should be discussed and debated, rather than BushCo’s blatant failure to address the fact that their plan is failing. They’re fear of showing political weakness is killing our troops.

Right on David! This administration is waiting til AFTER the elections to discuss change in strategy in Iraq. Like those who brought this war can be trusted to fix it. Rumsfeld has the O.K. for the next two years, Cheney would still like us to believe Iraq was involved in the 911 attacks, and Bush declares he’s never been stay-the-course.

In the meantime our soldiers are put in harms way in a half-ass operation between revenge killers and ethnic cleansers in Baghdad while insurgents and terrorists take aim at them.

Posted by: Chris2x at November 2, 2006 3:35 PM
Comment #192834

Food for Thought.
#1 George Bush will not run for re-election
#2 Plans were made right after 9-11 to accomplish certain goals over next 6 years of his admin.Removal of saddam hussien,change of government in Iran /+ Syria,Removal and reunification of korean people.
Immeadatly after election look for things to get extreme quickly ,his speech in early 2002 oultlined the map of goals they estliblished long ago ,removal of as much of the Axis of Evil as possible.with saddam being the weakest of all 3 taken out first.removal and change of leadership in iran syria,and north korea are essential to protecting you me and all americans.please oh wise democrats explain in detail what your party would do if given all the riens of power in the senate and house?…abandon the free people of iraq?disregard the facts regarding north korea?or iran ?or syria ?…..how many more attacks must occur on american soil before our elected offiacals can put partisan politics aside and work together to defeat these terrorist killing animals ?….show me a tape anywhere of american soldiers tying up a prisoner then slowly sawing his head off while he whimpers in dispair ?….You all know they dont exist ,however tapes of our enemys doing this to our citizens is readily available.why is it we cant work towards defeating these animals than contimue to use dirty politics gerrymandering and anything possible to stay in power….personaly i beleive this country needs a third party that more closly reflects the views of the american people.Look to 2007 2008 to be bloody but must happen ,North korea derives a large % of thier hard currency selling illegal arms to rogue nations .with nukes now confirmed and santions world wide ,how long before he sells one bomb to al Quada ?…how much do you think bin laden and associates would pay north korea for access to evan some reprocessed plutonium?enough to make say 2 dozen dirty bombs ?….I believe were in a situation very simalar to 1939,where we were still on the sidelines and not involved in ww ll ,where the real hard work of the coming war will be the combonation of Iran North Korea Syria and possible some south american nations such as venizuala,point being that casualities weve scene to date will be nothing campared to what we see over next 36 months but is needed to finish job and create some semblince of order in mentioned nations.

Posted by: J at November 2, 2006 4:15 PM
Comment #192857

David S,

“The world is a better place with Saddam out of power”

How in the world could you say that?

He was not a threat to the USA. He did not have any WMD. Iraq was not close to chaos like it is now. Iraq was not a terrorist haven like it is now. We were not creating scores of new terrorist daily. The list of problems that Bush has created by invading Iraq is endless.

Posted by: Frank at November 2, 2006 5:35 PM
Comment #192859

J

You obviously have fallen prey to the fear tactics imposed by the Bush administration to try and save face in the wake of this huge debacle in Iraq. It is not healthy to imeadiatly believe everything your government tells you and accept it as exact truth. It is this type of undivided and ungaurded trust which has allowed these people to put us in the position we are in. Had the nation spoken up and let our reps know they should excersize patience and listen to the weapons inspectors in Iraq, we more than likely would not be there today. Bush took advantage the vulnerability of americans in the wake of 9/11 to expeditiously vault us into an entirely unnecesary war in order to serve the needs of a greedy few.

Case in point: Weapons of mass destruction were never found and never proved to ever be in Iraq. :This was our sole reason for invading

Iraq and terrorism had no ties whatsover until we invaded.

Before we invaded we were keeping Saddam in check with simple fly overs, continuing weapons inspections and economic sanctions.

Four hundred billion dollars, 3000 lives and tens of thousands of troops injured and maimed for life later, we are embroiled in a civil war of our own creation in a country that does not want us there.

You can not honestly believe that the war in Iraq is keeping terrorists out of our country. That has to be one of the most absurd and idiot statements I believe Bush has put out there. For him to think we are really that gullible is offensive to all of us, whether you realize it or not.

We more than likely will be attacked on our home ground again at some level. It probably is inevitable. This is a sad truth. But our being in Iraq has absolutely no bearing on that issue. That is, other than the fact that we have further motivated them thru our forced presence on their soil.

