Dr Guy Dr Guy

Bush Hits back - Dems Reveal hand

Bush Hits back - Dems Reveal hand

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,175878,00.html

Bush and Cheney have been on the offensive lately.  Some say it is way overdue.  They are refuting the claims of the Democrat leadership that they were in the dark.  (Yea, I know, they are always in the dark).

But Rep Murtha played their hand today.  He called for a complete and utter retreat from Iraq.  Forget the 2000 Americans and the other allies losses!  Time to pull out!

So the democrats are finally getting honest, if not smarter.  Murtha has shown that the democrats, who voted for the war before they voted against it, have one simple agenda.

The defeat of America will mean the defeat of Bush!  So let us pack up and leave and admit defeat so we can say Bush was defeated!  Forget all those men and women who sacraficed for the 30 million iraqis!

Forget the fact that while the bacteria still exist and continue to target more innocents than troops are losing.  Forget the fact that we have liberated a country where a despot routinely slaughtered those he did not like.  Forget all that!

Let's cut and run!

You know what is more sickening than not having a policy, as the democrats have not had for 5 years.  What is more sickening is that they detest the troops so much that they want to trash them to get to Bush.

That is what is truly sickening!

35,134 views 146 replies
Reply #101 Top
not often as I dont need to since the left here at JU are so eager to do it. I dont like writing 'me too' articles, so I leave them to you, but to imply I blindly follow Bush and Republicans is to truly be naive about what I do write


yeah the left is so overrepresented here...and i write so many 'me too' articles. the check is in the mail as well huh?

while you may not be a blindly partisan as drmiler or island pup, all one need do is skim thru the titles of your articles for a week...at most two...to know which one of us is fooling himself.
Reply #102 Top

Beautiful.

How quickly some forget.

Reply #103 Top

Did it really hurt your feelings so bad to be called a fool? That's the big injustice that I did here? Calling you a fool for saying that I had masters??? That's unacceptable behavior on one of your blogs? If so, you should just go ahead and blacklist me now too. If you're such a pansy that you get your panties in a wad for someone calling you a fool then please do.

You are the only fool here.  If that does not sit well with you, you have an option.  Leave.  You are like the other bloggers who make a big deal about leaving, only to be back in a day.  That was one of 2 you fool.  If you cant read what I wrote, that is your problem, not mine. So get off your horse.  You want to debate, do so.  So far all you have done is insult others and provide no substantiation for your allegations.  While I and others have offered lots of it.

So who do you think is the fool now?

Reply #104 Top

did you and drmiler blacklist him? the impression i had was he was directing that to drmiler.

I think Drmiler did.  I warned him, as you can see from the post following yours, he is not blacklisted.

Reply #105 Top

You "still" do not get it, do you? What you've done /are doing is considered a big time no-no on "most" peoples blog. You really should try growing up.

I think he is just a Dabe junior.  Cleaner langauge, but no debate.  Just insults.

Reply #106 Top

Murtha has been getting "slammed" by "PA VOTERS" for his mouth! And they are the ones that count.

I will go one further.  Col Klink, why dont you post the letter you sent Oliver North?  I would very much like to see it.

Reply #107 Top

while you may not be a blindly partisan as drmiler or island pup, all one need do is skim thru the titles of your articles for a week...at most two...to know which one of us is fooling himself.

Why did you not quote the whole quote?  I clearly admitted my articles are biased to the right.  I never denied it.  But you only have to go back a few to find some articles bashing the extreme right as well.  I have yet to see anything from you bashing the extreme left.

Mr. Pot, I suggest you take a look in the mirror before addressing Mr. Kettle.

Reply #108 Top
The Bush supporters HAVE trashed the service of Vets that do not agree with his policies. Sen McCain, The former disabled congressman from Georga and when Rep Murtha was called a coward on the House Floor. Also Amb Wilson who said Bush was wrong about Saddam trying to purchase Yellow cake. It was Bush that was incorrect about that not Wilson.

Iraq gets worse every day. The generals are now saying we do not have the troops to sustain 150,000 troops in Iraq without total mobilization of the Guard and reserve or they would need to send troops over for a 4th or even 5th tour. That is because Bush ignored his own admission in 2000 that the Military was too small and then did not nothing to correct the problem he identified for the last 5 years.
Reply #109 Top
The Bush supporters HAVE trashed the service of Vets that do not agree with his policies. Sen McCain, The former disabled congressman from Georga and when Rep Murtha was called a coward on the House Floor. Also Amb Wilson who said Bush was wrong about Saddam trying to purchase Yellow cake. It was Bush that was incorrect about that not Wilson.


Get a clue fool! I have NEVER trashed Sen McCain! And just an fyi since you obviously don't listen to the news....Murtha was called a coward by a fellow "MARINE"! There was a letter sent and read on the floor. The text was...."Cowards cut and run, Marines NEVER do!" So if you want to take umbrage with the statement then I would suggest you take it up with the actual person that said it!
Reply #110 Top
This is my letter to VP Cheney for All you Bushies: 20 November 2005

Vice President Dick Cheney

After listening to your positions on the Iraq War, I would like to point out a few things.

First, you have no business casting dispersions on people that served our nation and do not agree with this war. When it was the time that you could have served in the military you avoided service with five deferments. President Bush sought to avoid service that might have sent him to Vietnam by using his father’s contacts to get into the Texas Air National Guard and then did not meet his obligations during the last two years of his commitment. He then avoided punishment for his failure to obey regulations and obtained an Honorable discharge after failing to attend drills and taking a required physical that resulted in him being grounded. His records that were released by DoD prove both these of these allegations.

As we are now learning, there was intelligence that did not support the position you and President Bush took prior to asking Congress to go to war. The intelligence that was used by the Bush administration to justify the war was in many cases incorrect. We need to learn ALL the intelligence that did not support your arguments for war that existed prior to Congress voting for war. We also need to know why Congress was not aware of ALL intelligence prior to being asked to approve the United States attacking Iraq.

At the time we attacked Iraq, U N weapons inspectors were in Iraq and if we had allowed them to complete their inspections we would have learned what we know today, Saddam did not WMD. There was no urgency to attack Saddam in late 2002 and we were NEVER made the enforcement agent for the U N Security Council.

The president also ignored the military experts that told him we needed at least 300,000 troops to secure Iraq. Generals Shinseki and Franks said that was the force levels required. In fact in Op Plan 1003, which was the planning for the Iraq invasion, Gen. Franks called for first 500,000 troops and then under pressure lowered that to 300,000, in country, when Saddam fell. It is sad that Gen. Franks did not stand his ground and invaded Iraq with less then half the number of troops both he and the Army CoS said were needed. The results were that we did not have the force levels to secure the borders or the Ammo dumps. We could not control all the areas bypassed to reach Baghdad that were hot beds of Saddam forces. We did not have the force levels required to safeguard the infrastructure. We began loosing control in Iraq the day after Saddam fell.

This war has not made America Safer and has been fought poorly because Bush would not allow the military experts to properly conduct the war to include the required force levels. Iraq was not a place were terrorists operated prior to our invasion. Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11. Bush wanted to invade Iraq from the start of his administration. The invasion was a topic at his First Cabinet meeting, nine months BEFORE 9/11 according the Paul O’Neil. This was an elective war and at the time we choose to invade we did not have all the protective equipment to help safeguard our military. Rep. Murtha is correct. We need to turn this over to the 25 million Iraqi people the task of securing their country.
Gene P. Abel, COL USAR Ret.


And what did your letter to the VP accomplish? Anything? Or nothing?
Reply #111 Top

Reply By: COL GenePosted: Tuesday, November 22, 2005
This is my letter to VP Cheney for All you Bushies: 20 November 2005

Vice President Dick Cheney

I asked for your letter to Oliver North, not Dick Cheney.  Post it on your own blog if you want.  Dont pollute mine with your half truths and hatred.

Reply #112 Top

The text was...."Cowards cut and run, Marines NEVER do!"

That was Moderateman, right?

Reply #113 Top
My letter clearly states the facts.

Yesterday 100 Sunni, Shiite and Kurdish Iraqi leaders for the first called for a time table for ALL foreign forces to pull out of Iraq. Now Bush has members in the new Iraq Government telling him they want a time table to GET OUT. I guess they must all be Democrats. Time for Bush and Cheney to wake up!
Reply #114 Top
Also Amb Wilson who said Bush was wrong about Saddam trying to purchase Yellow cake. It was Bush that was incorrect about that not Wilson.


And as far as this goes....you have a memory problem don't you?



A report based on Wilson's trip was widely disseminated via routine channels on 8 March 2002. (44)
This report indicated the the former Prime Minister of Niger was unaware of any Iraqi contracts for yellowcake, but acknowledged that in 1999 Iraq may have been interested in discussing yellowcake sales but the PM "steered the conversation away." Niger's former Minster for Energy said that there had been no yellowcake sales outside of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) channels since the 1980s.

This report also described "how the structure of Niger's uranium mines would make it difficult, if not impossible, for Niger to sell uranium to any rogue states."
The consensus expressed in the Senate report was that Wilson's trip provided little or no new information. Thus, the information was not used to "produce any further analytical products" and the CIA did not brief the Vice President on the report. (46)


The above line was said "after" he said this one.


Wilson arrived in Niger on 26 February 2002. After meeting with various government officials, he "reached the same conclusions that the embassy had reached, that it was unlikely that anything was going on." (42)

On 1 March 2002, the State Department published an intelligence assessment entitled: Niger: Sale of Uranium to Iraq is Unlikely. The assessment was written in response to interest from the Vice President's office. It was distributed in a routine manner, not directly to the Vice President via special delivery. (42)
Reply #115 Top
Get a clue fool! I have NEVER trashed Sen McCain! And just an fyi since you obviously don't listen to the news....Murtha was called a coward by a fellow "MARINE"! There was a letter sent and read on the floor. The text was...."Cowards cut and run, Marines NEVER do!" So if you want to take umbrage with the statement then I would suggest you take it up with the actual person that said it!


He doesn't get it, trashing the service of a vet means trashing the service itself, his mind is set to think that not agreeing with the Vet and thinking that he's an idiot or something is trashing his service. So just because he fought for my freedom or something means I can't disagree with them? All of a sudden their voice is more important than mine?

Col Gene, I thank you for being part of the military that defends this great country. I thank you for being willing to put your life on the line for my sake and that of my children, family, friends and all the American people. That doesn't mean I will follow you to the ends of the world if I don't agree with your way of thinking. You are taking inot consideration the fact that they have military experience and that it gives them an edge when they have an opinion about the war but what your failing to consider is that they are political people and they use what ever tool or weapon (and I don't mean guns and bombs)they can get their hands on to as a powewr boost to push their agenda. Keep that in mind the next time someone political with a military background comes out to talk about the war and see where else have they voiced their ideas and used their military background as a stepping stone to push it.
Reply #116 Top

Now Bush has members in the new Iraq Government telling him they want a time table to GET OUT

Yes, and did you read the rest of the article?  Or just got hung up on the GET OUT part?

Reply #117 Top

And as far as this goes....you have a memory problem don't you?

I was nice. I only accused him of half truths, not out right lies.  I can believe that Col Klink really beleives Wilson, even after he has been documented to be lying.  After all, some people still think that Clinton did not have sex with that woman.

Reply #118 Top

they are political people and they use what ever tool or weapon (and I don't mean guns and bombs)they can get their hands on to as a powewr boost to push their agenda.

I dont remember the outrage from the left when they were trashing Col Oliver North during his senate run.  He is a very decorated marince officer, who because he does not spout the liberal line, is fair game for them to trash.  But dont touch a liberal!

Reply #119 Top
Bush trashed McCain in the 2000 election. Many members of his administration including the VP and his Press Sec as well as the Bush supporters in Congress trash ANYONE that does not agree with Bush. Yes trashing LTC North was dead wrong as well. That does not make what the GOP has done to military members that do not agree with their bankrupt policies OK. Now that the Iraq government officials, from all three factions, want a time table for us to leave Iraq, it is time to open a discussion on Rep,. Murtha's suggestion!
Reply #120 Top

Bush trashed McCain in the 2000 election.

Might want to provide a link. I dont remember Bush questioning McCain's reputation, just his politics.  And it was politics.

Reply #121 Top
Bush trashed McCain in the 2000 election.


Make up your damn mind would you? First you say Bush supporters, now you're saying Bush. But then again that is to be expected. I called your bluff on the first statement so you had to change it to keep your diatribe going.


The Bush supporters HAVE trashed the service of Vets that do not agree with his policies. Sen McCain,


And just were did you find this piece of trash? Provide a link please or withdaraw your ignorant statement.

Now that the Iraq government officials, from all three factions, want a time table for us to leave Iraq
Reply #122 Top
Bush trashed McCain during the election of 2000. Try this one:



Commentary: Bush turns to men he trashed


By Martin Sieff
UPI Senior News Analyst

Washington, DC, Aug. 12 (UPI) -- Politics make strange bedfellows -- especially when you are finally forced to turn in desperation to two national heroes from your own party.
Click to learn more...

Three years after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, boosted him to stratospheric personal popularity, this has become President George W. Bush's ironic fate in the 2004 presidential election campaign.

With his own luster as a resolute, successful defender of America against Islamic terror unraveling following months of embarrassing revelations topped by the conclusions of the Sept. 11 Commission, the president is now trying to associate himself at every public appearance he can with former New York Mayor Rudi Giuliani and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.

It is impossible to imagine any two figures in public life Bush would instinctively more wish to avoid. His 2000 presidential campaign trashed McCain in one of the dirtiest campaigns of smears, slander and attempted personal destruction the Republican Party has ever unleashed against one of its own in the South Carolina, New York and Michigan primaries. McCain, whose cherished sister had died of breast cancer, was even accused of opposing increased spending on cancer research through the highly creative twisting of his actual Senate voting record.

Even now, the maverick Arizonan and famous Vietnam War hero continues to embarrass and no doubt infuriate the president at key moments. Only last week, he called the GOP's attempt to trash Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts' heroic Vietnam War record despicable and called on the White House to repudiate it. Bush has not done so.

But McCain still toed the party line enough -- with, no doubt, a desire to have an uncontested re-nomination race when his time comes up for re-election -- to embrace Bush as if he were a buddy from his long years of imprisonment in Vietnam in the notorious "Hanoi Hilton." And Bush, even more remarkably, was happy to return the hug.

The Bush-Cheney '04 campaign's decision to make Giuliani the new central figure in its latest attack strategy against Kerry is even more remarkable: It was not intended or planned as little as a month ago before the Democratic National Convention in Boston.

The Republican National Committee does not turn on a dime, and neither does this particular White House. Both are famous for meticulously planning their campaign strategies years -- in Karl Rove's case even entire election cycles -- ahead of time. Embracing Giuliani and the moderate Northeastern Republicanism that he embodied through the decade before Sept.11 was not among them.

Turning to Giuliani at all, but especially turning to him this late in the day, is an even greater mark of desperation than publicly hugging McCain. For Bush has coldly and calculatedly treated Giuliani as dirt ever since he stepped down on the completion of his second consecutive term as mayor of New York City.

Giuliani's performance in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks that destroyed the World Trade Center's Twin Towers, killing 2,800 people, was magnificent. The emergency services of the City of New York that day acted not only with exemplary, heartbreaking bravery but also with outstanding efficiency, a quality that has not been evident in the Bush administration's national-security and anti-terror policies, to put it mildly.

Had the city administration of New York that Giuliani had run with an iron hand for nearly eight years not reacted as superbly as it did, the death toll in, around and under the towers could easily have been 30,000, as Giuliani has said.

Yet after Giuliani stepped down as mayor, he was not immediately conscripted to head the CIA, the FBI or the Department of Homeland Security, even though any of these positions would have fitted him perfectly. He was not even given any honorary federal commission to preside over as a figurehead.

For Giuliani had always been a genuinely moderate Northeastern Republican in the tradition of Thomas E. Dewey, Nelson Rockefeller and the president's own father, former president George Herbert Walker Bush. And the current resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. has always treated such people as worse than lepers -- or even Democrats.

Giuliani's outstanding success in administering the largest city in the nation and his previous first-class record as a crime-busting district attorney gave him the ideal résumé to spearhead the war against al-Qaida and its efforts to penetrate the United States. Yet Bush refused to let him anywhere near those responsibilities.

To quote the Irish poet William Butler Yeats, "All is changed, changed utterly." Giuliani, as the New York Times reported Thursday, "is emerging as a central player in the Bush re-election effort, attacking John Kerry, racing around the country campaigning and directly leveraging the events of Sept. 11 in ways that President Bush and many of his closest allies have not dared."

Will it work? Almost certainly not: Historically, whenever an incumbent president has been forced to rely on the charisma or talents of another figure to boost his re-election efforts, that president has gone down in defeat.

Dwight Eisenhower in 1956, Richard Nixon in 1972, Ronald Reagan in 1984 and Bill Clinton in 1996 had no need to resort to such undignified and even desperate expedients. Rather, the ploy recalls the antics of Gerald Ford during the 1976 campaign and Jimmy Carter in 1980.

Indeed, far from making Bush look bigger as intended, the campaign of relying on heroes the president had previously gone out of his way to ignore or even humiliate seems much more likely to make him look like a wimp. After all, real he-men never need other heroes to rescue them.

--
Reply #123 Top
Bush trashed McCain during the election of 2000. Try this one:



Commentary: Bush turns to men he trashed


By Martin Sieff


ONCE AGAIN you do NOT address points made. I never said Bush didn't trash McCain DID I? NO I didn't.And just what in Gods name did you expect? It was an election year. MY point was that you started in on Bush "supporters" for doing this. When I came forward and said that I did not, then you changed gears and started in on Bush. Grow up will ya?
Reply #124 Top
I was giving Dr Guy post #120 his reference. If Bush killed someone on national TV you guys would tell us that it was the fault of the person killed for being at that place not that Bush was wrong. What a piss poor bunch that defent Bush!
Reply #125 Top

Make up your damn mind would you? First you say Bush supporters, now you're saying Bush. But then again that is to be expected. I called your bluff on the first statement so you had to change it to keep your diatribe going.

I will not question his supporters, but let's see what Col is saying.