Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 3/1/2002 11:19:43 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/1/2002 11:20:58 AM EDT by EricTheHun]
[size=4]A New Front[/size=4] [b]Democrats vs. Bush on the war.[/b] By Ramesh Ponnuru, March 1, 2002 9:00 a.m. Democratic senators Tom Daschle, Robert Byrd, and Kent Conrad have each raised questions about aspects of the administration's national-security policy over the last two days. It's a marked departure from previous practice of Democrats, who have hitherto been eager to explain that there is "no daylight" between them and the president when it comes to the war on terrorism. Daschle said that the war's continued success "is still very much in doubt" as we have not yet found Mullah Omar or Osama bin Laden — a remark that Republicans interpreted as a criticism of the administration. ("Disgusting" was the entirety of Tom DeLay's press release responding to Daschle; Trent Lott's said, "How dare Senator Daschle criticize President Bush while we are fighting our war on terrorism, especially when we have troops in the field.") Byrd was much more explicitly critical, complaining that the Pentagon is "seems to be looking for opportunities to stay longer [in Afghanistan] and expand our presence" and that we are better "at developing entrance strategies" than "exit strategies." Senate Budget Committee chairman Conrad, meanwhile, balked at the president's defense budget requests. The new Democratic aggressiveness may reflect the fact that the direction of the war has become, if not uncertain, unexplained. The administration probably needs to do a better selling job on why our next logical step is to go into ex-Soviet Georgia. Democrats may also have decided that the only way forward for them politically is to bring down the president's poll numbers by raising doubts about his conduct of the war. It is, obviously, a risky strategy. It opens them up to the kind of counter-criticism Daschle is getting now, and in the short run at least the Republicans are likely to win the pr fight. And even if Democratic criticisms were to bring Bush's positives down and his negatives up in the polls over a longer period, the same might happen to the Democrats — indeed, they might suffer more. So far, the White House is showing some restraint in exploiting the opening that the Democrats seem to have given it. At today's briefing, spokesman Ari Fleischer was asked if he thought Daschle and Byrd were "damaging to unity on the war." He said, "No, I think members of Congress have every right to speak out as they see fit." But he also said this: "There's a bottom line, and the President always understands that members of Congress are going to speak out as freely as they should. But when it comes to the defense of the nation, the President surely hopes that nobody will vote to under-fund our nation's defense needs, because the needs are serious, there is a war underway." My guess — and it's just a guess — is that in the next few days other Democrats, especially senators in tight races, will politely put some distance between themselves and Daschle's comments. And that Daschle himself will follow suit. See article at:[url]http://www.nationalreview.com/daily/nr030102.shtml[/url] Can the DEMOS get any dumber? Eric The(ShortAnswer?Yup!)Hun[>]:)]
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 11:23:58 AM EDT
these idiots should be poster boys for term limits for professional politicians.[BD]
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 11:30:05 AM EDT
They know that the polling shows that they are going to get waxxed in november so they are doing everything they can to get their poll numbers up. Come november we are going to take back the senate, and widen the margin in the house. You can kiss the AWB bu-bye [:D]
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 11:39:52 AM EDT
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 11:41:52 AM EDT
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 11:45:03 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/1/2002 11:47:22 AM EDT by The_Macallan]
The Democ[b]rat[/b]s know that if the economy picks up even slightly by the fall, they're doomed. The ONLY way Dems can win is if they keep the economy weak AND they get help from the Media to erode his poll numbers. They have been SLOWLY falling from 91%-78% since 9-11. These little nudges from Daschle & Co. as well as the increasing coverage of Enron, Bush's declining poll numbers and a hot summer could weaken the Republican control of Congress in the fall. The media just LOVE to pound away with polls showing slipping support for Bush - the "self-fulfilling prophecy" effect of covering poll numbers. It worked with Bill Clitoris during the Impeachment to keep his approval rating high. It could also work to accelerate Bush's approval rating decline. The Dems can only hope this trend continues with no obvious victories (domestic or international) between now and November. But if Bush gives the Dems an "October Surprise" like UBL's or Saddam's head on a platter, Daschle & Co. are out of business for sure. [^]
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 11:45:06 AM EDT
This is an extremely rare event, and I truely hate the thought that I may even remotely agree with anything a demon rat says. I assure you guys, I don't agree with [i]why[/i] they're saying what they're saying. I think they're right. We've waged the war brilliantly. Our guys have done a marvelous job on the ground and in the air. It's been good for Afghanistan, throwing off the Taliban and the Al Q****das, however you spell them. The entire world is better off for this war. The good guys (us) have won & won big. However, we haven't confirmed that we hit our #1 & #2 targets, bin Laden & Omar. They may well be buried under a bazillion tons of cave dirt, but we don't know thatand neither does anyone else. We may never know. We have severely cripped, if not destroyed, any capability they may have. We probably have a residual mission of digging out the last of the cave rats and border crossing scumbags. Basically, we (the military) are done there. We should be drawing down, not building up and solidifying positions. It's time for the aid givers and the rebuilders to take over. On to bigger & better things. Even the blindest of squirrels finds the occasional nut.