Posted by: Ric at November 2, 2006 5:42 PM
Comment #192862

JEiden,

“We’ll get the same thing we got when we found out Rove wasn’t the leaker for the Plame case. We’ll get a big ignore.”

Mathew Cooper got the name of the covert CIA agent (Valerie Plame) from Karl Rove not Dick Armatage. Karl Rove did leak her name and he knew exactly what he was doing and why. When the Democrats regain control of the Congress I hope there is time to finnish this investigation. So only you that don’t question this administrations lies “found out”.

Posted by: Frank at November 2, 2006 5:46 PM
Comment #192864

frank ,
How can you say there are no weapons in iraq ? , Grant you we have not found many of those weapons as of yet ,however in may of 2005 terrost elements used a binary nerve agent shell as a road side bomb ,agents did not properly mixed set off this way however this was one of 795 55 mm chemical binary shells that were inventoried by the un weapons teams in the 90s.
take one of these shells have the right personell disassemble and correctly reassemble and youd have a poor mans chemical weapon with 4 liters of material.Any idea what 4 liters of nerve agent set off in a local football game or mall would do ?….Just because we have not found the major weapons caches as of yet that truly doues not mean that while he had the chance many weapons were hidden and smuggled out of the country were they are probibly in the hands of iranian /hamas terrorests now .but this is one of those things there are no winners ,tell you what ,take the state of california ,simalar size to iraq ,give a group of people with millions of dollars to spend and no over sight and 4 years to plan and hide ,then try to find ….think about this itll take only one or two chemical shells to create a very wicked weapon,what will all say if and when they are used against us by hezbolla or hamas ,and if we maintain the courage to help the iraq people create and maintain there own democracy , they will be allies in the war on terror,instead of a breeding ground for new terrorists.

Posted by: J at November 2, 2006 5:51 PM
Comment #192872

J,

You picked the wrong subject to argue with me about. I worked for a DOD contractor for several years. We were working on a secret project that included the use of the chemicals that compose nerve gas. The likelihood that someone would be able to accomplish what you suggested are miniscule at the most. As soon as that chemical is exposed to air it starts rapid decomposition. There really is no way to transfer this chemical without that occurring. Besides those shells are so old that they would most likely have already decomposed rendering them harmless. You should stop listening to Rick Santorum he is just desperate to win an election!

Posted by: Frank at November 2, 2006 6:06 PM
Comment #192883

J

Why are we so motivated to bring democracy to Iraq? Why not in other parts of the world? What’s in it for us? There are other dictators in the world just as crazy as Saddam so what’s going on? Oh, could it be…OIL?!!!

Posted by: lefty at November 2, 2006 6:26 PM
Comment #192894

Lefty

If it was about the oil we could haven grabbed all the oil from kiwait. Lefty is there anything that America has done that is good?

Posted by: Thomas at November 2, 2006 6:53 PM
Comment #192896

Frank

When your man bubba went to war with Bosnia why were you not enraged? What possible motive could bubba have had? Bosnia a threat to U S. I dont think they have an air force. I guess if a Dem goes to war its just different. Bubba didnt go to your beloved U N. No out cry. I wonder why.

Posted by: Thomas at November 2, 2006 6:56 PM
Comment #192905

At least we had a reason to go to Bosnia, there were thousands of people being killed over there due to ethnic cleansing. Now why did we go to Iraq?

A. Saddam had weapons of mass destruction.
B. To bring democracy to Iraq.
C. Revenge for George’s pappy (and the oil)

Or maybe we are looking for Bin Laden in Iraq. Yeah right!! He is after all who is responsible for 9/11. Now remind me why we are in Iraq again.

Posted by: lefty at November 2, 2006 7:12 PM
Comment #192917


“is there anything that America has done that is good?” Yes, America has done many good and sometimes wonderful things in it’s past. Just nothing good in the last 6 years.

Posted by: jlw at November 2, 2006 7:38 PM
Comment #192918

lefty

How many people were killed under saddam over
100,000 thousand. Ethnic cleansing. Your man buuba called for regime change in Iraq. Bubba said saddam had WMD. Kerry said WMDS Hillary said WMDS British intelegence said WMDS Saddam used WMDS. All your heroes said he had WMDS. Lefty lets try and stick to the facts. I know thats hard for a liberal to do. Try real hard.

Posted by: Thomas at November 2, 2006 7:38 PM
Comment #192923

Hmmm ,
Did not realize that the bosnians used chemical weapons against thier own people or that thier government had started two major conflicts in the worlds oil region,like it or not with out oil youd be sitting in the dark humming the blues to your self.someday maybe you’all democrates will realize that unless we begin searching now for as much oil and energy resourses our children will have to pay for the negligence .Guess the democratic solution is to negotiate with the terrorists?…oh ya they have no plan simply say no to any thing the bush adminastration does to help save our people.Or perhaps you could ask Daniel Pearl whethor we can negotiate with these demons,or perhaps Nick Berg ,im sure they would agree that we should give these people rights and appoint attorneys once we beat em on the battlefield.

Posted by: J. at November 2, 2006 7:48 PM
Comment #192924

J

Pull your head out of the sand. If Abu Grab and the marines being tried for murder in Iraq doesn’t prove to you that Americans are bad too, then you are helpless.

Believe me, if some enemy country was flying war planes over our country, we would fire at them too. We invaded a country that did nothing to us, NOTHING. We just didn’t like them. Sadam had nothing to do with 911, that is a fact.

Clinton liying about sex and didn’t kill one American solider. Weather Clinton thoguht in 1998 the same thing about Sadam that Bush did, doesn’t matter in 2002. Not one soldier lost their life in Iraq under Clinton and the mistake wasn’t made. Bush made the mistake. Bush started the war with Iraq, not Clinton. Bush lied about WMD, not Clinton. Bush lied about Yellow Cake in Africa, not Clinton. Bush lied about Sadam being in cahoots with Bin Laden, not Clinton. Bush is responsible for the 2700+ soldiers lives, not Clinton. Bush is responsible for not catching the person who planned the 911 attact, not Clinton. Bush is responsible for the fact that we still are fighting a war in a little country like Afganistan still to this day. Bush is responsible for the largest Deficit in US histroy, not Clinton.

The list goes on and on. Get over it. All this happend under Bush’s watch, not Clintons. Clinton has been out of office more than six years now and you guys still want to blame him for everything.

Was Clinton perfect? Hell no, but he didn’t start a war for his own personal gain. He had his faults that I hold him accountable for, but losing American life isn’t one of them. You all want to talk about Clinton liying under oath. I agree he did. But at least he went under oath. Bush, Cheney, Rummy and company won’t go under oath to be questioned. To me that tells me they are lying.
Stand up and take it like a man. Bush has made huge mistakes. When he appologizes to our troops for sending them into harms way and costing lives under false pretenses, then I may forgive him. Until he does that though, I will never trust him.

Posted by: rusty at November 2, 2006 7:52 PM
Comment #192928

rusty I have to disagree with you. Bubba is responsible for the 3,000 people that died at the towers. You see if he was doing what he was supposed to do instead of chasing girls around maybe 9/11 would not have happened. I like how you dismiss lying under oath because its only about sex. What other crime are you gonna allow us to lie under oath about. I know bubba wanted to protect his family but so does the bank robber the murderer.

Posted by: Thomas at November 2, 2006 7:59 PM
Comment #192929

Rusty Said
Pull your head out of the sand. If Abu Grab and the marines being tried for murder in Iraq doesn’t prove to you that Americans are bad too, then you are helpless.

Believe me, if some enemy country was flying war planes over our country, we would fire at them too. We invaded a country that did nothing to us, NOTHING. We just didn’t like them. Sadam had nothing to do with 911, that is a fact.

Hmmm I thought the no fly zone was created by the UN because saddam was viciously killing Shites …..and when enforcing a UN mandated No fly Zone they continued to target our pilots and refused all additional UN Mandates forcing action to be taken.
I also wonder what the families of the uss cole would say to you regarding no US soldiers died during his term .Saddam directly funded the terrorists who were blowing them selfs up in isreal.
its obvious that the only solution to this is for all america to go the liberal way retreat from afganistan and iraq(the same way the clinton adminastration did in somilia) and just hide over here in our country.it really is terrible when we see terrorists kill 4 of our men drag thier bodys around the street and then hang them by a bridge ,you’all dems solution is to retreat and run ,shows a lot of cowardice if you ask me.

