Democrats Challenge Bush's Credibility

The Washington Post/NYTimes ^ | 2/24/03 | Jim VandeHei/Paul Krugman

[Gothmog]

From yesterday's WPost: "After months of searching for a unified political attack against President Bush, congressional Democrats have settled on a new and, some say, controversial strategy: questioning the president's truthfulness.

"On an almost daily basis now, congressional Democrats are warning of a "credibility gap" between what Bush says to the American people and what he does through new government policies."

[Snip]

So following instructions from the DNC is the NYTimes' Paul Krugman in today's paper:

[Snip]

"You'd almost think President Bush had a credibility problem.

"And he does.

"The funny thing is that this administration sets great store by credibility. As the justifications for invading Iraq come and go — Saddam is developing nuclear weapons; no, but he's in league with Osama; no, but he's really evil — the case for war has come increasingly to rest on credibility. You see, say the hawks, we've already put our soldiers in position, so we must attack or the world won't take us seriously.

"But credibility isn't just about punishing people who cross you. It's also about honoring promises, and telling the truth. And those are areas where the Bush administration has problems. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/25/opinion/25KRUG.html [Snip]

[Gothmog]

It doesn't get much more obvious than that.

[mewzilla]

ROTFLMAO! This reminds me of Einstein's definition of insanity, which is doing the same thing over and over, and expecting different results.

[Agent Smith]

"THE BIG LIE" game plan has been brought back into action. Josef Goebbles would be proud. We call them DemocRATS for a reason.

[CROSSHIGHWAYMAN]

The Democrats seem to be caught in an old chinese martial arts movie where the dubbed translation is out of synch!

They're a little late!
The great stainmaker was the one to question as far as truth.

[mwl1]

The RATS are absolute fools and totally out of touch. The last thing that Bush is vulnerable on is his integrity, veracity, honesty, particularly compared to x42. The RATS are setting themselves up for a body blow, a counterslam, when contrasting this honorable man vs. a convicted perjurer.

Daschle is playing with more political fire, and if he continues is going to burn his party to the stake.

Bush is vulnerable on jobs and the economy. Period.

[RooRoobird14]

Hmmmmm, the Dumbocrap party still lovingly "services" (on their knees) The Face Biting Rapist President, genuflecting at the mere mention of The Rapist's name. And these idiots are trying to make the case that President Bush is 'dishonest'?!?

That's VERY, VERY FUNNY!!!!

[Our man in washington]

I wonder what they'll try next week.

[dirtboy]

So following instructions from the DNC is the NYTimes' Paul Krugman in today's paper:

Someone recently did a bias index of columnists, both left and right. Krugman won hands down. 'nuff said.

[roses of sharon]

The words Democrats and credibility in the same breath?

They held the Congress for 40 years, thru lies, with the help of the elite Dem media. As a result they now have a great influence over our public schools, and higher education. Our culture, thru TV and music are heavy with liberals.

With the internet and talk radio, the right is making some inroads.

[mewzilla]

With the internet and talk radio, the right is making some inroads.

Ain't it grand? :)

[Ben Ficklin]

The "enviros" have been accusing Bush of saying one thing and doing another since he took office.

[jerod]

This is bad decision on the DemocRATs part.

The Republicans called Clinton a liar for 8 years, and it didn't do any good. The sad part is that the man was a liar, and an impeached one at that.

[section9]

The great thing is that the Dems are down to their last arrow in the quiver.

The American people, most of them anyway, trust George W. Bush. They figure that he isn't going to lie to them, but that he won't tell them the whole truth, either.

So the Dems are down to accusing him of being a liar, eh?

Oh well, let's see them try and sell this.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[goodnesswins]

"With the internet and talk radio, the right is making some inroads."

And they are panicking.....and it's getting almost funny....if we weren't so close to the precipice it would be.

[wjcsux]

More proof that the RATS have nothing to offer the country other than big government, higher taxes and less freedom. It appears that even the Washington Post is catching on. I despise RATS more and more every day.

[VRWC_minion]

Everything the rats have is negative. They will never get out in front with constant negative.

[Just mythoughts]

"It doesn't get much more obvious than that."


What the "liberal/communist" commonly know as democrats are liars?

[InspiredPath1]

The biggest problem with this strategy ...

As the justifications for invading Iraq come and go ... the case for war has come increasingly to rest on credibility."

The case for war has been made by Bush AND Powell AND McCain AND Lieberman. Three of the four are media darlings. Powell is the Democrat "love child" - the "voice of reason". McCain is the war veteran - the "Republican Anti-Bush", the champion of the growing number of "Independents". Lieberman is one of the Democratic Party contenders for President.

Will the media mention these names when they question Bush's credibility? Doubt it. Bush needs to wait until "the usual suspects" (Hillary, Sharpton, etc.) extend their necks over the chopping block, then make one of his speeches surrounded by Powell, McCain, Lieberman, Lantos, etc.

Let the media be shown, once again, to be a tool of the left - BUT, some republican (McCain, I suggest) should challenge them - point out to the watching world that he doesn't appreciate his president (and by association, himself) being called a liar. He should point out that political division of this type resulted in more body bags in Vietnam.

[BibChr]

I've lived to see it.

The Party of Bill Clinton, challenging the believability of George W. Bush.

But when you come right down to it... did an accusation ever feed a hungry child? Isn't the work of the American people more important than credibility? Aren't all these issues from the past -- i.e. they happened before the accusation?

We need to move on.

Right?

Dan

[maica]

From today's Washington Times:

Posted on 02/25/2003 1:48 AM EST by kattracks



News and political dispatches from around the nation.

     Axis of opportunism

     Congressional Democrats are counting on European criticism of President Bush's Iraq policy to boost their own campaign to undermine Mr. Bush's credibility, according to an article in The Washington Post yesterday.
     The Democratic effort to question Mr. Bush's honesty on domestic issues was designed by Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota, reporter Jim VandeHei wrote.
     "A top strategist for House Democrats, who declined to be identified, said party leaders are intensifying the campaign now to coincide with criticism of Bush's Iraq policy from world leaders. 'What's happening in Europe has been the trigger,' the strategist said. Daschle has encouraged activists in labor unions and environmental groups to spread the 'credibility gap' message, too. 'You will see this coming from all corners of the Democratic operation,' spokeswoman Ranit Schmelzer said."

---

My preferred comment to any Dem statement.

"And please tell me what is YOUR plan? It will result is confused looks and silence, I'm sure."