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 12:03:54 PM EDT
Post from DK-Prof -
That's only because they were too busy blaming the entire Middle East mess on the Clinton administration.[:D]
View Quote
Or too busy beating the crap out of the Taliban, Al-Queda, or whatever other slimeballs get in our way![:D] I don't think that President Bush has ever blamed this mess on Bill Clinton's limp-wristed, ass-kissing, poll-watching, fat- intern-humping, office-employee-groping, disbarment-pending, focus-group-inspired, money-grubbing, grand-jury-worrying, White House furniture thieving, terrorist-ignoring, presidency! But he should![:D] Eric The(Don'tYou?)Hun[>]:)]
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 12:18:37 PM EDT
What is particularly sad about this whole thing is how obviously orchestrated this is. The Dems have looked at the poll numbers and are sweating bullets. So they're concocting issues and seeing if any of them stick. To see how absolutely absurd it is, please refer to Sen. Foghorn Leghorn (Ernest Hollings) of South Carolina re: Enron. I absolutely believe this guy slipped a gear and has been running in neutral for a couple of years now. [url]http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,46742,00.html[/url] Anybody who thinks this is about legitimate grievances and not about the November elections has to get his head examined. The Dems, unfortunately, will have success at this and probably will retake the House and hold the Senate. The party in power usually takes a beating in an off year election. Face it, the American electorate is very fickle.
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 12:39:23 PM EDT
Originally Posted By DK-Prof: How DARE they disagree with the Grand Exalted Leader Who Knows All. Nobody should be allowed to express any opinions if they are different from Bush!
View Quote
No, Daschle did more than just disagree - he set the criteria for "success" in the War, namely getting the bodies of UBL and Omar. When Daschle speaks that way, he's not just giving his opinion - he's usurping Presidential authority by declaring what a US "victory" will consist of. THAT hamstrings the President (which is what Daschle wants) and now we have TWO opposing sets of criteria to guide military strategy within Gov't. That's the politics of "division" - the only trick in the Democ[b]rat[/b]s playbook. [b]Now can you tell me DK-Prof, where the f*ck in the Constitution it gives the Senate Majority Leader power to determine foreign policy objectives and designate specific military targets?[/b]
Wouldn't it be possible to charge these evil democrats with "aiding and abetting terrorists"? Maybe they could be put in front of a military tribunal without legal representation. Or maybe they could just be detained indefinitely without charges.
View Quote
No no no! Daschle is a US CITIZEN and citizens are NOT subject to military tribunals. Tsk-tsk... silly, silly Professor!
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 1:26:14 PM EDT
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 1:47:16 PM EDT
Post from DK-Prof -
Just imagine living in a country where you could criticise your leader without being attacked for it - obviously that country is no longer the U.S.
View Quote
[b]Nonsense![/b] Being attacked for criticizing your leader? Where? What country are [u]you[/u] talking about? If you mean 'attacking' as in criticizing, then if Sen. Daschle is free to criticize President Bush on the conduct of the War, then we are free to criticize (or 'attack') Sen. Daschle on his comments, as well. Sheesh! That's what the First Amendment is all about, D-KProf! It protects free speech from every different angle and source! Especially political free speech!
To my mind, it is the republicans who are being partisan here - trying to milk as much politican gain as they possibly can from the "war on terrorism"
View Quote
Well, you certainly have the right to offer your opinion! The rest of us just don't see it that way - have you looked at the polls, lately? And when George W's numbers begin to slip, which they will, it will be do to the nattering little nabobs and idiots who don't understand what needs to be done in the first place! If Gore were President, we'd still be trying to negotiate through intermediaries with the Taliban to see about arresting and extraditing Osama Bin Laden to a neutral third country for an Islamic trial before mullahs! Sound vaguely familiar? Yep, the Clinton Administration Redux!
