Skip to comments.
Brownback Says He is Getting More Calls Against the War than For
Fox News
| October 8, 2002
| Miss Marple
Posted on 10/08/2002 7:17:56 PM PDT by Miss Marple
I just heard Senator Brownback of Kansas on Greta's show on Fox say that he is getting more anti-war calls than pro.
I must admit I had not thought to call my own senators because I thought this issue was self-evident. I will call tomorrow.
Meanwhile, I would encourage all Freepers to call your senators and express your opinion about the Iraq resolution that is coming up for a vote.
It seems to me that the democrats, anarchists, and Arab sympathizers have their phone banks going overtime.
Thank you for reading this post, and any calls you make will be appreciated!
TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: iraq; senate; vote; waronterror
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-105 next last
To: Miss Marple
I just heard Senator Brownback of Kansas on Greta's show on Fox say that he is getting more anti-war calls than pro.Of course he is. I would guess that most Senators and cong-critters are. The naive, see-no-evil Neville Chamberlin types, the Hollywood morons, and their pro-Arab friends, all know they're just a small, noisy minority. Now they're becoming desperate and pulling out all the stops to get Saddam off the hook. I just hope the politicians realize that, and are smart enough to ignore them.
41
posted on
10/08/2002 8:26:00 PM PDT
by
epow
To: dfwgator
And most colonists were against the Declaration of Independence. My great to the fifth grandfather served with Gordon's regiment at Ft. Pitt.
I, lacking a musket, just fired my fax machine and telephone at the two Senators' and Congressman's office machines.
To: Pining_4_TX
None of Bush's arguments have convinced me of the merits of a war against Iraq Ummm, I'm assuming you're not a 13 or 14 year old, so maybe you'll get this. The guy in Iraq wants you dead. Why? Because you represent everything he despises. I guess when the sleeper cells start shooting at your spouse and kids, the chem or bio attacks kill your loved ones, or the nuke detonates and takes out a city, maybe, just maybe, your sorry arse will get it.
To: A Citizen Reporter; Howlin
You can keep me on your friend list! Thanks, Citizen! That one took me by surprise!
A private freepmail would have been so much more polite, wouldn't it, Howlin? When one is considered to be an annoyance, it's so much more pleasant to not have the entire cyberworld alerted to it........ :o \
44
posted on
10/08/2002 8:31:27 PM PDT
by
ohioWfan
To: Pining_4_TX
A war against Iraq right now is nuts.No, Saddam is nuts.
45
posted on
10/08/2002 8:34:46 PM PDT
by
lonestar
To: Go Gordon
It's tempting to just ignore someone who substitutes insults for rational discussion, but let's try this one more time. Saddam is not the only nutty dictator in the world. He is certainly not alone in hating America. He is not the only one with nukes. Getting rid of him will not make us safer. Getting rid of the threat within our own country will. If we invaded every country with a crazed tyrant for a leader, we'd have to conquer most of the world. If we don't close our borders soon, we won't have a USA to defend.
If we take over Iraq, we will be there for years, just as we will be in Bosnia and Afghanistan, because as soon as we leave, they will produce another tyrant to take over. Will there be a country left where we don't have troops?
To: Pining_4_TX
I can't figure you guys out! Are you, or aren't you a anti-war person? If, as you say, we shouldn't go into Iraq; why should we go into N. Korea? This doesn't sound very consistent to me! Could you explain to me exactly why Saddam shouldn't be dealt with, but the guy in N. Korea should? They both seem to be about the same to me! They're both a threat. But if you're completely anti-war, why would you advocate attacking anyone at all?
We may have to go after N. Korea eventually. But our President apparently has more information than you or I do, so couldn't we give him a little time and patience, please!
47
posted on
10/08/2002 8:35:42 PM PDT
by
dsutah
To: Pining_4_TX
If we don't do something quickly about the mass immigration into the US, we won't have a country left to defend. I am also very concerned about our virtually nonexistent immigration policy. But it isn't an either-or proposition. We can stop Saddam AND tighten up our borders.
But first things first, and the first job is to stop a genocidal maniac who hates our guts from getting his hands on nukes.
48
posted on
10/08/2002 8:37:29 PM PDT
by
epow
To: Russell Scott
This country is on the edge of the cliff. The liberals have ruined the entire country. They literally are selling us all out for the sake of trying to win more seats in the House and Senate.