Posted by: J. at November 2, 2006 8:04 PM
Comment #192942

rusty I have to disagree with you. Bubba is responsible for the 3,000 people that died at the towers. You see if he was doing what he was supposed to do instead of chasing girls around maybe 9/11 would not have happened. I like how you dismiss lying under oath because its only about sex. What other crime are you gonna allow us to lie under oath about. I know bubba wanted to protect his family but so does the bank robber the murderer.

Posted by: Thomas at November 2, 2006 8:54 PM
Comment #192945

J,

When we originally went into Iraq did Bush say we were going because Saddam was killing his own people? Think not. If that were the case there are countries all over the world that need our help. Now that there are no WMD’s and democracy is looking like a lost cause what’s the next lie Bush is going to give us for staying in Iraq? Oh and since we like to invade countries based on the assumption that they have weapons of mass destruction why aren’t we invading North Korea right now? How about Iran? Oh yeah, they’re next on Bush’s to do list, I mean since we’re in the area and all.

Posted by: lefty at November 2, 2006 8:55 PM
Comment #192947

J. Just a question. If Bush was forced from office legally through impeachment perhaps or the end of his term and he refused to step down,sighting national security reasons,would you still support him?

Posted by: BillS at November 2, 2006 8:55 PM
Comment #192951


J: 236 marines blown up in their barracks in Beruit. That great republican conservative Ronnie Raygun cut and ran. I guess he was the coward of all cowards.

Posted by: jlw at November 2, 2006 9:08 PM
Comment #192964

Thomas,

Try cutting the Prozacs in half.

Posted by: Mike at November 2, 2006 10:02 PM
Comment #192966

Kerry, allthough inarticulate, was trying to relay the fact that most folks who do enlist are poor and in need of direction. How is this such a revolution? Kerry lived in a time where the motto was Score high, don’t die” eluding to the disparity of poor and minorities in Nam. Poor dude, he can’t get over Nam. Who can blame him.

Posted by: shelly at November 2, 2006 10:17 PM
Comment #192987

Jr. and his neo-cons are liars, manipulators and killers. The biggest war criminal in this whole mess is Jr and Cheney themselves. Both are closet fascists that care nothing about 99% of the population. They cater to the 1% corporate fascists that only want to fatten themselves at the worlds expense and to blazes about the consequences. Jr is an idiot and finally I think most Americans see that

Posted by: Paul at November 2, 2006 11:57 PM
Comment #193067

Frank:

If there was no WMD. Then how did 5,000 Iraqi Kurds die in Hallabjah? Saddam dropped a chemical bomb on them.

If there was no WMD, why does the New York Times have an article about the Iraqi Nuclear program today.

Stick with facts and you’ll gain more credibility.
NO WMD is misleading. He had WMD, he used them in Hallabjah and in other Iraqi areas. It was a campaign over several years called the Anfal Campaign.

Sunday Saddam is going to be sentenced for his war crimes. In fact in the latest trial there were several witnesses and survivors of the atrocities that testified. Of course, the press doesn’t report this because it doesn’t line up with their view of the world.

The atrocities in Iraq far outnumbered and lasted decades longer than Bosnia.

And don’t think everything is OK is Bosnia. There is still a lot of tension there, and violence between ethnic groups still occurs including burning of churches, and mosques.

Posted by: JEiden at November 3, 2006 11:15 AM
Comment #193069

JEiden: As part of the US involvement in the Iran-Iraq war we supplied WMDs to Saddam. The weapons he used on the Kurds should have been marked “Made is USA”> Look it up yourself as you won’t believe me.The US looked the other way as he murdered his people.

Posted by: BillS at November 3, 2006 11:25 AM
Comment #193074

BillS:

I never said the US was not a party to supporting Saddam back then. All I’m saying is that everyone says no WMD, when evidence suggested otherwise (such as Hallabjah).

We gave a lot of help to Saddam during the Iran / Iraq war - which was wrong. REmember at the time, Iran had Americans held hostages in the US embassy in Tehran.

America is by no means innocent in contributing to this mess. We gave Saddam weapons, we gave his intelligence support, etc. Because he was at war with our enemy (Iran). Looking back on that, that was a very bad choice. We have both parties to blame for that (Carter - Democrats; Reagen - Republicans).

Most likely those chemical weapons were supplied by the US. But to say he never had them flies in the face of the facts.

Posted by: JEiden at November 3, 2006 11:45 AM
Comment #193083

Jeiden: The hostages had been released by then.
Don’t you find useing the WMDs we supplied as a reason to invade akin to the police planting dope on someone and then arresting them?Also remember that chemical weapons degrade fairly quickly.

