Democrats Target Wolfowitz on Iraq Crisis

Associated Press ^ | May 17, 2004 | Ken Guggenheim

[kcvl]

The Democrats didn't succeed in destroying Rumsfeld so now they are going to try with Wolfowitz. To have Hillary Rodham Clinton call anyone a liar is a joke. I am sick of these people!

[Aquamarine]

Looks like it's Wolfiwitz's turn in the barrel this week. The dems are so obvious.

[jwalburg]

Well, targeting Rumsfeld didn't work. We'll try the next step down and see if that will work. Like gnawing Rats, chewing away on whatever is chewable, trying to break down as much of the administration, military and defense of country as possible for political advantage.

[dead]

It would be nice if, just once, Democrats targeted the foreign enemies of our nation... but they shoot back.

[sgtbono2002]

Who died and left Levin the arbiter of the way we should go?

[Americanwolf]

your right and if our forgein enemys shoot back... with the likes of John Kerry at the helm, we see how much of a stomach they have for a fight.

[KellyAdmirer]

Condi Rice was the designated target for a while but her testimony ended that. Then, Cheney was the designated target for a while, but that attack fizzled out. Rumsfeld came next, but he has survived. Now it is Wolfowitz. I think Colin Powell is coming into the liberals' cross-hairs, too, and he won't be the last.

They really are obvious, these liberals, and funny in how they keep trying the same failed strategy of personal destruction. I find the strategy oddly reminiscent of what Al Quaeda is doing by trying to pick off our allies in Iraq, here the liberals are trying to pick off President Bush's colleagues.

[LS]

Condi, Swing and a miss, strike one.

Rummy, Swing and amiss, strike two.

Here comes strike three.

[samadams2000]

To be fair is he is guilty..of not having us steamroll the terrorists once we won the war in two weeks. Politics either tied our hands or we once again became too "compasionate" or complacent. Now the libs have the foot in the door and..BINGO..we lose another war.

[SkyPilot]

But surveys have shown that Iraqis have mixed opinions about the war, and U.S. prestige among Arabs in general has been especially hurt by the prison abuse scandal.

1. The majority of Iraqis support the US and freedom---and the Democrats know it.

2. The "prison abuse scandal" has been shamelessly demagogued by the media and Democrats---and both guilty parties know that too.

[dufekin]

If Hillary Rodham Clinton were to call herself a liar, then she would have ceased to be a liar!

Reminds me of an old joke, with no prejudice to the residents, governments, or cultures of the cities that I have chosen:

IF:
(1) People from Arlington always tell the truth;
(2) People from Washington always lie;
(3) You met a person on the pedestrian bridge between Arlington and Washington;
(4) You have established that this person is from either Arlington or Washington;
(5) You are able to ask this person only one question; and
(6) The person must respond with a simple answer, either "yes" or "no,"

THEN what one question will you ask to definitively establish the city in which the person resides?

Think about it.

[Use It Or Lose It]

A short clip on the news of Joe (Don't touch my hair) Biden giving his two cents' worth on what to do with Abu Ghraib was sickening. This VP wannabe is everywhere, audtioning for the Number 2 spot on the Kerry ticket. What a headline grabber.

Duncan Hunter, appearing on C-SPAN this morning was livid because the top three generals who are conducting the war in Iraq have been summoned by the Armed Services Committee to testify tomorrow. Does anyone think the hearing will be about money? Hardly. Why are these men being called back from their appointed duty to endure harangues and harassment from the likes of Kennedy and Klinton? Don't they have better things to do?

What nasty little "V" word has been tossed around the last few months by the RATS? It's the same little word that Komrade Kerry uses as his trump card. It's also the same word that is associated with failure, disdain for our troops and turning tail. Vietnam. Isn't it ironic that those who swear support for our troops are now using the same tactics (second guessing, micromanagement by politicians, hand wringing, extreme opposition) as were used thirty years ago? Coincidence?

[Watery Tart]

Wolfowitz is a demonic figure to the anti-war types for little reason other than that his name begins with a big scary animal and ends Jewishly.

Mark Steyn, Telegraph Opinion Page, 12/30/2003.

[LS]

Well, I totally disagree with that. We haven't "lost" anything. There were, and are, BIG limits to what we can accomplish. Our military, as good as it is, is pretty much stretched right now. Anything short of a national draft (a disaster, politically) would be insufficient to open up new wars in Syria and Iran.

Moreover, this is a long haul. The occupation of Germany and Japan took five years, and while not as violent, were every bit as difficult with the different parties. People actually questioned whether or not Germany was "capable" of democracy. Likewise, it took TWO YEARS and 70,000 troops to quell the uprising in the Philippines after the Sp. Am. War. In fact, I would argue that the whole "won the war in two weeks" was an illusion of Saddam's strategy, which was precisely a guerilla war in which he gambled that he could hide out and escape long enough to return to power.

We still win, but it won't be as satisfying and convincing as a knock out. Few wars really are. Rather in five years Iraq will be reasonably peaceful and reasonably stable and will be a solid base for fighting still other terrorism in the region.

[rogue yam]

Wolfowitz is a demonic figure to the anti-war types for little reason other than that his name begins with a big scary animal and ends Jewishly.

Mark Steyn, Telegraph Opinion Page, 12/30/2003.

LOL! Thanks for posting that. I missed it before. Steyn does it again!

[Watery Tart]

Yep, it's a keeper! Link is here if you missed the original article. ;o)

[Petronski]

There's at least a dozen Freepers who can't stand Wolfowitz or his 'kind.'

[AntiGuv]

OK, I give up. What's the answer?

[rogue yam]

"If I went to your town and asked someone there whether folks there told the truth, would they say yes?"

If the answer is "yes" the guy is from the truth-telling town. In both cases the person in the town would say "yes" if asked the question. But a person from the lie-telling town if asked what his townsperson would say would lie and say "no." I think.