Skip to comments.
Bush Doubts Iraq Will Meet Deadline (and indirectly slams Daschle)
AP via Excite News ^
| 9/13/02
| AP
Posted on 09/13/2002 6:13:15 AM PDT by frmrda
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 121-130 next last
To: PhiKapMom
Heh! You think the Democrats are flailing wildly now...
Just think if they do continue with delay and the Administration either forces a vote over the head of their leadership or goes in without them -- two circumstances where the Democrats can take no credit at all for ridding the world of Sadaam's regime.
The Democrats will look crazier than wasps when their nest is under attack.
To: CIB-173RDABN
Lott said it best (he finally got some backbone)...
Senate Minority Leader Trent Lott, Mississippi Republican, said Democrats are still searching for an election issue as the opposition party. "When you don't have anything substantive to talk about, you start talking about process or how you need more information," Mr. Lott said. "That's what's happening here. Senators that are grouchy that they're not getting enough information ... they can't complain about the war on terror, they can't complain about the economy because the economy appears to be improving. And so what do they have to complain about? 'Oh, gee, I need more information.'"Source
At the end of that article:
Mr. Kyl dismissed complaints that lawmakers were not being briefed adequately on the war, noting that Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld would conduct another briefing for the Senate today. "It's not hard to be briefed by the administration," Mr. Kyl said. "Certainly, the majority leader has access to a lot more material than I do. Except for the specifics of operations ... that information is available to us by picking up the telephone."
Soooooo true.
To: ravingnutter
We need to call a spade a spade. The only thing protecting Iraq's Weapons of Mass Murder programs is the DemonCrap Party. Their stopping a vote to authorize the use of force on Iraq keeps these programs (building nukes to vaporize American cities) running unimpeded.
63
posted on
09/13/2002 7:55:01 AM PDT
by
tomahawk
To: BOBTHENAILER; PhiKapMom
precipitacely = precipitously
thinking before posting helps
To: Stultis
Bad as Clintoon was, I still think Jimmuh edges him out as our worst modern President.
Oh, I don't know about that... maybe it's apples and oranges. Jimma was bad but Clinton is EVIL! And that witch of a wife too. At least Jimmah belived in God. I'm very contented with the political landscape right now for the following reasons:
1) We will have a referendum on this war on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November. It really doesn't matter whether the congress votes on it before that or not. Possibly better that they don't because I think the pipple are ready to stack the deck and send congress to battle stations if you know what I mean and I think you do.
2) President George W. Bush knows that some things are too important to be decided by referendum. Therefore, however the political poker here at home turns out (and I have full faith in our leader at stud poker), there WILL be regime change in Baghdad before April showers bring May flowers.
65
posted on
09/13/2002 7:58:45 AM PDT
by
johnb838
To: Scott from the Left Coast
You are so right! Daschle/clinton DemocRATs are putting themselves up a creek without a paddle if they keep this up.
I always use daschle/clinton because I don't believe he makes a move without ms. clinton telling him what to do. It shows up everytime they have a key vote -- she is right down in front along with daschle and nodding her head it seems how to vote.
To: twyn1
Funny.
67
posted on
09/13/2002 8:03:40 AM PDT
by
HeadOn
To: BOBTHENAILER
Sometimes I read what I post 2 or 3 times and just after I hit the posting button I catch something -- too late! Lost track of the number of times that has happened!
To: PhiKapMom
Just want to say, that out in the car awhile ago, I heard this clip during the news.
So glad it's getting more coverage!!
To: Scott from the Left Coast
The ol' clock is ticking down.
And then I had a vision... When the Beast of Baghdad is gone there will be a dead calm in the Middle East. Nobody will going to know what to do. The terrorists will be cowering in their holes for quite some time -- their money will dry up. The Arab leaders (and France) will suddenly remind us that they have been with us all along. Arafat will lose the election (or be assassinated) and Israel will finally quell the 'intifada' and find that mythical 'decent palestinian' that we have all been hoping against hope existed somewhere. The democracy factions will advance in Iran.
