I suppose it is a false, misleading, and fiercely unpatriotic charge, no?
Shoot it down, Ladies and Gentleman. Make me feel stupid.
You do a good enough job of that yourself
So, yes, I'd say it's misleading and false.
It's sad that you are rooting for the terrorists to escape because of your hatred for our President. Shame on you and those of your ilk.
The liberal spin is that he wants him captured by the election to simplyget votes. A conservative spin is that he wants him before the election because he knows that if a democrat is elected the war on terror will stop and we will never again capture another terrorist.
Label is required: you are stupid.
Unnamed Pakistani intel sources, with the New Republic as the source of this expose?
LOL - the shadowy, spooky left will believe anything w/out corroboration these days.
The New Republic?
Puh-leeze, and even if Bush wants to catch bin Laden in July, who cares? At least he'd be caught. I can only assume that you would prefer he remain at large for your POLITICAL benefit.
You are just as bad as this sketchy article paints Bush as being.
Should we not try to nab bin Laden?
If we have a chance to get him, shouldn't we?
Or should we sit and wait and hope your boys Kerry and Edwards will file a lawsuit, and that'll do the trick?
Just being liberal should make you feel stupid.
I'll believe it when there's a lick of proof.
The title doesn't seem to fit the text.
I agree...Its a terrible thing to get a bad guy, especially so close to an election
Elections are one way we hold presidents accountable. Presumably the American people would like to see Bin Laden captured. If the election in November provides GWB with a self-interested motive for capturing him, as if capturing him at any time wouldn't be in GWB's self-interest, then so be it. To me that's further evidence that much of Mr. Madison's efforts way back when were not in vain.
This is symptomatic of the general lack of accountability among liberals. Here, Bush apparently demands action by our ally, and he gives a timetable. He may also have said "as soon as possible". In any event, we have a measurable criterion.
As anyone who observes the UN knows, no such accountability accompanies any of their "edicts". That allows the organization to look tough while relieving them of any obligation to act.
This is part of the liberal MO. I applaud the administration for placing a timetable on the capture of terfrorists in their own country.
It's now or never, gang. Kerry & Company won't lift a finger to go after Bin Laden; he'll be too busy building bridges with the UN and giving them more of our money to squander, while kissing up to France and Germany.
Does "get lost" count as an answer?
Trying to kill or capture Ayman Al Zawahiri as soon as possible translates to "before November". Simple enough for you?
I'm not convinced that the Bush administration's best course of action is to take out an insurance policy to ensure the public's confidence.
Jag
Correct headline:
PAKISTAN FOR BUSH.
July Surprise?
by John B. Judis, Spencer Ackerman & Massoud Ansari
Interesting that one of the only named sources is an ISI Lt. General, considering that the ISI is notorious for it's Al-Qaida sympathies and is probably behind the assasination attempts on Musharaff.
We're interested in why people like you would rather fight in the streets of your hometown than Iraq or Afghanistan.
From the article:
"This public pressure would be appropriate, even laudable, had it not been accompanied by an unseemly private insistence that the Pakistanis deliver these high-value targets (HVTs) before Americans go to the polls in November."
Hiram Buck, let me put it to you this way: do you have some problem with the capture of HVTs sooner rather than later? Why is it that Liberals, such as yourself, WANT it to take longer for HVTs to be killed or captured? Why is it that Liberals, such as yourself, WANT more and more Americans to die -- at least up until November 2nd? Is it, perhaps, because you want to use this as a political stick with which to beat the President of the United States? It is BECAUSE you Liberals ARE making a political issue out of this that the President feels he has to pressure to get some result not just sooner, but even BEFORE the election (if possible). Is there something WRONG with capturing Osama in July, August, September, or October ... rather than in Mid November or December????? Oh, yes ... from your perspective there WOULD be something wrong with it ... it would help to ensure the President of the United States RE-election.
I think it is a GOOD thing that President Bush is pushing to capture HVTs sooner rather than later. What I am amazed by is the seeming implication that you DON'T agree. You would rather -- for POLITICAL REASONS -- let the HVTs run free until AFTER November 2nd, no matter what kinds of death and destruction result. You disgust me.