You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Home Front: Politix
Democrats call White House rhetoric on Iraq ‘outrageous’
2006-09-04
Opposition Democrats on Sunday expressed outrage at a campaign by President George W BushÂ’s administration portraying critics of the Iraq war as defeatists reminiscent of those who tried to appease Nazis before World War II.

Bush’s top aides, including Vice President Dick Cheney and Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, delivered strident speeches last week describing the conflict in Iraq as a crucial part of the “war on terror,” invoking World War II and the Cold War. “Can we truly afford to believe somehow, some way, vicious extremists can be appeased?” Rumsfeld asked in his address.

Democratic lawmakers said the White House was trying to attack its critics by questioning their patriotism and determination to fight terrorist threats. “I thought his statements were outrageous,” Representative Marty Meehan of Massachusetts told CNN’s “Late Edition”.
Posted by:Fred

#18  Barbara, you really are sweet to say so. I am but the sledgehammer to your scalpel, as well I know, but I'm learning as fast as I can.
Posted by: trailing wife   2006-09-04 22:59  

#17  #16 tw scores again!

You speak the truth, tw - and it leave another mark. ;-p
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut   2006-09-04 22:39  

#16  This is the cheapest war on a percentage of GNP basis than we have fought in a century. On a dollar basis we can carry this on for a very long time, Mr. bk. And avarice isn't America's sin, it's the sin of the Muslim oil producing countries; were they not so greedy, they would have been investing their profits in improving their societies, educating their people to be self-supporting. With each post, sir, you demonstrate the shallowness of your thinking and the narrowness of your knowledge.
Posted by: trailing wife   2006-09-04 21:40  

#15  Crying towels here, get your crying towels.
Red, white, and blue donkey towels here.
Posted by: wxjames   2006-09-04 13:06  

#14  The Dems look so stupid at every turn. They are pissed off because the Administation uses WW2 comparisons all the while they can't stop comparing EVERY conflict to Vietnam. Duh.
Posted by: Intrinsicpilot   2006-09-04 12:26  

#13  "...then we could possibly lose or at least drag this thing out alot longer than it has to be drug..."

Indeed bk, that seems to be how things will be dragged. Most sad and really unnecessary just because of the indugent ignorance and stupidity called political correctness via distorted and wrong multiculturalism taken to be the real thing.
Posted by: Duh!   2006-09-04 11:43  

#12  Also, if the "republicans" and "Dems" cannot get it together and realize we'll all in this mess together then we could possibly lose or at least drag this thing out alot longer than it has to be drug...
Posted by: bk   2006-09-04 11:04  

#11  the muzzies apparently have us right where they want us... slowly going broke fighting an unseen nebulous enemy, just like they did with the Soviets. Eventually everybody runs out of money, they know this... We, in our avarice soaked views dont even contemplate this eventuality, we just keep printing the stuff.
Posted by: bk   2006-09-04 10:58  

#10  "Outrageous" is the word then Sen Dachle used whenever the Repubs laid a glove on them -- remember what happened to him.
Posted by: regular joe   2006-09-04 10:05  

#9  With the next terrorist strike on American soil the Dems can rejoice in their victory. These donks are going to lose the war for us if we are not carefull.
Posted by: 49 Pan   2006-09-04 09:11  

#8  Â“I thought his statements were outrageous,” Representative Marty Meehan of Massachusetts told CNNÂ’s “Late Edition”.

Outrageous, Marty? Kind of like these little things?

Term limits
Meehan first ran for Congress in 1992 on a platform of reform. As part of that platform, Meehan made a pledge not to serve more than four terms. He won the 1992 election and has been re-elected to Congress every two years since, including the latest election (2004). On the House floor in 1995 he scolded members who might go back on their promise to limit their tenure in office. "The best test of any politicians' credibility on term limits," he said, "is whether they are willing to put their careers where their mouths are and limit their own service." Despite this pledge, he again ran for Congress in the year 2000, exceeding four terms. [3]

Wikipedia
On 18 July 2005, Meehan's staff made controversial changes to his Wikipedia article. These edits consisted of, among other things, removing verified facts that portrayed him in a bad light. On January 27, 2006, Matt Vogel, Meehan's chief of staff, admitted to authorizing a replacement article on Meehan published on Wikipedia, with a staff-written biography Lehmann, Evan. "Rewriting history under the dome". Lowell Sun Online. January 27, 2006. This ran afoul of internal Wikipedia guidelines.
Posted by: Raj   2006-09-04 08:59  

#7  The White House didn't go far enough - and that's a problem. Meanwhile, we have this dumpkoft Newsweek vomit:
"The 'Islamofascists'
Newsweek - USA
... Some preferred the conservative buzzword "Islamofascism," which was catchy and tied neatly into Bush's historical view of the struggle. ... "
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/

True LLL.
Posted by: Duh!   2006-09-04 07:57  

#6  He operated behind the scenes at the 1864 Democratic party convention in Chicago; this convention adopted a largely Copperhead platform, but chose a pro-war presidential candidate, George B. McClellan. The contradiction weakened Democrats' chances to defeat Lincoln's reelection.

DFMD - thanks for that. It is amazing how similar the Copperheads were to todays Democrats in mindset. I think that the contradiction of todays Democrats back-room dealings to place bitter military men on their ballots could likewise backfire. In fact, looking at Kerry in 2004, it already has.
Posted by: Shush Sholuth7794   2006-09-04 05:04  

#5  That's right. Defeatists and Traitors. You heard it clearly. Clench your jaws, twist your faces, try not to wet your pants.
Posted by: SOP35/Rat   2006-09-04 01:53  

#4  Brilliant political move by the White House and about time.

Nothing says Bush is serious about the War on Terror like the boss himself.

Hit that bullypulpit, W!!
Posted by: badanov   2006-09-04 01:31  

#3  Truth Hurts.

I would love LOVE to see the Democrats who support America and the Wetern culture (If thier is any left) prove Rumsfield wrong. I want to see the Dems come up in support of US winning the WOT. I want to see the Dems get up and openly state that whatever it takes we are going to win and not take anything less than the destruction or complete surrender of Radical Islamist.

The Dems just complain about everything offer nothing as a alternative plan simply becuase thier plan wont sell. The Dems plan is retreat then when it all falls apart blame it all on Bush.

We are looking down the barrel of a Dem victory. That victory will at best just result in endless investigations and committee's damming the WOT one piece at a time at Worst it will be a full immediate retreat (redeployment) whatever followed by ending of military support and money followed by non-sptop blaming Bush's mistake debacle Iraq as why it all fell apart and why we are being attacked regularly at home again.

8yr's of Clinton's policy of just ignore the problem and kick cans down the road to the next guy is what got US 9-11 on the terrorist front and Nuclear Norks on the decsion front.
Posted by: C-Low   2006-09-04 00:46  

#2  Don't like the 'appeasers' analogy - try this one.
Posted by: DMFD   2006-09-04 00:29  

#1  They should know - the Dems certainly are experienced with outrageousness.

Oh, wait.... that's not what they mean?
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut   2006-09-04 00:15  

00:00