Minority Whip is Much More Fun !
Posted on 01/27/2003 1:04:08 PM PST by ex-Texan
Democrats demand ‘proof’ from Bush
Daschle, Pelosi sharply assail president on eve of State of the Union speech
WASHINGTON, Jan. 27 — On the eve of President Bush’s State of the Union address, congressional Democratic leaders challenged the president to show “proof to the world” that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction.
Jan. 26 — Presidential aides indicate that Bush’s State of the Union address will deal with a growing federal deficit and will require cuts to some programs. NBC’s Joe Johns reports.
IN WHAT WAS billed as a “pre-buttal” to Bush’s address to Congress and the nation Tuesday at 9 p.m. ET, Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle and Rep. Nancy Pelosi, the party’s leader in the House, sharply criticized Bush for taking what they said was a “hurry-up approach on Iraq” and charged that he was creating a “credibility gap” by saying one thing and doing another across a range of issues.
“If we have proof of nuclear and biological weapons, why don’t we show that proof to the world — as President Kennedy did 40 years ago when he sent Adlai Stevenson to the United Nations to show the world U.S. photographs of offensive missiles in Cuba,” Daschle said at the National Press Club news conference.
“At a time when we have only just begun to fight the war on terror, the American people deserve to hear why we should put hundreds of thousands of American troops at risk, spend perhaps hundreds of billions of dollars, risk our alliances, and inflame our adversaries to attack Iraq,” said Daschle, D-S.D.
CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS CITED
Daschle’s reference to Cuba related to the Cuban missile crisis of four decades ago. At the time, the Kennedy administration unveiled reconnaissance photographs at the United Nations to prove its claim that the Soviet Union had dispatched missiles to an island 90 miles off the United States mainland.
“The state of our union today is anxious,” he said. “The triple threat of war, terrorism and recession are combining to make Americans unsure about their future and unclear about the course our nation is taking.
Pelosi’s criticism of Bush was directed largely at domestic issues, including the president’s proposed elimination of the tax on corporate dividends and his record on the environment.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.com ...
After Monday's interim "progress" report on wonderful Iraqi "compliance", the only conclusion one can draw is that Iraq -- and Democrat backers -- have rather curious ways of defining "cooperation." Maybe Saddam, like his playmate Clinton on the meaning of "is", reserves unique definition for words.We hear ad nauseam that the President has 'failed to make his case.' That Saddam is, like Osama Mama Murray says of her darling namesake, really just the kindest, sweetest, gentlest lil' dictator you'll ever know. Don't believe me? Just ask the Kurds.
Saddam is, say Democrats, allowing the inspections process to move forward, so why can't bully Bush?
But is Saddam really cooperating, as Democrats assert?
Gee, let's see:
-- Iraq, says chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix, hasn't "come to a genuine acceptance, not even today, of the disarmament that was demanded of it." The 12,000-page weapons report was a sham, a web of falsehoods and omissions, "a reprint of earlier documents," he said. They don't "seem to contain any new evidence that will eliminate the questions or reduce their number," he added.
-- Iraq's "cooperation" on process is a fig-leaf. Saddam still offers nothing on substance. "It is not enough to open doors," Blix told the U.N. Security Council Monday, adding that "inspections is not a game of catch-as-catch-can. Rather ... it is a process of verification for the purpose of creating confidence."
-- Anthrax? "There are strong indications," said Blix, "that Iraq produced more anthrax than it declared and that at least some of this was retained after the declared destruction date."
-- On Iraqi assertions that remaining supplies of deadly VX nerve agent were destroyed after Desert Storm, Blix says the U.N. "has information that conflicts with this account."
-- A Mustard gas precursor had been uncovered.
-- Iraq has thus far failed to produced scientists for private interviews. Kinda strange if, as Saddam claims, he's got nothing to hide. Blix noted, moreover, that U.N. inspectors have also been targets of Iraqi harrassment and intimidation.
-- Thousands of chemical warfare bombs have not been accounted for.
-- Construction of missiles with ranges beyond the 90-mile limit imposed by U.N. resolutions continues.
-- Iraq has refused repeated requests by inspectors to deploy a U-2 surveillance plane.
No 'smoking gun', granted, just freight-loads of semen-stained dresses with Butcher-of-Baghdad's DNA all over 'em.
