Skip to comments.
In the Oval Office:
George Bush talks about "the next attack on America."
WSJ ^
| 27 October 2006
| DANIEL HENNINGER
Posted on 10/27/2006 3:25:56 AM PDT by Aussie Dasher
Somewhere it is written in the Book of Politics that when the race gets tight, the leaders call in the Scribes. It is for this reason that I found myself at LaGuardia Airport Wednesday en route to an afternoon meeting in the Oval Office with President Bush. That would be followed by lunch the next day with the vice president. The airport deserves mention because the very small group of writers who sat with the president was in fact exponentially larger than the number of travelers there who stopped to watch his 10:30 a.m. news conference on the TV monitors.
Two weeks from an election, perhaps their minds are made up. The president's certainly is. "This war is different than the other wars we've been in," Mr. Bush said a few hours after his news conference while sitting beneath a portrait of George Washington. "If we leave, they will follow us here."
Meetings with the president at election time are overtly political, but the remarkable irony here was how little election politics came up in our discussion. Mr. Bush talked expansively about Iraq, the Maliki government, Iran, Syria, North Korea and the broader war on terror. When his own party's infatuation with immigration was raised, Mr. Bush briefly ticked off his own thoughts on immigration policy and swung back to this:
"I'm campaigning like mad, and I'm looking at people in the eye and saying, you better have a government that does everything in its power to protect you from attack. You're right here in the office where I get briefed every morning and I'm telling you it's on my mind, and I can't keep it off my mind. I was affected deeply by the attacks of September the 11th.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
TOPICS: Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: attack; georgewbush; nationaldefense; wot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-53 next last
To: backtothestreets
You'll be voting Republican, then?
21
posted on
10/27/2006 4:52:08 AM PDT
by
Aussie Dasher
(The Great Ronald Reagan & John Paul II - Heaven's Dream Team!)
To: Aussie Dasher
This is the type of article that needs to be seen/read/pounded into the average Americans skull. It's sincere, unapologetic and frightening, all at the same time. Have the American people forgotten about 9/11 enough to actually think that we'll be fine after pulling out of Iraq? ..."they'll follow us here" is the most sobering statement that the President can make. It should be used as the Pubs campaign slogan!!!
22
posted on
10/27/2006 4:59:16 AM PDT
by
albie
To: mariabush
We had three crucial items on our voting ballot in Tenn. If I could have added a fourth it would have been to stay the course in IRAQ!!!! My fourth would have been "Quit holding the military back. Let them do their job, Iraq and elsewhere."
To: backtothestreets
You know something, I agree with President Bush that we are indeed at war. Where I part ways with President Bush and most Republicans is in defining the enemy. While he is insistent the enemies are extremist Muslims, I believe all of Islam is at war with us. And I'm EXTREMELY uncomfortable the way he cozies up to Muslims.
---
It's called divide and conquer. There are many divisions within the Islamic world. The best tactic is to use those divisions to make make sure that Moslems are fighting amongst themselves, and that some of them are on our side.
There are Moslem soldiers and policemen killing terrorists and Al-Qaeda in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. We have Moslem allies in Jordan and the Gulf States, Turkey and Indonesia. These Moslems allies may sometimes be working at cross purposes to us, but that's the problem with allies. It happened in WWI and WWII as well. Look at De Gaylor or the Soviets, for instance. And if you look closely at the history of those times you will find a lot more examples.
Fighting a unified Moslem world would be at least ten times harder that the present war on terror.
But the price of those allies is that President Bush has to make nice with them.
24
posted on
10/27/2006 6:03:23 AM PDT
by
Cheburashka
(World's only Spatula City certified spatula repair and maintenance specialist!!!)
To: Aussie Dasher
You'll be voting Republican, then?
That's my "A" plan. I don't have a "B" plan.
BTW, you've a rock solid Prime Minister in John Howard.
To: Paloma_55
BULLSEYE!!!
Yes, but he has to see it is not radical Muslims alone raising the ruckus. It's all Islam seeking any little thing to rally around and stir Muslim resentment.
To: backtothestreets
Thank you. We intend to keep him in the job for some time yet!
