The Ramblings of the Millahtime Man

Tuesday, July 27, 2004

Democrats, WMD and Following Up What You Say

I found this interesting. A forward I got the other day. The reson is that so many Democrats want Bush to apologize for going to Iraq and going after Waepons of Mass Destruction. What about all those in congress who told him to go there? What about those that before we went told him to go there? Should they also get up and do the same as they expect from GW Bush? Heck, yeah.

Just because Bush was the one with the authority and power to make it happen doesn't mean he is the only one that would have gone in there for the same reasons given the same choice he was given. Should those who backed and pushed him to go get up there and say the same things they expect Bush to say? Heck, yeah.

For someone to first support and push Bush to go in there and then condem him for his actions is just wrong. You can admit you were wrong and that we shouldn't have done that but to put all the blame on the person that had the power and followed through with the deed you wanted and then tearing them a new one for it later is in bad character and taste.

"Character is like a tree and reputation like a shadow. The shadow is what we think of it; the tree is the real thing." --Abraham Lincoln

"[WE] 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 (D-MI), Tom Daschle (D-SD), John Kerry( D - MA), and others Oct. 9,1998

"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

"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

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons 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


"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

13 Comments:

  • Wow - you've really done a great job pointing out what two faced hypocrites the democrats and the majority of the politicians in office are being. Love the quotes. Haven't seen something as well put together with real quotations in a LONG while.

    Too bad the majority of the population will never hear it, and instead will listen to the garbage they heard at the DNC and what the liberal media tells them.

    By Blogger Kevin Flannery, at 11:13 AM  

  • Agree with most of what you say here, BUT, as there are no WMD, no ties with Osama BinAhole, a lot of kids getting killed. Someone in the current administration dropped the ball and provide a lot of bad information to a lot of good people - who acted on it without verification of fact. I supported the movement before the war was started based on what we heard. But I am not happy with how its being run. Guess I'm a flip flopper too. We are not safe, not liked, not supported by the rest of the world and have a huge tax burden that wasn't there 4 yrs ago. He's gotta go.

    By Blogger Texas Arm'o'the'clan, at 11:56 AM  

  • They were basing their decisions and posturing on the "slam-dunk" evidence put forth by the CIA and National Security Directorate, as well as Colin Powell's UN roadshow.

    The executive branch was selling the war; the legislative branch got duped into buying it just like the rest of us.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:03 AM  

  • Responding to Jdan:

    We are not safe, not liked, not supported by the rest of the world and have a huge tax burden that wasn't there 4 yrs ago. He's gotta go.Were we safe after Pearl Harbor? We we safe after we decided to go to Europe to defeat Hitler? Were we during the Cold War? No. We are not safe now because we are at war against an enemy that needs to be defeated. We won't be safe until we defeat that enemy.

    Much of the world didn't support us during WWII either (Germany, Italy, Japan). There were also many in this country (John Kerry included) and throughout the world that didn't support Ronald Reagan and his policies that ultimately led to the end of the Cold War. Just because it isn't popular doesn't mean it isn't the right thing to do.

    Also, which is better?

    An Iraq where Saddam Hussein is still in power and we don't know whether or not he has WMD. Where people live in constant fear of being tortured or put to death. Where Saddam might use his vast fortune to acquire WMD or fund terrorists. An Iraq that was already in a quasi-war state subject to no-fly zones and where the Iraqi people are subject to U.N. economic sanctions because of their crazed and ruthless leader.

    Or,

    An Iraq where the people can hope for something better. Where there's an actual chance for basic human rights and liberty. Where we are absolutely sure that Saddam will never again be a threat - to us, to his neighbors and especially to the Iraqi people.

    You tell me which is better.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:47 AM  

  • Hey -- do you have the whole speech the Kerry quotes came from?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:40 PM  

  • Once again, impeccably poor logic.

    For someone to first support and push Bush to go in there and then condem him for his actions is just wrong. You can admit you were wrong and that we shouldn't have done that but to put all the blame on the person that had the power and followed through with the deed you wanted and then tearing them a new one for it later is in bad character and taste.You are assuming that the Democrats who voted in favor of the war were given accurate information. The lack of accurate information is exactly the point of the democrats' gripe.

    The Bush administration clearly presented a one-sided case for war. They presented evidence from sources that they knew were flawed, and they withheld relevant evidence that pointed to there being no weapons. One expects a government to be unbiased, and the democrats (naively) believed that this administration gave them the complete picture.

    Congress people have to rely on the intelligence reports that the current administration gives them, which is exactly what people like Hillary Clinton did. It is out of the question for a congress(wo)man to actually go to these places and make their own observations...government is supposed to move slowly but not *that* slowly. When the reports that congresscritters rely on are biased, we all have a right to be upset.

    Question: say a jury in a murder trial is presented only part of the evidence in the case, and that evidence leads to a guilty verdict and subsequent execution. Do the members of the jury owe an apology if, years later, that rest of the evidence comes out that proves the defendant's innocence? What if it turns out that the prosecution had a court order to prevent that evidence from being shown to the jury during the trial?

    Information is power...

    Cheers,
    Reid

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:39 PM  

  • Heh, erased my comment already? Classic one-way punditry.

    And I'm a registered member of the republican party...

    Reid

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 2:38 PM  

  • "For someone to first support and push Bush to go in there and then condem him for his actions is just wrong."

    You make it sound like Kerry and Lieberman were bullying the WH to go attack Saddam. What would you be posting about the Democrats in congress if they had actually said "Hey wait, we don't totally agree Saddam is a threat to the US."? Would you laud their integrity, or would you call them pinko-commie-hippies?

    I find it interesting how republicans take everything on faith until someone has a different viewpoint, and then suddenly it's all lawyering and slander and half-truths. Sad, really.

    I would write you a longer post, but I already see that you delete comments you disagree with. So why bother?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:34 AM  

  • George Bush - dictating your future since selection '00!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:43 AM  

  • Two can play at that game.

    George Bush hates America. He is a terrorist. He is a drug addict (once an addict, always an addict). His daughters are loose floozies. His father is a wimp. His brother is a fool (and may be homosexual).

    George Bush sleeps with 9 year old boys. George Bush SAYS he loves Jesus, but really he's a satanist.

    George Bush's favorite dream is where he and Osama BinLadin play footsy while America burns. George Bush thinks that hard work is not a worthwhile value.

    George Bush is a communist.
    George Bush doesn't respect our fallen heroes.
    George Bush shirked his military duty.
    George Bush lies like you and I turn on a light.
    George Bush uses religion as an excuse to do things forbidden by all religions.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:51 AM  

  • I really hate seeing anyone who believed in Bush and rallied behind him after 9/11 getting reamed for it now. Kerry's mistake, and Hillary's mistake, was BELIEVING THEIR PRESIDENT. Of course they've changed their position since finding out that he lied to them, and to his country, for his own slimy goals!

    By Blogger Liberty, at 7:16 PM  

  • This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    By Blogger Roberto Iza Valdes, at 8:36 AM  

  • This comment has been removed by the author.

    By Blogger Roberto Iza, at 10:14 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home