Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Kennedy Accuses Bush of 'Credibility Gap' (Bloviator Alert)
Washington Post ^ | 4/6/2004 | Helen Dewar

Posted on 04/05/2004 8:56:17 PM PDT by playball0

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-57 last
To: lonestar
About as fast as I would want him to drive me over a bridge at Chappaquitick.

I heard someplace that Ted and modes of transportation in general, don't go together. Besides the car(s), he's wrecked a boat or two, been in an airplane crash, etc.

The joke, or warning if you prefer, is that if you see Ted get on the same train as you, get off.

41 posted on 04/05/2004 9:36:15 PM PDT by Calvin Locke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: playball0

42 posted on 04/05/2004 9:44:01 PM PDT by happydogdesign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: isthisnickcool
That my friend was very good...
43 posted on 04/05/2004 9:44:58 PM PDT by maxamillion (covey leader to raven.... covey leader to raven.... come in Johnny)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

If Ted Kennedy drove a Volkswagen, he'd be President today

It floats.

The way our body is built, we'd be surprised if it didn't. The sheet of flat steel that goes underneath every Volkswagen keeps out water, as well as dirt and salt and other nasty things that can eat away at the underside of a car. So it's watertight at the bottom. And everybody knows it's easier to shut the door on a Volkswagen after you've rolled down the window a little.

That proves it's practically airtight on top. If it was a boat, we could call it the Water Bug. But it's not a boat, it's a car.

And, like Mary Jo Kopechne, it's only 99 and 44/100 percent pure. So it won't stay afloat forever. Just long enough. Poor Teddy. If he'd been smart enough to buy a Volkswagen, he never would have gotten into hot water.

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 | Home | Cartoons |

 

 

        

44 posted on 04/05/2004 9:46:13 PM PDT by A.A. Cunningham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Paul Atreides
Back, and to the left.
45 posted on 04/05/2004 9:47:30 PM PDT by quantim (Time is not relative to things, things are relative to time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Paul Atreides
Ouch. That must have been after a 5-martini lunch.
46 posted on 04/05/2004 9:57:28 PM PDT by FlyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: playball0
What a joke!!

I dunno. The Swimmer may have his exegesis back-ass-ward, but comparing Bush/Iraq to Nixon/Vietnam is not entirely inapt. After all:

Wrt to Vietnam, Nixon immediately began to turn around the fortunes of a war that Democrats had botched horribly for 5 to 8 years.

Nixon showed incisive strategic thinking, strong resolve, and deft usage of diplomacy. He managed to hurt the North Vietnamese badly even while drastically reducing the number of American troops the 'Rats had been (miss) using. He hard-balled the North Vietnamese and obtained a peace treaty that no one thought was possible and would, in all probability, have secured South Vietnam against the communists. Would have, that is, if a quisling 'Rat congress had not cut off aid to South Vietnam.

All the time Nixon was fighting and negotiating the 'Rats, and not a few Republicans, were screaming at him to settle for much less than he would eventually obtain. Many -- including one John Forbes Kerry -- were wailing that victory, even a partial negotiated victory that preserved our ally and our honor, was impossible, and that we must cut and run (withdraw unilaterally, in exchange only for the Communist promise of releasing POWs, and agree to a "coalition" government in South Vietnam in which only the Communists would be armed).

Throughout all of this, and midst a level of social and political division over the policy in Vietnam that was as great as any the country had experienced since the Civil War, Nixon consistently acted in the interest of the country rather than in his personal interest. For example he kept the negotiations in Paris involving Henry Kissinger, and/or their substance, secret even when revelations could have redounded substantially to his political benefit.

Although, with respect to the nature of the wars in themselves, there are vast differences between Iraq and Vietnam, there are some fairly close parallels with respect to the behavior of the Presidents, Nixon and Bush, and their domestic critics.

Both Nixon and Bush were handed huge stinking messes, all but universally perceived as intractable, by 'Rat predecessors. Both took action requiring a vision and boldness that frightened, angered or befuddled their critics (who were in many cases the authors of previous failed strategies). Both faced (or are facing) critics that undermine their efforts, and sometimes further the interests of our enemies.

Nixon succeeded in so far as achieving an honorable conclusion to an "unwinnable" war. His success was squandered by those who hated him more than they hated our enemies (or in some cases who shared the interests of our enemies). It is only in this last point that the analogy hopefully breaks down.

47 posted on 04/05/2004 10:02:46 PM PDT by Stultis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Common Tator
Good point, BUT... If Nixon had been forced to continue fighting the war (i.e. if the North Vietnamese hadn't caved in negotiations on the force of massive B-52 strikes and sound Republican resolve) his support in the Congress would have been spent. The Congress would have ended the war unilaterlly in "cut and run" fashion by January or February of '74, or by that Summer at the very latest.

An important reminder that the Presidency alone is not enough to preserve our security. The 5th column, in so far as possible, must be expelled from the Congress as well.

Inattention to the midterms, and largely abandoning the down ticket races in '73 (in a self-absorbed quest to better LBJ's margin of victory over Goldwater, as some have charged) was one of Nixon's biggest mistakes. Fortunately it's one that Bush has NOT repeated.

48 posted on 04/05/2004 10:17:22 PM PDT by Stultis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Stultis; Alamo-Girl; amom; Ragtime Cowgirl; Mia T; 68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub; Kathy in Alaska; ...
#48. The Fifth Column which has a number of demoCommiecRAT Congressman and Senators aboard and which runs the demoCommiecRAT party(The Third Way Crowd):

http://www.dsausa.org/


The Enemy Wthin
49 posted on 04/05/2004 10:23:54 PM PDT by Defender2 (Defending Our Bill of Rights, Our Constitution, Our Country and Our Freedom!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Defender2
Thanks for the link!
50 posted on 04/05/2004 10:33:59 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl (Glad to be a monthly contributor to Free Republic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl
Check out their latest bits on trying to Oust President Bush. I think it may prove their complicity with the enemy.
51 posted on 04/05/2004 10:36:05 PM PDT by Defender2 (Defending Our Bill of Rights, Our Constitution, Our Country and Our Freedom!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Brad's Gramma; Grampa Dave
You both might also want to check out the link I posted in #49.
52 posted on 04/05/2004 10:38:09 PM PDT by Defender2 (Defending Our Bill of Rights, Our Constitution, Our Country and Our Freedom!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: playball0
Who else is more qualified to speak on the subject of credibility gaps than the man who killed an innocent woman, refused to call the cops over the matter, and repeatedly lied after the fact.
53 posted on 04/06/2004 3:14:28 AM PDT by jagrmeister (I'm not a conservative. I don't seek to conserve, I seek to reform.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Defender2
Thanks for the tip! Hugs!!!
54 posted on 04/06/2004 8:32:52 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl (Glad to be a monthly contributor to Free Republic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: playball0
Who's willing to bet that the Senate Republicans won't have anything serious to say back to him.
55 posted on 04/06/2004 8:38:20 AM PDT by Blue Scourge (Off I go into the Wild Blue Yonder...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: playball0
Is Kennedy a white house stooge actively campaigning to help Bush or what? Even democrats I speak to are embarassed at Ted's longevity in office. Only the hard-core left compromising less than 30% of the populace finds redemption in Ted. Amazingly Kerry is too stupid to see that TK only hurts his campaign.
56 posted on 04/06/2004 10:00:57 AM PDT by Katya
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Blue Scourge
Unfortunately, that's the way it works. On the opther hand the president can triangulate against Congress saying they spend too much.
57 posted on 04/07/2004 3:12:29 PM PDT by playball0
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-57 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson