[Neville Chamberlain]

Wolf,

1) I appreciate you throwing McCain’s quotes at Kerry in an effort to be fair and balanced but if all the hubbub is about the questions posed in Bush’s speech, how about at least asking the indignant Dems to answer the actual questions that spurred them to launch their coordinated attack in defense of appeasement?

2) Is it foolish delusion to claim that talking with terrorists will result in peace?

3) Should we negotiate with terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along?

4) Aren‘t you saying like that Senator back in 1939 that ‘Lord, if only I could talk to Ahmadinejad, all of this might be avoided’?

5) Isn’t this really the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history?

6) Aren’t you defending the failed strategy of appeasement and thinking that if you go and talk with Ahmadinejad that they’ll forget their evil ways and learn to love us?

7) What makes you think they would treat a future president any better than they did Jimmy Carter?

8) When one looks at how they use the spectacle of a U.N. address to excoriate us, wouldn’t they similarly use the spectacle of ‘talks’ as a sign of legitimacy and an opportunity to offer no peaceful conciliation but rather a tool to justify the path they‘ve chosen?

9) If you speak with Iran, what demands would you make of them and what are you willing to compromise to get a deal?

10) To which kinds of terrorists would you talk and to which would you not?

[Mike Darancette]

About FREAKIN time!!!!

If McCain lacks the guts to say what needs to be said Bush will have to.

[Joe 6-pack]

One of the most frustrating things for me is that all the prominent elected Republican office holders lucidly understand the futility of appeasement in terms of the War on Terror, but don't have the courage of their convictions to exercise the same principle in relationship to their political opponents at home on the philosophical battlefield (or as Ruxh refers to it, "The Arena of Ideas.")

Republicans in general, Bush as the party leader, and McCain as the presumptive nominee are all willing to compromise their agenda for no purpose other than, "appeasing" democrats and liberals when it comes to the economy, the environment, individual liberties, energy, education, etc.

[Mike Darancette]

4) Aren‘t you saying like that Senator back in 1939 that ‘Lord, if only I could talk to Ahmadinejad, all of this might be avoided’?

You mean Hitler right?

[Bommer]

Ten Questions to Ask the Dems Republicans About Liberal Appeasement

[muawiyah]

Long before Obamasama came along with his idea of sitting down with the Ayatollahs to carve up the Middle East, Robert McFarlane had gone secretly to Teheran bearing weapons, a cake and a Bible.  Read all about what the New York Times said then:  http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...752C0A961948260
 

Democrats of all stripes ridiculed this event for the next 22 years and then Obamasama said "'at's what we oughta' do by crackies".

Still, the New York Times wrote another piece in 1987 and is virtually in answer to Osamabama's proposal. Interesting to see what the Leftwingtards have to tell the Moonbats: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...751C0A961948260

[Tatze]

Doubts about Obama with Jewish Americans were stoked by Sen. John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee in the 2008 presidential election, when he recently charged that Obama is the favored candidate of Hamas.

Hamas is an Islamic fundamentalist group that controls the Palestinian territory of Gaza.

Obama last week called the Hamas allegation a "smear" and lashed out Thursday at Bush's speech in Israel.

PALESTINIANS IN GAZA ARE PHONE BANKING FOR OBAMA!!! Hello???

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21YF7ggCG6g

[SunkenCiv]

Joe Biden’s remarks are beneath the dignity of the Senate. Or at least they used to be — and will start to be once that balding racist plagiarist is out of office.