FYI. In the last major battle between Iraq and Iran the US not onlt supplied chemical weapons but also survalence and logistics. That means we directed the battle. The Iranians lost an estimated 50,000 troops in one battle. Any wonder why they do not like or trust us?

Posted by: BillS at November 3, 2006 12:13 PM
Comment #193084

Jeiden: Franly I am sick of having to point out where my country has been on the wrong side. Another example : We toppled a democratic government in Iran and installed the brutal Shah leading to the iranian revolution. High time our forign policy was based on ethical,decent,responsible behavior in accord with our stated principles rather than the needs of multi-national corporations. Can we agree on this?

Posted by: BillS at November 3, 2006 12:29 PM
Comment #193097

J & Thomas,

I’m sorry if you thought I thought it was OK for Clinton to lie under oath. I DO NOT. I do hold Clinton to task for his lie/lies. However, you two don’t want to hold Bush to account for his… That is where we disagree.

When Bush, Cheney, Rummy and Condi testified before the 911 commission, remember they would not testify under OATH. Everyone else who went before the commission went under oath, why not our leaders?

It is kind of like drug testing. If you are clean why would you be against the testing? If Bush and company were going to tell the truth, WHY NOT UNDER OATH?

Thomas, you said Clinton was cheasing skirts and that is why 911 happend. I say, Clinton was out of office for 9 MONTHS when 911 happend. I say Bush and company fell asleep at the wheel and didn’t pay any attention to our intel during that time. We have the 911 report that shows the communication between operatives (the actual plane hijackers) and that it was in July and August of 2001. That info didn’t come in under Clinton’s watch, it was BUSH-CO.

I held Bill Clinton responsible for his actions during the Lewinsky ordeal. In fact as a dem you may be suprised to know that I even was fine with his impeachment. I know he committed a crime by lying under oath. I just wish Reps would hold to the same standard that they preach. Again, Clinton believed Sadam had WMD’s, but he didn’t start a war over it, Bush did.

As for the UN no-fly zone over Iraq. I understand that was being impossed by the UN. I still argue that if the UN did the same thing to us we would shoot down any plane that flew into our airspace. As for Sadam paying people to blow themselves up… Again, that didn’t happen until after the US invaded Iraq. Then Sadam used what he could to try and protect his little ass. Again, this action by Sadam was brought on by our action against him. He had not supported that type of action prior to our invading of his country.

We can argue all day on weahter it was right or wrong to invade Iraq. Both sides have good valid arguements. But in the end 911 and Iraq happend under GWB, not Clinton. Bush needs to take responsiblity for his actions. He always trys to blame someone else for the reason he had to take the action he did.

Posted by: rusty at November 3, 2006 1:40 PM
Comment #193116

1)Kerry made a big mistake.
2)It insulted our soldiers.
3)Given our political problem, he would have to be an idiot to insult American soldiers. Just look at the fallout.
4)Given that I don’t think he’s an idiot (I just think he’s wrong.) I am willing to buy his explanation.
5)The Republican noise machine has pounced on this beyond all bounds of reason. Kerry isn’t running for anything. He does not speak for the democratic party as a whole. (Just as Bush and his pals do not speak for the rep. party as a whole.)
6)The entire debate over Kerry’s comments can be dismissed as juvenile and irrelevant.
7)The only thing this is good for is critizing the rep noise machine.
8)I prefer Bush over Kerry as president. Lesser of two monstrous evils.

Posted by: Silima at November 3, 2006 2:31 PM
Comment #193142

JEiden,

The inspectors that were in Iraq prior to Bush ordering his invasion were doing their job. They said that Iraq was cooperating. Bush said he wanted diplomacy to work and the inspectors to do their job. That turned out to be another big lie since as soon as he found out that Iraq was cooperating he rushed the invasion before the world was to find out that their were no WMD.

I am certain that Saddam is getting a fair trial (sarcastic). I am not sure of what he has done He seems to be a bad person but there are so many in this world. I don’t believe anything that comes from this administration. I do know that he had a close relationship with Bush number 1 and Rumsfeld. Maybe Bush’s war is all about hiding that involvement. Bush’s war is certainly not about spreading freedom and democracy.

Why do you people continue to bring Clinton into the current events? He is not the President. GW Bush is the President. He did many things that I don’t agree with. But I don’t blame him for the problems Bush and Co. are creating!