No amount of proof will, of course, ever convince the 'With-Our-Souls-And-Our-Blood-We-Sacrifice-To-You, Oh-Saddam!' Democrats, who everyday sound more and more like Tariq Aziz.
Democrats want Bush -- not Saddam -- to be the issue here.
Some are even upbeat Saddam will beat the rap.
Iraq has had more than enough time to comply, says the U.S.
No way, say Democrats. Bush isn't being fair. Disarming is a big job, time-consuming -- not something a dictator can do lickety-split. Between torturing and hanging opponents, extracting confessions, running detention camps, chopping hands off, kidnapping, training terrorists -- c'mon, where's Saddam suppose to find the time? The Butcher is a busy guy. It's not like sonny boy Uday can handle the workload alone, you know.
Iraq, of course, denies there's any torture and killing going on. Okay, maybe just a little. Hey, it's not our fault, you see. If we torture and kill people, the U.N. embargo is making us do it, they say.
Follow the "logic" here:
-- Inspections have failed, so we need more of 'em.
-- U.N. resolution 1441 calls on Iraq to comply fully. Saddam's reply? The middle-finger salute. The French Vichy wannabes and the German Nazi wannabes call this "progress" -- hey, he could've launched chem or bio weapons that he doesn't have on Israel, right? Besides, anyone who hates Americans and Jews like Saddam can't be all that bad.
-- Saddam would've willingly allowed inspectors back in -- Bush's threatened use of force, backed by large-scale U.S.-British troop deployments to the region, has had nothing to do with it.
Democrats argue that the world will be a lot less safe without Saddam in power because if we remove Saddam from power the Arab world will get really, really mad at us even though they were really, really mad at us even before 9/11 which is why 9/11 occurred and Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11 and even if he did Bush has not made the case that he did therefore it didn't really happen....
Confused yet?
As I noted several months ago, Democrats are in 'Defend-Saddam-At-All-Costs' mode, eerily similar to 'Defend-Clinton-At-All-Costs during the Monica mess.
Nothing Saddam has done, say Democrats, rises to the level of removal from office/Nothing Clinton did rose to the level of impeachment and removal from office.
Sure Saddam lied to weapons inspectors, but so what? All politicians lie/Sure Clinton lied to Ken Starr but so what? All men lie about their sex life.
Sure Saddam violates human rights, but so what? So do Iran and Syria and China/Sure Clinton had sex with Monica, but so what? All men do it.
Sure the Blix report was pretty scathing, but so what? Where's the 'smoking gun'?/Sure the Starr report was pretty scathing, but so what? Where's the 'smoking gun'?
Interestingly, Democrat leaders yesterday rallied around Saddam in much the same way Democrats rallied around Clinton at the Rose Garden after impeachment.
Where's the proof? demanded Tommy Daschle and Rep. Nancy Pelosi Monday.
Appearing jointly at the National Press Club in a "pre-buttal" to the President's Tuesday Address, Tommy and Nancy sought to undermine Bush, insinuating the White House lacks evidence to back up its claims that Saddam possesses weapons of mass destruction.
If you have the proof, let's see it, they said.
The onus is not on Saddam, but on Bush.
Benedict Arnold had nothing on Nancy and Tommy.
Anyway, that's..
My two cents..
"JohnHuang2"
Remember the room that they had all the evidence in about Bill Clinton? The evidence that PROVED he had lied under oath, etc.
Remember how the Democrats dealt with it?
They just never went over there and looked.
Either that's what they are doing now, or Bush hasn't told them ONE thing.
I'm betting it's the last one.
Because if they knew, their "grand plan," whatever it is, would fall apart.
As far as we've been able to figure out their plan consists of us losing the war, Bush's utter failure, loss of American life, and the economy in the crapper.
And they ride to the rescue and seize power again.
Imagine.
Bingo. Democrats FEAR another American military victory on Bush's watch. He'll be that much more difficult to unseat in '04.
Saddam has been playing with fate for the past dozen years. He's a psychopath and needs to be exterminated.
The game is over!
Sadly, if they return to power via our demise, they won't be able to rescue US from what they've brought down upon US.
Thought the same thing myself, Republic.....thought the very same (as I'm sure many, many Americans have, too!)
What a nice and warm fuzzy feelin', huh?...
| Entrapment by Bush: He plays Democrats for fools, and they always rise to his bait http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/827498/posts?page=11#11
President Bush January 22, 2003: |
Good one meek!
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.