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
Hastert and Delay Assail Kerry Speech
2003-04-04
The top three Republicans in Congress sharply criticized Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry on Thursday for saying that the United States, like Iraq, needs a regime change.
These guys are the artillery, softening up Mr. Kerry for the coming assault in early 2004.
  • House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., released a statement that said in the midst of war, the nation should pull together to support the troops and commander in chief. "Once this war is over, there will be plenty of time for the next election," the statement said. "But the war is not yet over, and we still have much work to do to rid the world of Saddam Hussein and his brutal regime."

  • Sen. Bill Frist, R.-Tenn., the senate majority leader, said the statement called into question Daschle's (sic) fitness for presidential office. "Free and open discourse is one thing, but petty, partisan insults launched solely for personal political gain are highly inappropriate at a time when American men and women are in harm's way," Frist said in a statement.

  • House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, released a statement calling Kerry's words "desperate and inappropriate." "America before New Hampshire," DeLay said.
Kerry backed a congressional resolution last fall giving Bush the authority to use force to oust Saddam, but he repeatedly and hypocritically has criticized the president for failing to give diplomacy more time. "Clearly, Senator Kerry intended no disrespect or lack of support for our commander in chief during wartime, but the point of this campaign is, obviously, to change the administration of this government," said Kerry spokesman Robert Gibbs. "And unlike many of his Republican critics, Senator Kerry has worn the uniform, served his country, seen combat, so he'd just as soon skip their lectures about supporting our troops."
Wonder, if we took a count, how many Dems and Reps in Congress served in the military.
Kerry is a decorated Vietnam War veteran. Hastert and DeLay did not serve in the military. In response to Gibbs, DeLay's spokesman Jonathan Grella said, "His service to our country was admirable, but his words now are shamelessly political."

On the day that Bush announced military strikes would begin unless Saddam left the country, Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., said Bush's diplomatic efforts failed "miserably" because he failed to secure a U.N. resolution for the war. Daschle's remarks drew a sharp rebuke from Hastert and DeLay. This week, Daschle said that he was satisfied with Bush's strategy.
Please, Tom, please express your dissatisfaction. Don't be shy.
Posted by:Steve White

#13  Dean, Wetzel?!! You're kidding, right? Would the Democrats really be that stupid? The only Democrat that has a chance of making a race out of 2004 is Lieberman. Or Gephardt, if Dickie adopts a new set of "core beliefs."
Posted by: Christopher Johnson   2003-04-04 17:33:53  

#12  Neither political party has shown any real understanding of what the PEOPLE in this great nation want. Kerry (and his fellow dummycheats) wants a Democratic lock, so he can continue to destroy this nation with social welfare programs. The Repuglycons want an even bigger win in the House and Senate, so they can promote their own pet projects. Neither has stood back, read the Constitution, and decided to pursue the LEGITIMATE ACTIONS of Congress, as detailed in that document. Until they do, both parties will be part and parcel with the downward spiral of both politics and the national character of the United States.
Posted by: Old Patriot   2003-04-04 15:18:06  

#11  Kerry never opens his mouth unless he needs to change feet...
Posted by: mojo   2003-04-04 14:15:46  

#10  The harder left the dems go, the better. They are so far out of touch with the American people right now that you'd think they were all permanently vacationing in France.

Wee Doggies!
Posted by: Jonesy   2003-04-04 13:41:23  

#9  If the U.S. needs a "regime change", it's not likely to be pulled off by the likes of Kerry.
Posted by: Bomb-a-rama   2003-04-04 10:47:29  

#8  Sharpton! Sharpton! Sharpton! Sharpton!.....
Posted by: tu3031   2003-04-04 10:24:33  

#7  He's like an adolescent-Pat Paulson yelling poo poo at a church supper. Yeah, he stands out from the crowd but not in the way he intended. A little too immature to be taken seriously but a little too old not to know better.
Posted by: Hudson   2003-04-04 10:20:22  

#6  from foxnews - remarks from al from, leader of moderate DLC.

'But with polls suggesting that as much as 80 percent of the public strongly backs military action in Iraq, some Democrats are increasingly worried that the anti-war sentiment will backfire against the party.

"If a minority of our party can create doubts among the American people about our ability and our willingness to defend the country and keep it safe, we will be in trouble as a party, period," said Al From, president of the moderate Democratic Leadership Council.

From told Fox News he fears that anti-war liberals may restore a 1970s-era image of the party as weak, just when it needs to appear strong in the wake of Sept. 11.

"I don't care if it's an old image or a new image that says we're not strong enough to promote America's interests in the world. If that's the case, it's a bad image," From said.'

Posted by: liberalhawk   2003-04-04 09:47:57  

#5  actually kucinich hurts Dean, just as Dean hurts Kerry. One of the things that tends to help moderate dems is the proclivity of lefty dems to pursue a "holier than thou" strategy.
Posted by: liberalhawk   2003-04-04 09:27:13  

#4  Anyone but Lieberman has 0 foreign policy experience or general credibility vis-a-vis war or homeland security. Also, there are 11 (?) candidates. To knock each one out of the process requires a "concession" to said candidate. The moderates will be torn out of the strategic decision making process and replaced with Team Kuchinch.
Posted by: Brian   2003-04-04 07:00:22  

#3  I've written how Kerry doesn't impress me, well, I'll also note that Hastert and DeLay don't impress me either.

While turnabout is not necessarily fair play, H&D could be big enough to admit that Clinton deserved more support at the time over the Balkans.
Posted by: Hiryu   2003-04-04 06:12:01  

#2  Heh heh heh. I hate to think of the crap that would fly if Kerry got the nomination--but that would pale into insignificance compared to what would happen if Dean Howard won the ballot. Kerry at least tries to be circumspect, but leaves the telltale traces of his his inclinations in his wake. Like today. But Howard just lets it all loose. This could really be fun.
Posted by: therien   2003-04-04 04:23:43  

#1  The GOP hopes Kerry is going to be the nominee. But Dean is going to win.
Posted by: wetzel   2003-04-04 03:07:56  

00:00