It's going to be a new world folks. This is going to be big. This is going to be Berlin Wall big. I can't wait to see it. If things go right it could be morning in the middle east. I'm not prepared to go that far in my predictions. But the opportunities for peace will be greated than ever in my lifetime.
70
posted on
09/13/2002 8:09:16 AM PDT
by
johnb838
To: rockinonritalin
I would like to remind Senator DA$$hole that if it weren't for the courage of those people on Flight 93, he would more than likely be looking upon us from wherever it is that Liberals go when they assume "room temperature". I guess that because they didn't succeed in hitting the Capitol, we should just forget about it and wish them better luck next time, and unless we act, there WILL be a next time.
To: Molly Pitcher
Thanks for the update! Glad to hear it is getting out!
To: frmrda
Tommy boy should have never lied to GW. He also should have seen that Owen was confirmed. Both mistakes are going to hurt him.
To: Clovis_Skeptic
That is indeed closer to what the President said.
To: rockinonritalin
I find it hard to believe that Democrats actually think that they can win in November by behaving as they are. Aren't they just generating anger from the American people against themselves? Wouldn't they be better off acting tough alongside the President and then using the power of incumbancy to hold onto the Senate?In a way, I'm glad that the little Tommy DemonRAT is putting politics over U.S. interests. I welcome any and every advantage the Republicans can get to regain control of the Senate and hold the House. How in the world are we ever going to know what President Bush and his administration can do toward turning back the tide of liberalism if he can't get a fair chance, whether it deals with the judiciary, education, social programs, etc. He'll never get a fair opportunity to demonstrate to the American people what can be done unless he has a Congress that is willing to support his positions. In fact, forget about a Congress even supporting the President's positions, at least let him have a majority on the various committees so that his recommendations/nominations can make it to the Senate and House floors for full congressional votes!
75
posted on
09/13/2002 8:22:12 AM PDT
by
nfldgirl
To: mass55th
Yeah, and what was even better was the incredulous look on his face at the reporter (who happened to be female) asking that sort of question. There was a LOT of silence in the room after his statement. I'm thinking the reporter also wished she'd had a hole to sink into as well.
To: frmrda
"Chuckling, the president said he could not imagine being an elected member of Congress and saying, "Vote for me and, oh, on matters of national security, I think I'm going to want somebody else to act."OOOoooooo....our little Obstruction-in-Chief wannabe, li'l Tommy Boy, may have bitten off more than he can chew.
On a slightly different note...was it just me, or did both Daschle and Ritter sound like they had been comparing notes yesterday? They seemed to be saying the same things.
To: Mean Maryjean
When I see Daschle on TV, I just say, "Keep talking A**hole." He's building a case against himself.
To: ravingnutter
We know all we need to know. Saddam is working on getting nuclear weapons. He has chemical and biological weapons. He supports terrorism, has given money to Bin Laden in the past.
We are in too great a risk with weapons of mass destruction in the hands of one who supports terrorism. Allowing terrorists to get their hands on WMD means death to millions of Americans in one strike. The world has changed so that now terrorists can deliver massive deaths to an enemy if they can get their hands on the materials or weapons. They now can get their hands on them.
Now - Saddam refuses to allow inspectors and will probably refuse to abide by the U.N. resolutions to insure the safety of other nations.
What is the purpose of allowing him to hold the world hostage or slaughter millions?
We have the right to protect ourselves. We must or we will no longer have an America.
79
posted on
09/13/2002 8:32:53 AM PDT
by
ClancyJ
To: Real Cynic No More
"In contrast, Ronald Reagan, during his election campaign in 1980 made some not-so-veiled threats about going after those terrorists. And once he was in office, how long did it take before the Iranians decided they'd better release the hostages?"Somebody probably already answered this, but IIRC he wasn't in ffice yet, or only for a few minutes before the cowardly mad mullahs showed their true color. The hostages were released either the day before, or the day OF, The Great Man's inauguration.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 121-130 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