Posted by: Frank at November 3, 2006 3:55 PM
Comment #193152

Look at the facts.

1. Clinton tried to go to war with Iraq in 1998. That is a fact. Clinton claimed Saddam had WMD. Where did he get his intelligence from?

2. Bush used the same claims as Clinton, almost verbatim. Did Bush use Clinton’s intelligence?

3. Bush tried diplomacy for over a year before going to war with Iraq.

4. Saddam had 12 years and 17 chances to come clean. There were 17 UN resolutions regarding Saddam Hussein. Each Resolution was another chance for Saddam to come clean.

5. There was physical proof Saddam used WMD. The maimed and crippled survivors of Hallabjah, and the 5,000 dead victims of his chemical weapon attack. When you say there was no WMD, that is wrong. Somehow a chemical weapon was dropped on this Kurdish town. Saddam did it and probably used US supplied weapons to do it. There was even a 60 minutes segment on it. Educate yourself.

6. Today’s front page headline talks about Iraqi Nuclear program documentation. Saddam was a lot closer to getting a nuclear weapon than was originally thought.

7. Saddam was in the middle of building a nuclear facility when Israeli warplanes destroyed it.


When you say there was no WMD, that is not correct.


If you say, they had WMD, now it is missing, then you are on to something. Because Bush tried the diplomatic route before going to war, he gave time for Saddam to dispose of the weapons. It is very possible that he shipped those WMD stockpiles over the border to Syria.

But to say there was no WMD ignores the facts. He had them, he used them, but we don’t know what happened to them which is scary.

Look up Hallabjah.

I’m not saying going to war with Iraq was right or wrong. I’m saying there is absolute proof of WMD during his reign.

Posted by: JEiden at November 3, 2006 4:35 PM
Comment #193157

BillS:

I never said the US was on the right side of anything. We screwed up big time with Iran. First with Carter, then made worse with Reagen.

I never said anything to the otherwise. I’m not sure why you bring that up.

Yes the hostages were released by the time Iran / Iraq war happened, but the US allied itself with the Iraqi’s, and that was also a mistake.

None of this is cut and dried. I never said the US was always right. I’m simply trying to point out the facts so when someone makes an argument they can speak from knowledge rather than a simple soundbite that distorts the truth. Even if that truth is ugly, sticking to the facts will lend credibility to the argument.

But on the same day the New York Times details the Iraqi nuclear program was more detailed and advanced than previously thought, it goes aganist the argument that there was no WMD, and Saddam wasn’t pursuing and hiding his goals.

Posted by: JEiden at November 3, 2006 5:02 PM
Comment #193166


JEiden: You have pieced together facts that go back as far as 20 years and use them as justification for the war. Nearly all of Sadam’s weapons were destroyed before ,during and right after the Gulf War. Sadam did many things to obstruct the inspectors. When Clinton threatened to invade, Sadam became very cooperative for a while. When Bush started threatening him he became cooperative again because, in my opinion, he felt that if he let the inspectors verify that he no longer had WMD’s, he could hold on to his position as ruler of Iraq.

Did you bother to read the times article? I think not. The article wasn’t really about Iraq’s nuclear program. It was about the administration’s website. This administration that is obsessed with secrecy and is constantly claiming that the democrats are saying and telling things that aid the enemy, has been showing Iraq documents which they had hoped would prove their reasons for the war. So far, those documents have proven nothing. The Bush administration, by posting the documents revealed a step by step procedure for producing a nuclear weapon right here on the web for the whole World including terrorists to see.

Often the grand plans ( Pax Americana) of zealots end in disaster for themselves and their followers because those zealots think they know more and better than everyone else.

Kerry put his foot in his mouth and hurt his future political prospects. He could have hurt democratic efforts in the election but President Bush saved him by announcing his confidence in and his retainment of his bud Rummy.

Posted by: jlw at November 3, 2006 5:30 PM
Comment #193170

hi

Posted by: Matt at November 3, 2006 5:39 PM
Comment #193171

Bush and co. posted 16000 pages on the INTERNETS on how to buid a nuclar bomb. Good move bush. A move that shows how stupid these guy are.

Posted by: Jeff at November 3, 2006 5:40 PM
Comment #193173

Looking back on the 2004 election, there is no doubt that Kerry was the wrong person to receive the democratic nomination. The answer for 2008 has to be a non-devisive, moderate democrat. Soneone who can appeal the independent voters who determine elections, not an ultra-liberal that the right can tee off on. In retrospect, Wes Clark would have been the better candidate, but thats neither here nor there. Kerry’s idiotic comments should only serve to formally exclude him from receiving the democratic nomination in ‘08. Anyone hear of a guy named Obama??

