Democratic Response to President Bush's Speech (HILARIOUS!!)

WAZZADEM | 12/1/05 | JOHN

[areafiftyone]

Democratic Response to President Bush's Speech

 

 

 

 

Click!

 

 

 

 

The Democratic members of the House and Senate applaud the President for addressing people of the United States today, however, I have to say we're disappointed with what he said, or possibly what he did not say.

 

 

 

 

The President offered no new information or insight about the situation in Iraq, and the American people deserve the truth.

 

 

 

 

On the other hand, if during the course of the speech he did offer some new information, I must say I'm disheartened by what I heard, and that it's obvious we need a new approach...

 

 

 

 

...unless he discussed a new approach, in which case I want to state for the record that the plan or plans outlined by the President don't appear to be based in reality, as they don't take into account the facts as we know them.

 

 

 

 

We strongly disagree with most or all of the President's assertions, and feel that any solutions he may have proposed do not adequately address the root cause of the problem or problems they may have been intended to address.

 

 

 

 

And now, I'd like to turn the microphone over to whoever might be here on stage with me. I'm sure he or she needs no introduction.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I--or we--will be glad to answer any questions you might have. How about...

 

 

 

 

You, in the back.

 

 

 

 

Thank you. You said that the President...

 

 

 

 

You, in the back.

 

 

 

 

Yes, you said that the President...

 

 

 

 

You, in the back.

 

 

 

 

Bam!

 

 

 

 

That's an excellent question, and one that I'd be glad to answer.

 

 

 

 

I didn't get to ask a question!

 

 

 

 

But first, let me say that this president has been a failure.

 

 

 

 

He has destroyed the economy, misled this country into a war of choice, and...

 

 

 

 

You, in the back.

 

 

 

 

Me?

 

 

 

 

That's an excellent question.

 

 

 

 

That's not a real question!

 

 

 

 

But first, let me say...

 

 

 

 

Bam!

 

 

 

 

...has been a failure.

 

 

 

 

Bam!

 

 

 

 

...and one that I'd like to answer...

 

 

 

 

Bam!

 

 

 

 

He's quirky, but he's a lot sharper then Al Gore.

 

[YouPosting2Me]

I like it!. Thanks Fiddy-one.

[areafiftyone]

Kudos to WAZZADEM for always making me laugh! They never fail to crack me up! :-)

[maggief]

HAHAHAHAHAHA!

[Zacs Mom]

"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious.

But it cannot survive treason from within.



An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known, and he carries his banners openly.

But the traitor moves among those within the gates freely,
his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys,
heard in the very hall of government itself.

For the traitor appears no traitor.

He speaks in the accents familiar to his victims,
and he wears their face and their garments,
and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in hearts of men.

He rots the soul of a nation.

He works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city.

He infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist.

A Murderer Is Less To Be Feared."

Cicero, 43 B.C.

*********

PS ~ FYI, in cased any of you missed reading the thread which featured this U.S.News & World Report article: The (Very) Big Lie ... it's a damn fine read!

From the LA Times article "Democrats' War Opposition Not a United Front " (of all places):

"Many Democratic political strategists and foreign policy analysts have long believed the party can benefit more from criticizing Bush's handling of the war than from specifying an alternative."

[ErnBatavia]

Bravo!