Cheney's 'Soft on Terror' Charge Has Sting of Truth

Newsmax.com ^ | 9-8-2004 | unknown

[The G Man]

It's pretty much a given that a Kerry Administration would be indecisive and inconsistant, traits that have really scared the al Qaeda types in the past.

[BenLurkin]

[Piquaboy]

The vice president was just calling a spade a spade. Again, truth hurts!

[outlawcam]

That has got to be the funniest darned picture...

[Huck]

They are totally distorting what Cheney said. The lib media and dems all quote this part:

"It's absolutely essential that eight weeks from today, on Nov. 2, we make the right choice, because if we make the wrong choice then the danger is that we'll get hit again and we'll be hit in a way that will be devastating from the standpoint of the United States,"

but they cut off the thought right there, avoiding this part--the key thought Cheney is making:

and that we'll fall back into the pre-9/11 mind set if you will, that in fact these terrorist attacks are just criminal acts, and that we're not really at war. I think that would be a terrible mistake for us. We have to understand it is a war. It's different than anything we've ever fought before..."

Cheney wasn't saying vote for Kerry and we'll get attacked. He's saying vote for Kerry and the DANGER is that we'll get hit again and RESPOND WEAKLY, as we did in the past. It's dead on. No one would say vote for this person and we'll get attacked. That's just idiotic.

Source: GWB website transcript

[sheik yerbouty]

Liberals always go to their "selective indignation" mode when confronted with the truth...

[belchermadness]

The picture(s) posted of Kerry coming out of the hole reminds me of Woody Allen's movie. However, like Gullivar's Travels, the picture could be identified as a Massachusettes
Senator taking an interest in the NASA space program.

Hmmmm!!!!

Is he for real or is he memorex?

[libertyhoundusnr]

I think if Cheney would have been more sensitive and stated words to the effect of "The T's would be using our children for target practice, like when Clinton was in office", he would have been met with a kinder gentler response from the 'craps

[libertyhoundusnr]

I think if Cheney would have been more sensitive and stated words to the effect of "The T's would be using our children for target practice, like when Clinton was in office", he would have been met with a kinder gentler response from the 'craps

[wizr]

John Kerry will not pass the the very first litmus test.

1. Take a stand.
2. Put his hand on the Bible.
3. Swear to serve America, and defend it from all attacks, foreign and domestic.

[Redmen4ever]

Remember, according to liberals, it is o.k. for Kerry to try to use the death of the 1,000th soldier in Kuwait for political advantage, but not for Bush and Cheney to "politicalize" the war.

[familyofman]

"then the danger is that we'll be hit again [by terrorists] and we'll be hit in a way that is devastating."

Okay Mr. VP, what will/would it mean if there is an attack (hit again) before 11/2/04? There is a danger in saying an attack could/might happen if your opponent is elected. Hopefully there will be no more attacks, but the possibility exists (why else would we be at code orange).

[rabidralph]

Also, I don't know if it's a coincidence, but a couple of times when we've gotten a new administration in place, someone in the world challenges us soon after the inauguration. Recent examples include the first attack on WTC in early 1993 and the chinese fighter jet crashing into our EP-130 and the resulting hostage crisis in April 2001 and of course, 9/11. Idiots around the world seem to enjoy probing new administrations to gauge their response to crises. So VP Cheney's statement is not hyperbole and if the shoe fits, Jean-Fraud, wear it.

[Huck]

How dare you attack the dems patriotism!

[Huck]

See my post #7. Cheney wasn't saying what people think he was saying.

[blaquebyrd]

"Okay Mr. VP, what will/would it mean if there is an attack (hit again) before 11/2/04? There is a danger in saying an attack could/might happen if your opponent is elected. Hopefully there will be no more attacks, but the possibility exists (why else would we be at code orange)."

How he can say this with a straight face while our borders are just as porous (if not more so) than on 9/10/01 is beyond me. This could come back to bite him Big Time.

[maggief]

http://www.turkishpress.com/turkishpress/news.asp?ID=26565

Albright Calls Cheney Charge On Terror "irresponsible"
AFP: 9/8/2004

[cousair]

The truth is what it is and the Vice President has it exactly right...With the soft more sensitive treatment Kerry would give terror and assessment of what happened in Russia over the weekend, Kerry would be at the UN door the next morning whining and begging for someone to turn off these threats. He committed TREASON in my book when in his own words from his own mouth called two and a half million Vietnam brave men and women war crimminals. You don't have to go any farther than that. Fox gave his WHOLE speech on the so called morning news this a.m. with the DNC cleanup crew writings. My television was OFF OFF OFF! I am sure the revamp at the Kerry camp is in full panic mode at this point because they told America after their convention...the election is Kerry's!! and they found out differently when the GOP brought out some of their big guns and set the story straight. McCain, Rudy, Arnie Zell, Dick and W told us what Kerry stands for, the new world order at the UN, and socialism they intend to install if they win. We have one main agenda...and that is the security of our country and people. The rest will follow in good order. Take a hard look at Russia today ... terrorism isn't over, and they know it. You don't appease and gain. President Bush understands this....Kerry isn't even on the same page.