Posted by: matt at November 3, 2006 5:46 PM
Comment #193175

JLW

Again:

I’M NOT JUSTIFYING THE WAR. ALL I”M SAYING WAS THAT THERE WAS WMD, AND NOW IT IS GONE.

I’m only trying to stick to the facts, whether they are right or wrong, good or bad. I’m not trying to selectively use facts that justify one position or another. I’m just pointing out raw facts.

Draw your own conclusion.

And yes, I did read the Times article. It talks about how the administration posted the details of Iraq’s nuclear program. The material posted basiclly describes how to create a nuclear weapon.

But the point is if Saddam had no nuclear program, and there was no WMD, then why was Saddam so close to getting a nuclear weapon?

So Iraqi’s had step-by-step instructions on how to do this.

Isreal previously bombed an Iraqi nuclear facility Iraq was building.

Posted by: JEiden at November 3, 2006 5:53 PM
Comment #193176

JEiden: Really, I do not need a lecture on facts. I just read the Times atrticle. The document you refered to were pre-1991. Back when Saddam was still our buddy. If you read furthur the article says there was no evidence found in the Iraqi archieves to say that the unconventional weapons systems were being built in the years before our invasion. Stick to facts . It adds credibility to the arguement.

Posted by: BillS at November 3, 2006 5:54 PM
Comment #193190

120 Million

Posted by: JEiden at November 3, 2006 7:04 PM
Comment #193191

JEiden: It is not the facts you mention that is the problem, it is your timeline. Sadam had WMD’s,nuclear,chemical and possibly was trying to produce biological weapons. He had none at the time of the invasion except for a few chem shells left from the Iran-Iraq War which had been buried and forgotten. Those chemical shells were impotent because of their age.

The inspectors were in the process of proving this. The administration, so convinced that they were right, could not allow that to happen so they ordered the inspectors out of Iraq and proceded with their invasion.

Here is an example of just how stupid these zealots are: Immediately after the invasion, Rumsfeld ordered the military to search for the WMD,s. After the search began, the military reported that they were not finding WMD’s but they were finding many thousands of conventional shells and that they needed more manpower to secure these shells. Rumsfeld told them to ignore the shells and to continue hunting for WMD’s. Those shells were used by the insurgents to make Improvised Explosive Devises (IED’s) which have killed and maimed so many of our brave troops. Rumsfeld should be hung!

Posted by: jlw at November 3, 2006 7:07 PM
Comment #193254

Kerry did not apologize. He sort of apologized. He borught up being a man. A real man stands up and apologizes in public. Kerry is a hatriot. He hates his country, he hates the military, and he hates anyone who is not living in poverty. He owes this counrty just one thing- a resignation.

Posted by: PV Bella at November 4, 2006 2:30 AM
Comment #193280

Astounding incompetence. There was a period when Bremer was in charge when an immediate formation of an Iraqi government could have prevented the growth of the insurgency. We did not do it because he wanted to finish”privatizeing” much of the state run industries. In other words distributing the spoils to cronies.Blind ideaology kept us from being over and done there.

Posted by: BillS at November 4, 2006 11:18 AM
Comment #193296

For God’s sake….What would it take for some on the right to accept facts. Not opinions. Facts.

David Kay, the man sent by W to look for WMD, was on TV yesterday. He said without any equivocation that the WMD’s were not there. Mr. Kay also said that they were not secretly transported to Syria or anyplace else because they did not exist. No evidence has ever surfaced to dispute that fact.

The grown up way to confront these facts is to admit your boy stepped on it and has made a monumental mess. A mess that is feeding our military into an Iraqi meat grinder.

Rote repetion of far fetched, pie in the sky, neo-con talking points just makes you look like W and Cheney: Delusional.

Posted by: tex at November 4, 2006 3:01 PM
Comment #193297

Sure Republicans are trying to take the focus off of all the scandals and issues and turn them towards the Kerry remark. They needed some sort of distraction. But, as a Dem, let me just say that Kerry is a moron. Shut the hell up Kerry. He is an idiot, maybe not the village idiot, but an idiot none-the-less, and I, quite frankly, was very disappointed that he was our choice in ‘04. Of all the people in the United States, I have a hard time believing that Kerry, and Bush for that matter, are the best we have. It’s shameful what money can buy in this country.

Posted by: Kc at November 4, 2006 3:04 PM
Comment #193299

I will go out on a limb and say you probably are stupid if you voluntered to go fight in Iraq on the basis that you thought that you were fighting for America’s freedom or what ever Bush’s ever changing excuse to invade Iraq was at the time.

Posted by: G.W. Rove at November 4, 2006 3:17 PM
Comment #193306

G.W.Rove

No man. You do not get to call them stupid. Even Cindy Sheehan would smack you in the mouth for that one. Naive,sure even gullible but you have no business calling them stupid.You are blameing the victums.

Posted by: BillS at November 4, 2006 4:35 PM
Comment #193384

I wouldn’t go that far to call them stupid… misinformed yes, they certainly were. The administration we have misinformed us all, or tried anyway.

Ya know, I was always one of those people that never voted party, I always voted who I thought was the better person for the job. I dream of the old school Republican…. What we have here now is NOT a Republican. I wouldn’t even go as far as to say “neo”…

Posted by: Kc at November 5, 2006 1:45 AM
Comment #193394


why would any one think of Obama as Presidential,
When he has been on the scene for only a few
months, What an who is he an what are his qualifications? We need a person with presidential
candidate this time with impeccable credentials

no more guessing games.
—-

Posted by: DAVID at November 5, 2006 7:21 AM
Comment #193395

—-sorry, lost some words above (*@*)

Posted by: DAVID at November 5, 2006 7:28 AM
Comment #193583

First of all Kerry shouldn’t have to apologize to the troops because W and Karl “wormtongue” Rove are either too stupid to understand the English language or so unethical that they would use our troops in the field to score a political hit on the Dems. Even w/o the “us” which Tony “windbag” Snow seemed to be unable to place in the sentence it isn’t an insult to the troops. Those lying bastards thought they could get some mileage out of it plain and simple and didn’t care who they deceived in the process.

The 24/7 news media shares a good bit of the blame as well. They shouldn’t have carried this stuff in the first place - it was obvious that they were being used the same way wormtongue has been using them for the last 6 years. The Repugs think that they can say any outrageous lie they want and when it gets put on TV it becomes a fact - unfortunately most viewers are not able to discriminate truth from hogwash and buy this garbage. They plant stories in the press through paying off “journalists,” they report things in an op-ed column has hard news not opinion and they don’t care who gets hurt in the process.

I hope that Bush and Cheney both get impeached for lying us into a war and 2,800 American deaths & 2-600,000 Iraqi deaths - talk about a high crime. Bush has caused the deaths of more Americans than Osama Bin Laden. Then you Repugs can enjoy a year and a half of President Pelosi (that even makes me cringe). That’ll teach you to lie your way into wars.

Posted by: tcsned at November 6, 2006 11:46 AM
Comment #283296

I feel that ANYONE that sits in the chair of the president should NEVER BE pounded by our “freedom of speach 1rst amendment press ” but instead we should support them and help them by teaching others to work together. NOT act like an angry mob! In the bible ROMANS 13:1-9 teaches this not hate , rebellion and defiling their names or the office.I for one think this has gone far enough,all the hate and fear of our government ,police and leaders is going to be the one thing that destroys our way of life. President Obama ,George W.Bush, Bill Clinton and ALL of them have spent to much time defending themselves when they should be getting our support.Stop acting like a bunch of gossips and report the the good things for a change ,they need your help. GOD BLESS THEM AND GUIDE THEIR HAND. Thats what the bible says !

Posted by: Ken B. at June 20, 2009 9:04 AM
Comment #283297

I feel that ANYONE that sits in the chair of the president should NEVER BE pounded by our “freedom of speach 1rst amendment press ” but instead we should support them and help them by teaching others to work together. NOT act like an angry mob! In the bible ROMANS 13:1-9 teaches this not hate , rebellion and defiling their names or the office.I for one think this has gone far enough,all the hate and fear of our government ,police and leaders is going to be the one thing that destroys our way of life. President Obama ,George W.Bush, Bill Clinton and ALL of them have spent to much time defending themselves when they should be getting our support.Stop acting like a bunch of gossips and report the the good things for a change ,they need your help. GOD BLESS THEM AND GUIDE THEIR HAND. Thats what the bible says !

Posted by: Ken B. at June 20, 2009 9:06 AM
Post a comment