CRIMINALS AND TRAITORS ALL.
Posted on 11/13/2005 10:49:10 AM PST by wagglebee
One of the centerpieces of President Bush's counter-offensive against his Iraq war critics will be a Republican National Committee commercial focusing on a speech given by former President Bill Clinton.
U.S. News & World Report says the RNC ad will spotlight Clinton's Feb. 17, 1998 speech on Iraq, where the former prez "guaranteed" that Saddam Hussein would use his weapons of mass destruction.
"Let's imagine the future," Clinton said seven years ago. "What if [Saddam] fails to comply [with U.N. sanctions], and we fail to act, or we take some ambiguous third route which gives him yet more opportunities to develop this program of weapons of mass destruction and continue to press for the release of the sanctions and continue to ignore the solemn commitments that he made?"
Clinton warned: "He will conclude that the international community has lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction.
"And some day, some way, I guarantee you, he'll use the arsenal."
Other soundbytes from Democratic flip-floppers will feature WMD warnings from Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi.
The truth that does not tarnish with time, the truth that one can wait to reveal after your oppononents have spun their last spin, told their final lies...written their last self serving biography, hired the services of the ENEMEDIA, kissed the cheap whores called journalists on the backside, danced with the devil himself for the sake of an extra buck and a little fleeting notoriety; that's when you bring out your best friend, the love of your life, the servant that never tires and shines like a beacon to illuminate the way ahead;
TRUTH!
Like a good mother, she's always there, she doesn't change. And she has no agenda.
TRUTH IS LIKE LOVE. IT CANNOT BE PACKAGED BUT IT'S THE MOST POWERFUL WEAPON ON EARTH.
His fear of looking STUPID stops him from fighting until his back is against the wall.
I am amazed how many on this thread still DON'T GET IT!
AT LONG LAST!
"I hope it's not too little too late." ~ GBA
Rasmussen Reports was the nation's most accurate polling firm during the 2004 Presidential election and the only one to project both Bush and Kerry's vote total within half a percentage point of the actual outcome.
Sunday November 13, 2005
Rasmussen Poll: Bush Job Approval - 49% 'Likely Voters', 46% 'National Adults'
Rasmussen Reports ^ | November 13, 2005 | Scott Rasmussen
Posted on 11/13/2005 11:21:07 AM EST by new yorker 77
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1521247/posts
On Election Day, the President's Job Approval was at 52%. During all of 2004, the President's Job Approval ranged from a high of 57% in early January to a low of 40% on October 28 [ 7 days before the election ]. The President's highest rating of 2005 was 54% on February 4.
Midterm Election Reality: 64% of 'National Adults' Will Not Vote in 2006
United States Elections Project ^ | September 19, 2005
Posted on 09/19/2005 8:50:40 PM EDT by new yorker 77
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1487645/posts
2002 Midterm Election Results
VAP(Voting Age Population): 215,139,087
Total Votes Cast: 80,295,249
VAP Turnout 2002: 36.4%
Link: http://elections.gmu.edu/VAP_VEP.htm
1998 Midterm Election Results
VAP(Voting Age Population): 205,891,406
Total Votes Cast: 74,825,832
VAP Turnout 1998: 35.2%
Link: http://elections.gmu.edu/1998_voting_age_population.htm
(Excerpt) Read more at elections.gmu.edu ...
So every time you see a garbage peice of MSM filler, remember that statistics trump Fake Polls that oversample Democrats, undersample Republicans and poll 'national adults' instead of 'likely voters'.
Democrats win the approval of non-voters.
Their Loser status is well intact.
For every 100 adults who are of voting age, only 36 of them will vote in 2006.
Conservatives know this. This is one of many reasons why we win elections regularly.
To the libs: While you enjoy your off-year..MSM polls, I will enjoy another election victory in 2006.
You have no idea how delighted I am to hear this. This is EXACTLY what I have been endorsing for over a year now.
BUSH: Some Democrats and anti-war critics are now claiming we manipulated the intelligence and misled the American people about why we went to war.
These critics are fully aware that a bipartisan Senate investigation found no evidence of political pressure to change the intelligence community's judgments related to Iraq's weapons programs.
They also know that intelligence agencies from around the world agreed with our assessment of Saddam Hussein.
They know the United Nations passed more than a dozen resolutions, citing his development and possession of weapons of mass destruction.
Many of these critics supported my opponent during the last election, who explained his position to support the resolution in the Congress this way: "When I vote to give the president of the United States the authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein, it is because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a threat and a grave threat to our security."
That's why more than 100 Democrats in the House and the Senate, who had access to the same intelligence, voted to support removing Saddam Hussein from power.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1520360/posts
A LIE IS HALFWAY ROUND THE WORLD BEFORE TRUTH GETS ITS PANTS ON, THAT'S WHY! see tagline.
Karl never left. He's just been working on these TV ads, and waiting for the right time to launch these ads.
CRIMINALS AND TRAITORS ALL.
No. We want the voters to understand that if Bush was lying, so was Clinton. That will shut up at least some of the less radical leftists.
You will be SO happy to read this.
Can you see the big grin on my face :0)
I'm giddy with joy :-)
If the lies are not countered, and the public believes them, then Darwin's Law kicks in.
I tell them one time, not because I believe they are capable of learning, but because when they don't, and the Universe crushes them to dust, I know I at least tried.
;-)
|
This legacy confab is in and of itself proof certain of clinton's deeply flawed character, and a demonstration in real time of the way in which the clinton years were about a legacy that was incidentally a presidency. Madeleine Albright captured the essence of this dysfunctional presidency best when she explained why clinton couldn't go after bin Laden. According to Richard Miniter, the Albright revelation occurred at the cabinet meeting that would decide the disposition of the USS Cole bombing by al Qaeda [that is to say, that would decide to do what it had always done when a "bimbo" was not spilling the beans on the clintons: Nothing]. Only Clarke wanted to retaliate militarily for this unambiguous act of war. Albright explained that a [sham] Mideast accord would yield [if not peace for the principals, surely] a Nobel Peace Prize for clinton. Kill or capture bin Laden and clinton could kiss the accord and the Peace Prize good-bye. If clinton liberalism, smallness, cowardice, corruption, perfidy--and, to borrow a phrase from Andrew Cuomo, clinton cluelessness--played a part, it was, in the end, the Nobel Peace Prize that produced the puerile pertinacity that enabled the clintons to shrug off terrorism's global danger. |
Sorry, folks.
I know 'rope a dope' is a W.H. strategy often employed, to great effect. But not everything can be chalked up to mythology of a 'rope a dope'. Just as Miers was not some grand strategy as some people tried to spin afterwards, allowing his base to begin to fall out from under him is not part of any wise 'rope a dope' scenario. The President isn't stupid. Neither is Rove, neither are his advisors. Only a fool would think it's a good thing to allow pressure to build to a point where your base is withholding support or in open revolt, and they aren't fools.
I will agree to a point they wanted to wait to use the Dems' words against them. But I don't think the timing now was part of the strategy. That was forced by the demands of the base that understood the President needed to fight back, not only for himself but for us & troops and the WOT itself to be success. Luckily for the administration this base, overall, isn't looney tunes like the Dems' base. We're correct on Miers, and we're correct on more communication and strong repudiation of the lies of the Left.
Sounds like a must see commercial and I'm eagerly anticipating it. Looking forard to another speech, hopefully soon? And more to come. I much prefer offense over defense any day.
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.