Democrats Are Still Weak on Security by Karl Rove

The Wall Street Journal ^ | March 21, 2008 | Karl Rove

[Clairity]

For a party whose presidential candidates pledge they'll remove U.S. troops from Iraq immediately upon taking office -- without regard to conditions on the ground or the consequences to America's security -- a late February Gallup Poll was bad news. The Obama/Clinton vow to pull out of Iraq immediately appears to be the position of less than one-fifth of the voters.

Nearly two out of every three Americans surveyed (65%) believe "the United States has an obligation to establish a reasonable level of stability and security in Iraq before withdrawing all of its troops." The reason is self-interest. Almost the same number of Americans (63%) believe al Qaeda "would be more likely to use Iraq as a base for its terrorist operations" if the U.S. withdraws.

There are more problems for Democrats on national security. Led by Ms. Pelosi, House Democrats are digging their party into even deeper difficulty by holding up the bipartisan Senate Protect American Act reauthorization. The reason? House Democrats want personal injury lawyers to be able to sue telecommunications companies for having the audacity to cooperate with the government in monitoring terrorist communications after 9/11.

[Clairity]

Republicans need to get the word out to the voters and not let the Democrats lie without challenging them.

[SandRat]

The Dems can't even run their own Party, how do expect us to believe that they can run the country.

[Canedawg]

“House Democrats want personal injury lawyers to be able to sue telecommunications companies for having the audacity to cooperate with the government in monitoring terrorist communications after 9/11.”

It’s late and I dont have the energy to type a detailed response now.

But this is beyond bizarre, and epitomizes everything that is bass ackwards about the Dims.

[Canedawg]

“House Democrats want personal injury lawyers to be able to sue telecommunications companies for having the audacity to cooperate with the government in monitoring terrorist communications after 9/11.”

It’s late and I dont have the energy to type a detailed response now.

But this is beyond bizarre, and epitomizes everything that is bass ackwards about the Dims.

[woofie]

Here is what the blonde super spy’s ambassador husband Joe Wilson has to say about Obama’s foreign policy experience:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joe-wilson/obamas-shallow-credentia_b_92586.html

[padre35]

The dhimmis are soft on even minimal levels of security, as any security excludes, and of course it is better to have Al Quida in your midst then exclude anyone as “risky” whether they are or not.

Fellow FReepers, I miss the Rove, you magnificent Bastard photochops, could some kind fellow FReeper please help a brother out and post one?

[BreezyDog]

I saw the word “I” in the piece too much so I didn’t read it...

[woofie]

The responses are hillarious

[BreezyDog]

Here you go:

[BreezyDog]

Alright I’ll Go back. But I don’t like taking more than 3 showers in a day...

[woofie]

you could send an underling

[KoRn]

The dems were also weak on national security in 2006 as well. The American people by and large just don’t care. We almost deserve to have an entire city nuked, but even then at least 25% of our people would want to respond with a peace march.....

[samtheman]

Democrats Are Still Weak on Security

And blocked toilets still overflow.

What else is new?