Posted on 07/29/2004 8:35:15 AM PDT by churchillbuff
Here's from Andrew Sullivan's blog this morning (in which he calls himself a "pro-war neocon" - go figure):
Edwards gave an immensely tough, hawkish pro-war speech. They really are pulling a Kennedy in 1960. One passage stood out, resplendent:
""We will lead strong alliances. We will safeguard and secure our weapons of mass destruction. We will strengthen our homeland security, protect our ports, protect our chemical plants, and support our firefighters, police officers, EMTs. We will always... We will always use our military might to keep the American people safe. And we, John and I, we will have one clear unmistakable message for Al Qaida and these terrorists: You cannot run. You cannot hide. We will destroy you.""
(By way of comparison, here's what yours truly, a pro-war neocon, proposed Kerry should say last Sunday night: To the murderers of al Qaeda, let me say this. Do not even begin to interpret a Democratic victory as some sign that we will acquiesce to your murderous intent and nihilist politics. In the war against Jihadism, there is no Democrat or Republican. There is simply American. We will unite to defeat you and to secure our country.)
But there was more. Edwards committed his party to victory in Iraq:
""With a new president who strengthens and leads our alliances, we can get NATO to help secure Iraq. We can ensure that Iraq's neighbors, like Syria and Iran, don't stand in the way of a democratic Iraq. We can help Iraq's economy by getting other countries to forgive their enormous debt and participate in the reconstruction. We can do this for the Iraqi people. We can do it for our own soldiers. And we will get this done right. A new president will bring the world to our side, and with it a stable Iraq, a real chance for freedom and peace in the Middle East, including a safe and secure Israel. Howard Dean may spin that as a way to bring troops home. But Edwards also pledged more troops and more defense spending as a whole. I fail to see how Joe Lieberman could quibble with much that was in Edwards' address.""
But then we won't be able to kick him around while he enjoys it.
This guy is so far NOT a Churchill it is ridiculous. He should be forced to drop that name and truthfully call himself " Chamberlainbuff."
Her masochism is in such an extreme state,that she almost makes Terry Kerry look sane.
But we've taken to calling churchy "NEVILE". :-)
Who is Neville's "man"? Howard Dean?
Pat Buchanan,I think...but I could be wrong.It sure isn't President Buszh.
Buchanan, Dean not much difference outside of the former not yelling as incoherently as the latter.
True,true... LOL
I have heard that Kerry may have served in Vietnam. Does anyone know if Edwards has any military service record? Just wondering. There is a not-so-subtle line of argument from Michael Moore and others on the dem side that if you did not serve, and yet support military action (apparently of any kind), you are a chicken hawk. Does Edwards not fit this description?
The Democrats will claim President Bush has no "wisdom". Oddly enough, the most unwise President Clinton first brought this up.
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.