I guess the republicans never criticized Clinton when he put US troops into Kosovo. Troops were on the ground then - why didn't the republicans stop their criticism?
View Quote
Show us some quotes from Republican leaders on that, boy! And did the Serbians ever take the lives of 3,000 US citizens? I sure hope you're not a civics or history professor!
Please - they're all slimy politicians. The republicans are no better than the democrats.
View Quote
Boy, are you wrong on that one! The present-day Democrats have got to be the worst group of self-centered, unpatriotic, special-interest group sucking jerk-offs in US History! But I mean that in the best sense of the term! Eric The(Incredulous)Hun[>]:)]
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 1:50:04 PM EDT
"there is a war underway." Really? When did Congress declare that? Sorry guys.....I think the Demoncrats are the voices of reason on this...ain't that a hoot....
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 1:50:55 PM EDT
Originally Posted By DK-Prof: Please - they're all slimy politicians. The republicans are no better than the democrats.
View Quote
Amen to that one.We need to start voting in someone how does not have a party influence.
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 1:53:28 PM EDT
Originally Posted By DK-Prof:
Originally Posted By The_Macallan: Tsk-tsk... silly, silly Professor!
View Quote
Yeah - I must be silly to think the First Amendement is important. Just imagine living in a country where you could criticise your leader without being attacked for it - obviously that country is no longer the U.S. All of the people who hated "political correctness" have now redefined it to mean that nobody should DARE to criticize the Great Bush.
View Quote
[b]DK-Prof[/b], I posed a direct question to you regarding YOUR idea of who has Constitutional authority to conduct foreign policy and set criteria for international affairs but you "conveniently" edited that out of this reply! Is this an indication of how you treat the students in your business classes who know better than you and question your faulty logic and errors of fact? Do you just ignore them too like this when they question you?
To my mind, it is the republicans who are being partisan here - trying to milk as much politican gain as they possibly can from the "war on terrorism" I guess this "war" will go on indefinitely, and republicans will claim that nobody should DARE to criticize Bush or any of his cronies while it is ongoing. How convenient.
View Quote
Exactly which sand dune was your head buried in during the weeks after 9-11 when EVERYONE (Bush, Powell, Daschle, Gephardt, [u]EVERYONE[/u]...) in Gov't ALL agreed that this "war" would not be over in three months but could take YEARS to slowly unfold and that WE must be ready for a LONG haul? Now you and the Dems seem to have strayed off track and are now saying this war should be finishing up soon. Exactly who is now changing their tune and politicizing the timeframe and goals of the war now??? Daschle & Co. (and you).
I guess the republicans never criticized Clinton when he put US troops into Kosovo. Troops were on the ground then - why didn't the republicans stop their criticism?
View Quote
Those Republicans weren't on board with Bill Clitoris' phony war from the get-go. They didn't change their tunes for political gain like Daschle is doing.
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 1:54:37 PM EDT
Boy, are you wrong on that one! The present-day Democrats have got to be the worst group of self-centered, unpatriotic, special-interest group sucking jerk-offs in US History! yep and how are the republicrats different?
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 2:02:55 PM EDT
Post from hound -
"there is a war underway." Really? When did Congress declare that?
View Quote
It's called the War Powers Act of 1973. It was a reaction against the Vietnam War by Congress. It's been in all the papers! See for example:[url]http://www.msnbc.com/news/641394.asp?0si=-[/url]
Sorry guys.....I think the Demoncrats are the voices of reason on this...ain't that a hoot....
View Quote
Yeah, quite a hoot, all right! So how do you propose that the United States go after those bastards who directed the attack on America on Sept 11? Assassins? CIA-covert operations? What? President Bush went after them in the best possible manner, losing the fewest possible servicemen, and obtaining the clearest possible victory! Only the possibly-rotting corpses of Bin Laden and the Taliban leader Omar have escaped out clutches! But who knows for how long? Do you really think any other country will lightly accept the presence of Al Queda within its territory without thinking that the same thing might happen to them if they do? You can't argue with victory! Eric The(Republican)Hun[>]:)]
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 2:08:24 PM EDT
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 2:11:28 PM EDT
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 2:12:11 PM EDT
Post from hound -
yep and how are the republicrats different?
