Posted on 10/18/2004 9:51:36 AM PDT by Robert Drobot
The winner in yesterday's debate among Senator Schumer, Assemblyman Howard Mills, and Marilyn O'Grady was President Bush.......
© 2004 The New York Sun, One SL, LLC. All rights reserved. Terms of Use
(Excerpt) Read more at nysun.com ...
Things are moving in the right direction, FReepers!!!!
Schumer's a hump in so many many ways, but the guy's a solid citizen when it comes to the War on Terror.
Man, that SMART'S!
I wonder if Kerry digs one LUMP or TEN!
"I voted for the $87 billion to back up our soldiers," Mr. Schumer said. "I'm never going to leave our soldiers high and dry, and I didn't when I voted for the $87 billion."
What a remarkable moment. New York's senior senator is accusing his own party's presidential and vice presidential nominee of voting "to leave our soldiers high and dry."
good post thanks, this neeeds more coverage
I pray that God continues to confuse and scatter America's enemies.
bttp...i have always respected and liked Schumers opinions, doesnt mean i agree.
Schumer remembers standing at that pile of rubble, he remembers the stench of burning bodies, he KNOWS what terrorism means. A lot of New Yorkers have forgotten, Schumer has not.
what's more surprising is that Schumer doesn't have to say anything - he is ahead by 40%.
Yep! My jaw dropped when I read that statement.
Schumer doesn't want to get blown out in a sweep.
New York must be a hell of a lot closer than the media is letting on.
Good post.
The most dangerous place in America is between UpChuck Schumer and a TV camera.
Still, the guy knows that without a safe and secure America, he can't expropriate my money to give to the lazy.
This became clear when Mr. Schumer, a Democrat, took on his two colleagues in the world's greatest deliberative body, John Kerry and John Edwards, who are his party's nominees for president and vice president. Mr. Schumer did not attack them by name, but anyone who has been even casually following the presidential race knows that Messrs. Kerry and Edwards both voted for the war in Iraq but against $87 billion to support the troops there. Mr. Schumer voted for the war and for the $87 billion. "I voted for the $87 billion to back up our soldiers," Mr. Schumer said. "I'm never going to leave our soldiers high and dry, and I didn't when I voted for the $87 billion."
What a remarkable moment. New York's senior senator is accusing his own party's presidential and vice presidential nominee of voting "to leave our soldiers high and dry."
This would be good - Bush is giving speech in New Jersey today - I wish he would do some "name dropping" like Kerry likes to do.
Schumer doesn't want to get blown out in a sweep.
Schumer has about as much chance of losing his race as Nader has of winning his.
Nonetheless, an ad hoc ally is better than no ally at all.
Does his stated support for Bush mean anything in this context?
"the senior Democrat from New York pronounced himself in "more or less complete agreement with President Bush."
For once, Chuck Shumer makes some sense. Send him down to florica to stump for Bush. Even a staunch Democrat like Schumer can see clearly that Kerry does not "support the troops." I'm sure it is also clear to him that Edwards is unambiguously unqualifed to step in as president if need be. Edwards is an embarrasment to Dems.
Schumer is a much savvier politician than either Kerry or Edwards. Plus he knows that those two losers will be roadkill in about 15 days.
Schumer is only solid about terrorism because his constituents took the biggest hit on 9/11. He, like all rodents, is smart enought to know where his bread is buttered and to not crap in his nest. On the rest of the political topics he can lie with impunity.
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.