Well well....

[vraiblonde]

Today John Kerry said Bush should be held accountable for claims of Iraqi WMD.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/mai...25.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/01/25/ixnewstop.html

David Kay, former weapons inspector, says Saddam's WMD are in Syria.

 

[vraiblonde]

Here's what burns me up about this stuff: the Dems (and the reporters) keep saying the weapons inspector report said there were no WMD. If you read the report, that's NOT what it says.

http://www.cia.gov/cia/public_affairs/speeches/2003/david_kay_10022003.html

So the Democrats are lying to the American people - NOT Bush. How can they get away with this and nobody does anything about it?

 

[aps45819]

I think most pols are willing to lie to us if it will get them re-elected. I also think the world is better off without Saddam being in charge of the largest mitary force in the mid east.

 

[vraiblonde]

Kucinich made an ass out of himself on Fox this morning. E.D. asked him the very question I've been dying to ask ALL of the Dem candidates:

Clinton, Bush and Congress said that Saddam has/had WMD. Why do you keep saying he didn't?

Kucinich said that no, there was no weapons program and there was no authority for Bush to get rid of Saddam.

E.D says, why do you keep saying that when Congress gave the President authority to do just that very thing?

Kuchinich says, no they didn't. Bush acted without authority and there were/are no weapons.

E.D. says, Congress apparently thought there was. Clinton definitely thought there was. Everyone in the universe thinks there was except for you, Kerry and Dean. How did you come by information that neither Congress nor two Presidents had?

Kucinich says, common sense, that's what. Anyway, this is an illegal war and we shouldn't be there.

Brian says, common sense instead of legitimate intel - interesting.



Truth is important and these friggin' Democrats are a bunch of lying wackos. The whole mess of them are still saying that Saddam didn't have ties to Al Qaeda, even though there's a ton of evidence that says he did. No, he didn't have anything to do with Al Qaeda - he only gave them money, funneled weapns to them and provided them with training camps.

 

[Larry Gude]

This will pizz you...

...straight off:

http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20040124-104150-3098r.htm

They are FLAT OUT lying. Big, bold and they have been for two years now.

The thing is, they are trying to win the 'ostrich' sweepstakes and Dean WAS winning by lying and there's no points for second place, so, feed the people want they want, lies, win the nomination then lie about what you said during the general election.

Clinton lied for 8 years on an international stage and his followers constantly said it didn't matter. It worked, he stayed in power.

People notice these things. Wall Street. Democratic Primary.

Lie.

 

[vraiblonde]

Well it's about damn time someone writes a column like that. They've got Clark on tape saying that Saddam is a threat and needs to be removed from power. Now he's saying he never said that. IT'S ON TAPE!!!!!

What I don't understand is why the Democrat voters are so invested in this lying corrupt party. You'd think they'd be smart enough to believe what they see with their own eyes and hear with their own ears. Yet they come out en masse and call Bush the liar!!!

It's infuriating.

 

[Bruzilla]

Kerry was stumbling all over himself on Fox News Sunday. I'm really starting to like Chris Wallace. He asked Kerry:

Wallace: You are criticizing the intelligence services, but weren't you the one who led the cuts to the these agnecies?
Kerry: Well yes, but I was only wanting to make cuts to electronic intelligence collection, not human intelligence. That we need more of.

Wallace reminded Kerry that he never called for more money to be spent on HUMINT collection, but Kerry went off on some BS claim that he had been to Moscow and had seen that they needed twelve phones in some office because they couldn't figure out how to run 12 lines to one phone... an amazing discovery that led Kerry to believe that ELINT collection was a waste of time. I do wish Wallace had pressed him on this.

Wallace: You voted to give President Bush the authority to invade Iraq didn't you?
Kerry: No. I voted to give him the authority to invade ONLY AFTER some set conditions were met: he had to build an international coalition, he had to work through the UN as much as possible, and he had to do something else that I can't remember, and Kerry said that Bush had failed to do all three.

The fact that Bush did work with the US up until it became obvious that self-interest was going to trump the world's interests, and the fact that an international coalition does not have to include the same pinheads that are screwing things up at the UN, were lost to Kerry.

 

[smcdem]

This whole WMD mess is a disater for Bush. As is the 477 billion deficit that the COB projected today. You guys should be concerned.

 

[Frank]

Originally posted by smcdem
This whole WMD mess is a disater for Bush. As is the 477 billion deficit that the COB projected today. You guys should be concerned.

We were in a recession. We got attacked by terrorists, which depressed business further and required new security. We went to war - *twice*. I'd be an idiot if I thought it were humanly possible to NOT have a defiicit.

And I am laughing - really laughing - that Dems are crowing SO MUCH about the deficit. Really. They ran deficits every year for over thirty years (when they were in control of Congress) and after Ross Perot's hammering on the campaign trail about the deficit - really, the ONLY thing on his platform - in 1995 the Republican Congress held Clinton's feet to the fire, forcing him to either agree to balancing the budget in *7* YEARS or shut down the government. He chose to shut it down.

Democrats for YEARS claimed that deficit spending was just ok. Really, it was just those annoying Republicans squawking about it, but it's no big deal. This was their stance for *decades*.

NOW - for the first time in history, the Dems have switched their position - but ONLY because there's a deficit now.

A little reminder - the CONGRESS spends the money. We got a balanced budget just a couple years after a Republican Congress, which was part of their Contract With America (they wanted an amendment). CLINTON did not balance the budget - the Republicans did. Clinton shut down the government rather than agree to balance the budget.

 

[Larry Gude]

You, our young socialist...

...are by definition 'ignorant'.

This whole WMD mess is a disater for Bush

I understand the compulsion to prove it. I was a dumb kid once to.

Now, can you not read or is comprehension the problem?

Or, do you hope that somehow the records of Messrs Dean, Kerry and Clark will simply not come up?

I'm curious.

Not that records can't be ignored. We've seen plenty of that.

So, your thoughts grasshopper?