Any and all manipulations of the system are justified in order to win elections.
When will this country wake up and say "IT ALL STOPS NOW"!
I HATE LIBERALS, I HATE DEMOCRATS; LIBERALS ARE EVIL, DEMOCRATS ARE EVIL. Any idiot could understand how corrupt these cretins are, but to me that is the problem, literally half the country does not pay attention or doesn't give a damn.
49
posted on
10/08/2002 8:38:57 PM PDT
by
LaGrone
To: dsutah
Could you explain to me exactly why Saddam shouldn't be dealt with, but the guy in N. Korea should? They both seem to be about the same to me! They're both a threat. But if you're completely anti-war, why would you advocate attacking anyone at all? My point is that Iraq is not unique. I am not anti-war, but war must make sense. I am not in favor of sending our troops into what will become a permanent occupation. Nothing will be solved, because as soon as we leave, there will be another tyrant in charge. We cannot conquer and re-make the entire world. We have to look after our own interests and defense first, and our biggest threat is from the mass of immigrants coming into the US daily. War with Iraq will accomplish little but at great cost.
To: Miss Marple
The ONLY way he's getting more against calls than for calls is if it is orchestrated. And it has to be coming from the KC-Topeka area. Kansas is not a liberal state.
51
posted on
10/08/2002 8:41:16 PM PDT
by
ALS
To: PhilDragoo
I think your ancestor would be really proud of you for that!
52
posted on
10/08/2002 8:42:03 PM PDT
by
dsutah
To: tomahawk
You are correct. I don't think that Brownback is taking a poll. He only offered the information in a response to Greta's question.
However, I do think that senators who are unsure could be marginally swayed by call numbers. And for those who are supporting the President, they should receive encouragement. Opponents, like Wellstone, should receive calls to at least make them nervous.
It is much better for a senator to not only do what is right but also feel like he is backed by the people.
To: Miss Marple
I just heard Senator Brownback of Kansas on Greta's show on Fox say that he is getting more anti-war calls than pro......Senator Byrd said today that he had had maybe 9000 calls "from all over the country" protesting the war - that's 9000 out of 220 million plus people (okay, knock off 100 million for those who don't have phones, the young, etc etc) - it's still an underwhelming response to the man who's been most vocal, if not hysterical, in opposing the war - the antis have got some organizing to do......
To: Miss Marple
Thanks for the ping. I will call Arlen Spector - ya never know what Arlen is gonna do. Rick Santorum is on board for sure. But it never hurts to call.
To: Miss Marple; Howlin
Yikes! It hadn't crossed my mind either. I got sooo excited reading this thread that I immediately exited FR, sent my emails, and only when that was done, came back to respond.
Thanks for the heads up, ladies! ;-)
To: ohioWfan
Thanks ohioWfan!
To: Miss Marple
The problem is that Bush's rhetoric is clashing with his actions. He is saying that Saddam is evil, that it is of utmost importance that we get rid of him, and that we have every right to do it ourselves. However, he is sitting around all day trying to gain everyone else's approval, and this thing is going on and on. If we are going to do it, then we should just do it.
Meanwhile, just like his dad, he is using this as a reason not to do anything about tax cuts or the economy.
It destroyed his Dad, and in my opinion the polls show that it is starting to erode W and the party. We could be heading for a major disaster in next month's elections rather than the Senate victory we are hoping for.
Republicans win when they have a message and stand up for our beleifs. Witness Ronald Reagan and the Contract with America. Republicans lose when they stand for nothing and hope some vague concept of statue is going to sweep them to victory. Witness the 92 and 96 elections, as well as the last Congressional election where we lost like 5 seats in the senate because we stood for nothing.
To: Pining_4_TX
There is mass slaughter taking place all over the world, especially in Africa. Nobody is talking about invading, conquering, and re-making all of Africa. I don't think anyone in Africa is close to obtaining nuclear weapons. We aren't planning to depose Saddam out of some futile altruistic desire to reform the world. The butcher of Baghdad is our sworn enemy, and for the last 11 years he has been developing deadly weapons for one primary purpose, to kill Americans.
59
posted on
10/08/2002 8:48:23 PM PDT
by
epow
To: Miss Marple
60
posted on
10/08/2002 8:49:48 PM PDT
by
Txslady
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-105 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