Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Attacking Liberalism Part I-The lefts hypocrisy over Bush and pre-9/11 america
Self | 5-24-02 | Matt Festa

Posted on 05/24/2002 5:19:25 PM PDT by Festa

This is part I of a series of articles I am writing on liberalism

What did Bush Know?

Part I in a series of scathing articles on phony liberalism and the Democratic Party

How dare President Bush not take action! The President Knew! President Bush: Tell us what you know! These are the headlines that have plagued newspapers the past week. Any reasonable person would want a full-scale independent investigation as to what this president knew and what he did about it. This is the man, remember, that is prosecuting the war on terrorism upon which the fate of our free nation depends. To that I say, “phhhh”.

Lets start from the beginning. The source of this criticism is a memo given the president in person on August 6th. That memo contained the following information. “There is movement among Al-Queda…possible hijacking in the fall…hostages may be motive.” This is the source of all the criticism launched against President Bush.

Of course, the media and its democratic allies distorted the facts. This “general warning” had been around for nearly 2 years. President Clinton was fully aware that Al Queda was on the move yet he did nothing. That is why when Hillary Clinton went before the senate and demanded that an investigation be undertaken she made a fool of herself. Hillary, as the president dutifully noted, this memo has been around for 36 months. YOU KNEW ABOUT IT! Your husband knew about it. Congress knew about it.

However, many republicans in congress are missing the most simplistic defense against this political a-bomb. Even if President Bush knew exactly what Osama Bin Laden was up to, where he was going to attack, and when he was going to, the democrats would have done everything in their power to prevent Bush from doing ANYTHING.

Why? The answer is quite simple. Look at what the democrats have done since 9/11. It is quite apparent that Muslim terrorists are planning another attack on the United States. However, for the past 9 months the democrats have attempted to stall each and every effort needed to prevent this attack from happening. Democrats fire back and say that they federalized airport security. Great, that’s fantastic. But these same democrats refuse to allow the security guards to profile Arab’s for fear of infringement on civil liberties. If they win this battle, then the cost to search potential terrorist victims would be astronomical and the possibility of another terrorist attack will only increase.

The senate judiciary chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) demanded, “It is imperative that the president tell America what was known in advance and what was done in advance to prevent it.” Hypocrite. This is the same Patrick Leahy who dragged Attorney General John Ashcroft before the senate and told him he was “ very angry.” Leahy was "very angry” not because Ashcroft was failing to do enough to prevent the next terrorist attack. Just the opposite: Ashcroft was doing too much, thereby threatening the civil liberties of Arabs.

Bill Clinton was aware of these threats for the last 36 months of his presidency. According to political aide Dick Morris, it was recommended that Clinton do the following: require photo identification for all air passengers, x-ray all luggage, hand inspect all carry on luggage, and federalize airport security. He chose to do nothing. Alas, liberals on the hill whined about civil liberties and civil rights encroachment.

So, to get back to my point, Bush would have been able to do nothing to prevent the attacks. Democrats on hill would have cried so loudly about the fascist policies of the Bush administration that Bush would have had to think twice about doing anything for fear of congressional investigations, partisan attacks, and public disapproval. The democrats are so hypocritical on this issue that one must ask the question, “How in the world does anyone with a rational mind vote for a democrat.” The answers to that are coming in the following essays.

TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Philosophy; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: hayek; liberalism; socialism

1 posted on 05/24/2002 5:19:26 PM PDT by Festa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Festa
Folks, come on, lets get serious for a second. The crime of the century wasn't 8 years of Clinton covering up terrorism every way possible. No, the death of 2,800 civilians and the complete destruction of thousands of offices, and everything they contained. No, it was the breaking of one lock of a Democratic office door, and a President covering up for a few corrupt political operatives. Come on folks, lets keep are priorities in order. If I recall, didn't a janitor jump to his death from the Watergate hotel when he realized he forgot to fix the lock?

Now repeat after me American sheeple. "What did he know and when did he know it."

2 posted on 05/24/2002 5:32:15 PM PDT by Russell Scott
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Festa
3 posted on 05/24/2002 6:09:30 PM PDT by lonestar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Russell Scott
Nixon was sure his emenies: the media, Ivy-league pencil-necks, the unions, Kennedy justice department were up to no good. HE WAS RIGHT
4 posted on 05/27/2002 10:28:04 AM PDT by ffusco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson