DFW Mustang Forums banner

1 - 20 of 83 Posts

·
Hero in a half shell
Joined
·
2,584 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
You would think by what the below mentioned people are
saying today, they suffer from Alzheimer's. However,
with the partisan heckler like Carl Levin trouncing Pres
Bush yesterday on this issue of supposedly lying about
WMD, I thought it comical and pathetic. I thought it's
appropriate to show what Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly,
other responsible conservatives and independents, and
other centrist democrats like Zel Miller call the
hypocritical left of the Democratic Party. Clearly,
these hypocrites speak with Bush bashing comments NOW
because of only one thing- Bush is not a democrat. They
are still seething mad about the 2000 elections. Their
hypocritical ways are so clear. I can guarantee you if
Gore was elected and we did the same thing in Iraq, they
would be applauding him. This is typical of the left
wing. They are filled with hypocrisy and misstatements
like Nancy Pelosi's comment in her rebuttal of the state
of the union address concerning what Pres Kenney said.
She said Pres Kenney said something like " Ask not what
America can do for you, but ask how we can work together
for the betterment of the world ". She totally misused
Pres Kennedy's statement for the self-serving moment. He
actually said " Ask not what your country can do for
you, ask what you can do for your country". Pres
Kenney's comment was domestically focused only and it
was focused on telling people not to count on
entitlement programs developed by the federal government
or state governments. The democrat party in the late
70's in my view changed its focus drastically away from
the main stream America to focus groups and left wing
causes. The left-wing faction of the Democratic Party,
which would obviously be comprised of these members’
statements below, is a classic example of partisan
politics. This sort of hypocritical flip flopping and
coupled with radical left-wing liberal views is probably
the main reason why the democratic party has shrunk from
approximately 52% of registered voters 35 years ago to
about 31-32% registered voters today. I would recommend
you forward these quotations to as many people so they
can see the truth and the partisanship of these people.

Re-evaluating Weapons of Mass Destruction


"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq
the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and
the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
- President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our
purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the
threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction
program." - President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there
matters a great deal here. For the risks that the
leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or
biological weapons against us or our allies is the
greatest security threat we face." - Madeline Albright,
Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as
he has ten times since 1983." S - Sandy Berger, Clinton
National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and
consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take
necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and
missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond
effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end
its weapons of mass destruction programs." - Letter to
President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom
Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of
weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat
to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of
the weapons inspection process." - Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D,
CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building
weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his
cronies." - Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of
State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has
invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that
biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace
and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition,
Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is
doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to
develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the
United States and our allies." - Letter to President
Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others,
December 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is
a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the
region. He has ignored the mandated of the Unit ed
Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and
the means of delivering them." - Sen. Carl Levin (D,
MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of
biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has
proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it
will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." - Al G
ore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is
seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of
1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some
stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that
he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his
chemical and biological warfare capabilities.
Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear
weapons..." - Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United
States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to
disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly
arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a
real and grave threat to our security." - Sen. John F.
Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is
working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will
likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years
... We also should re member we have always
underestimated the progress Saddam has made in
development of weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Jay
Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the
past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has
demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and
biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he
has refused to do" Rep. - Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10,
2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intel
ligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to
rebuild his chemical and biological weap ons stock, his
missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He
has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to
terrorists, including al Qaeda members . It is clear,
however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will
continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and
chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop
nuclear weapons." - Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct
10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling
evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a
number of years, a developing capacity for the
production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He
is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive
regime .... He presents a particularly grievous threat
because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation
... And now he is miscalculating America's response to
his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for
weapons of mass destruction . So the threat of Saddam
Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ." -
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

SO NOW THE DEMOCRATS SAY PRESIDENT BUSH LIED, THAT THERE
NEVER WERE ANY WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION AND HE TOOK
US TO WAR FOR HIS OIL BUDDIES???
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,842 Posts
Assuming those quotes are true, and I don't doubt they are, it sure paints a terrible picture of the hypocrisy of politics. The Dems and liberals are guilty of it for sure.

I just wonder why the Dems have chosen to bash Bush when he has great approval ratings even now. Are there really that many wishy-washy people that have not decided what party they are going to vote for?

Besides, what is the platform the Dem candidate will run on other than "Bush is bad"? I would think the people who are considering a Dem for president would want to know what their candidate is going to do if elected instead of the ongoing Bush bashing that all Dems agree on anyway.

BTW, I totally disagree with Bush on the illegal immigrant proposal and the overtime proposal, but the decision to vote for him is based upon his character, integrity, and leadership he has shown during his presidency.
 

·
Boost is Good
Joined
·
3,135 Posts
the Dems are just using all these bad mouthing tatics for political gain:mad:
But practically every one I know sees through them, except for a few idiots.;)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
18,368 Posts
Excellent post and topic, redhotcobra. It's usually 01whitecobra that brings these thought-stimulating topics to the board. Once the Dem's figure out who their sacrificial lamb will be, the true bloodshed will begin...and I don't mean in Iraq. Kerry supposedly was involved in some type of massacre in a Vietnamese village during his stint in 'Nam. Dean has begun to show his true colors, and the rest are about done.
All of you youngsters who will vote for the first time can learn a lot this year. I personally don't care who you vote for, but DO try to make an EDUCATED decision.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,099 Posts
90 Notch said:


BTW, I totally disagree with Bush on the illegal immigrant proposal and the overtime proposal, but the decision to vote for him is based upon his character, integrity, and leadership he has shown during his presidency.

I was a strong Bush supporter, even after his tax refund which did nothing but give money back to his supporters(by this I mean that it was not aimed at the lower income/middle class who would have used it to stimulate the economy.

But since his Immigration and Overtime policies, I am moving away. I think these two acts will do more to destroy the economy than anything Clinton did, to include NAFTA. It will provide the Employers a surplus of Minimum wage workers who will do nothing but send their wages south of the border. The OT policy will allow people placed as Salary Employees to be exploited by forcing them to work longer hours for fear of being fired. Which once again will only profit the Emplyers, the ones who put GW in office.

I was watching CNN the other day and they had the Dem. Senator from NC(can't remember his name), and he seemed to know what he was talking about without bashing anyone.

And he didn't just finger point he had a plan for everything he had a problem with.
 

·
Hero in a half shell
Joined
·
2,584 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Vertnut said:

All of you youngsters who will vote for the first time can learn a lot this year. I personally don't care who you vote for, but DO try to make an EDUCATED decision.
This will be my first presidential year to vote. I think you know who i'm voting for.:cool:
 

·
Hero in a half shell
Joined
·
2,584 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
90 Notch said:
Assuming those quotes are true, and I don't doubt they are, it sure paints a terrible picture of the hypocrisy of politics.

what makes you think the qoutes are not real?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
18,368 Posts
I agree that GW has made some poor decisions, especially in the last few months. Of all the things mentioned (i.e. overtime laws, immigration,...), the one big fear of mine, is Terrorism. Not ONE other politician running for the other side, has come up with even one suggestion on how to fix this. I think it is of the utmost importance to this country, and it's economy, that another 9-11 never happens. The last one cost us 1 trillion dollars. The next one may do us all in, at least financially. It took the market 18 months to show a recovery of any kind, and I personally don't think it would ever recover from another hit like that. Soooo, with GW's stand on Terrorism, he's still my man. None of that other shit is going to matter if we don't eliminate Terrorism, and at least he's trying.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,099 Posts
I am going to wait and see which dem comes out on top. The way I see it GW is doing everything he can to assist in eliminating the middle class with his OT and Immigration plans, and help out those who put him in office.

But if the democrats don't have anyone strong enough they can pretty much hang it up. They need to start developing solutions to the problems they complain about, instead of bashing GW.
 

·
Beer Swillin' *******
Joined
·
1,371 Posts
I don't know what is worse. The hypocrisy or the fact that it does not surprise me.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,842 Posts
x_redhotcobra_x said:
what makes you think the qoutes are not real?
I never said they weren't real, read my post. It's not like there hasn't been false quotes written in articles or posted on the net. Nahhhh, thats never happened, how dare I be cautious.
 

·
No Cerveza... No Trabajo
Joined
·
21,924 Posts
They are all a bunch of hypocrites, Bush included. His medicare overhaul is the biggest piece of shit this side of Clinton. And now, we find out it isn't going to cost $395 billion, it will cost $534 billion.

I guess he got tired of greasing the palm of his energy buddies and started in on his drug company buddies.
 

·
No Cerveza... No Trabajo
Joined
·
21,924 Posts
Sad, latest USAToday poll shows Kerry actually leading Bush at the moment. Only a couple of weeks after the State of The Union and still a few democrats in the running.

I think the poll also showed Edwards leading Bush, which while I like the way the man thinks, he isn't ready for the show.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
18,368 Posts
After several weeks of nothing but Liberals on TV, and in all other forms of media, I'm not surprised Bush is behind...out of sight, out of mind. Bush hasn't even begun his campaign, and won't, until the Demo's pick their sacrificial lamb. I am certain it will be a blood-bath like we have never seen.
 

·
No Cerveza... No Trabajo
Joined
·
21,924 Posts
Vertnut said:
After several weeks of nothing but Liberals on TV, and in all other forms of media, I'm not surprised Bush is behind...out of sight, out of mind. Bush hasn't even begun his campaign, and won't, until the Demo's pick their sacrificial lamb. I am certain it will be a blood-bath like we have never seen.
I don't think Bush has anything to worry about.

Although, I like Edwards. Probably the only centrist in the bunch, but quite a bit inexperienced. He should have waited a couple more election cycles before jumping to the "show".
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,099 Posts
01WhiteCobra said:
I don't think Bush has anything to worry about.

Although, I like Edwards. Probably the only centrist in the bunch, but quite a bit inexperienced. He should have waited a couple more election cycles before jumping to the "show".
Couldn't we say the same thing about Bush? Howlong was he a politician before becoming president?

I like Edwards too something about someone who doesn't need to to inslut to get his point across...and actually has a point to make.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
18,368 Posts
Funny you should mention Edwards...the reason I (we?) like him, is the very reason the Dem's won't pick him. The wife and I were having this discussion getting ready for work this morning. I guess it proves I'm not really a Die-Hard Rightwinger after all. Close, but not totally.;)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,099 Posts
x_redhotcobra_x said:
what makes Bush a hypocrite in your opinion?
Bush's tax refund he sent out was an across the board refund, not staggered to give more to the lower class. His explanation for the refund was to give the economy a boost to start it ..however, if he really wanted to start the economy, he would have give it to the poor who would have spent it. By giving back to the rich they put it back in bank acounts, effectively stalling the economy.

His plan to eliminate overtime, is a plan strictly for the employers, the people who put him in office. By making employees exept they will be able to limit their overtime expenses, hence raising profits. The fact that the employers have to use overtime is an example of their own inefficiencies, Bush is rewarding them for this, instead of making them go into their own organization and fix these problems.

His immigration plan has the ability to put American workers out of work because it allows employers to use cheap immigrant labor. The wages paid to these immigrants will go below the border effectively taking their buying power out of the economy, and will have a staggering effect on the economy.
 
1 - 20 of 83 Posts
Top