View Quote
Well, the answer is too lengthy to be printed here in full, but just think for a moment - if the assault weapon ban is allowed to sunset when it comes time to renew it - do you think that it will be the work of Congressional Republicans, or Congressional Democrats? That, alone, should show you how to vote! Because Congressional leaders are chosen based solely upon how many members of that leader's party are in Congress - you may be a gun-hating GOP representative or a gun-loving Democrat, but when it comes time to vote on Speaker, etc., you will vote on the leadership solely along party lines! Eric The(Republican)Hun[>]:)]
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 2:15:45 PM EDT
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 2:48:08 PM EDT
Post from DK-Prof -
Yeah, the Saudis are really shaking!
View Quote
What? What are you talking about? Of all the nations on the planet, the one least likely to want Osama Bin Laden in their country is Saudi Arabia! Haven't you ever read that little piece of British whimsey I post on occasion, such as this, entitled 'Imagine This'? Well, here it is: [url]http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,590276,00.html[/url] It's a very good reason that the Sauds never, ever want to see Bin Laden back 'home.' Read and understand! Eric The(Searcher)Hun[>]:)]
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 3:05:45 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/1/2002 3:06:27 PM EDT by The_Macallan]
Originally Posted By DK-Prof: It's amazing that you cannot help yourself from the personal "attacks" and inferences about me. How DARE you!?! Don't you know there's a war on? [:D] My MBA students pay a LOT of money for their education - what are you paying me? Send me some money and I'll be happy to give you more specific attention.
View Quote
Yeah... I do get riled easily! You know Time is Money and the time I spend reading your posts is worth at least two bits. [;)] Still, I await your answer as to where Daschle gets the authority to set singly constraints and determine criteria for "success" in foreign policy conducted by the Executive branch.
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 3:20:01 PM EDT
'Bout time SOMEONE started asking questions, for whatever reason! The Bush defenders sound just like the Clintonistas! Cheesh.....looks to me like we'll be losing more and more liberty in the "War on Terror" under Ashcroft and Bush, than we did under 8 years of Clinton and Reno.... At least Reno had the balls (heh,heh) to send in the JBT's, and we knew where we stood!
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 3:29:38 PM EDT
Post from liberty86 -
Cheesh.....looks to me like we'll be losing more and more liberty in the "War on Terror" under Ashcroft and Bush, than we did under 8 years of Clinton and Reno....
View Quote
Surely, you jest? What liberty have we lost in the last several months due to the War on Terrorism? And how does it stack up to the Brady Bill, the Assault Rifle Ban, the NICS background check, and myriad other BS that the Clintons gave us? Hyperbole is one thing, but there is simply no comparison.... Eric The(Serious)Hun[>]:)]
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 3:37:57 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/1/2002 3:40:27 PM EDT by warlord]
Man this a little of the kettle calling the pot black. Bill Clinton should have gone after Bin Laden for the Marine barracks and Cole bombings. If you look at it, Bill Clinton could be plausibly be blamed for the WTC/Pentagon attack. And Tom Daschle is whining that just because we didn't get Bin Laden and company, we have lost the war. GWB Jr. pushed the Taliban and the Al Qeada out of Afghanistan, and it cost us only a few causulties. Sen. Daschle has been smoking something other than tobacco, like he's La-La land or something.
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 3:54:57 PM EDT
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 3:58:24 PM EDT
Link Posted: 3/1/2002 4:24:54 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/1/2002 4:32:42 PM EDT by EricTheHun]
Post from DK-Prof -
I understand that the non-representative, non-elected, non-free press permitting Saudi Royal family would hate to have Osama in the country, but what about the Saudis in general?
View Quote
The general population of Saudis would probably love to have Bin Lden come and be their satrap, caliph, Grand Poobah and High Muckaluck if they had their way! It would be the price the House of Saud would pay for supporting, encouraging, and financing their Wahabist views all over God's creation for, lo, these many years! That's why I think that the 'Imagine This' story is so frightfully good! It's very close to what could possibly happen! Here's the story:[url]http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,590276,00.html[/url] What do you think? Eric The(Realistic)Hun[>]:)]
Top Top