27
posted on
10/27/2006 6:11:42 AM PDT
by
Aussie Dasher
(The Great Ronald Reagan & John Paul II - Heaven's Dream Team!)
To: Aussie Dasher
You'll be voting Republican, then?The alternative is to concede to the RATS.
"None of the above" should be a ballot choice (technically, it is due to the ability to write in, but you know what I mean).
28
posted on
10/27/2006 6:14:26 AM PDT
by
JimRed
("Hey, hey, Teddy K., how many girls did you drown today?" (Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help m)
To: Paloma_55
Here we are in the middle of a WAR, and the selection of one political party over another actually makes a difference in our national security and the direction of the war. Worth repeating.
29
posted on
10/27/2006 6:15:01 AM PDT
by
ladyjane
To: proud_yank
the OLD LIBERAL MEDIA has been very successful in turning the public's mind back to a pre 9/11 mindset. So sad.
30
posted on
10/27/2006 6:20:00 AM PDT
by
Jazzman1
(l)
To: Cheburashka
Fighting a unified Moslem world would be at least ten times harder that the present war on terror.
I'd agree harder, but it is becoming harder already and will become harder yet the longer we stall the inevitable. We can fight them now, or be assured our children and grandchildren will have to face a much stronger and more unified enemy, and quite possibly on our soil.
To: Thermalseeker
We are a military family and I would also agree with you.
32
posted on
10/27/2006 6:20:24 AM PDT
by
Coldwater Creek
(John Gibson is right. " If the Democrats win the terrorist win.")
To: backtothestreets
George Bush warned in September, 2001 that this war would outlast his administration, and go on for decades. Maybe you thought that was just rhetoric. I didn't.
What's disappointing to me is that so many in this country are already tired of the war and want an out. Some of them post on Free Republic. They hope for a quick fix. The only quick fix is our surrender.
I don't normally quote Trotsky, but in this case it fits. "You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you."
33
posted on
10/27/2006 7:42:54 AM PDT
by
Cheburashka
(World's only Spatula City certified spatula repair and maintenance specialist!!!)
To: proud_yank
When securing the borders becomes our government's number one priority, I'll pay attention again.
34
posted on
10/27/2006 7:44:44 AM PDT
by
Wolfie
To: proud_yank
"It is astonishing how many people seem to have forgotten the Sept 11 attacks. Given the possibility of a nuclear attack in an American city, it is simply amazing that this isn't an issue to people.
And when that happens, will Bush and the OBL regret not having secured the borders and will the American people blame them?
It's simply amazing that the borders weren't secured on 9/12.
35
posted on
10/27/2006 10:58:15 AM PDT
by
Kimberly GG
(Tancredo '08 www.firecoalition.com/www.unitedpatriotsofamerica.com)
To: Uncle Vlad
The next thing you know, they'll tell us something really ridiculous like, "The terrorists are planning to hijack airliners and fly them into buildings."
Sheesh, this eeeevil Republican hate and war machine just doesn't stop with the propaganda.
36
posted on
10/27/2006 12:43:16 PM PDT
by
proud_yank
(Socialism - An Answer In Search Of A Question For Over 100 Years)
To: Rome2000
I know. They tell me though if we get a hitlery/obamalama-dingdong ticket in '08 we'll be safe for the next decade though.
37
posted on
10/27/2006 12:45:34 PM PDT
by
proud_yank
(Socialism - An Answer In Search Of A Question For Over 100 Years)
To: Prophet in the wilderness
38
posted on
10/27/2006 12:46:23 PM PDT
by
proud_yank
(Socialism - An Answer In Search Of A Question For Over 100 Years)
To: backtothestreets
"If Democrats gain control of Congress, I've little doubt they will move to end this war."
I don't think the dems have the say on ending the war. They can cut our funding possibly. They can force our hand to redeploy the troops to Okinawa like Murtha wants. But the war can only end when the crazy muzzies stop their plans to attack us.
So all the dems would be doing is prolonging the war and garanteeing that it will be more bloody for ourside.
39
posted on
10/27/2006 1:18:57 PM PDT
by
Hayzo
To: Miss Marple
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-53 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson