It's been a few years since we had a President that would sacrifice his own future, for what he thought was right. I havent seen any Democrats lining up to do it. Georgie is the man.
Yeah Dems! Bush is a failure! Pffft! HA!
I love how this woman thinks and her sense of humor. Of course I also think she is a hottie!
IT'S LIKE CHRISTMAS IN DECEMBER!
Thu Dec 18, 8:01 PM ET Add Op/Ed - Ann Coulter
By Ann Coulter
Say, has anyone asked Dick Gephardt if this falls under "miserable failure"?
Ann Coulter
Obviously we'll have to wait for all the politics to play out, but at this stage it's hard to say which was worse for Howard Dean : the capture of Saddam Hussein or Al Gore's endorsement. Until Sunday, Gov. Mean's big applause line in speeches has been to sneer about the Bush administration's failure to catch Saddam Hussein. It seems the governor is better at prescribing bitter pills than at swallowing them.
In a speech to the Pacific Council the day after Saddam was captured, Dean nearly choked on the words, "The capture of Saddam is a good thing," and then quickly added, "but the capture of Saddam has not made America safer." (Possible headline: "Dean Says Saddam's Capture Good Thing, Just Not Really Good Thing.") If George W. Bush announced that a cure for cancer had been discovered, Democrats would complain about unemployed laboratory rats.
Liberals are against terrorism in a theoretical sense, but they oppose any concrete action to stop it (which is kind of how I feel about that whole Ashton Kutcher/Demi Moore business). They are unhappy the World Trade Center was bombed, and that's about all one can say with certainty. They talk about 9/11 like it was a cholera epidemic. Liberals would try to share in the joy over Saddam's capture, except they are so blue that we haven't let the French take over the United States yet.
On Fox News Sunday, Sen. John F. Kerry, D-Mass., said of Saddam's capture: "This is a great opportunity for this president to get it right for the long term. And I hope he will be magnanimous, reach out to the U.N., to allies who've stood away from us."
It's as if he were reading my mind! After listening to all the bellyaching from European leftists for the past eight months, I think I speak for all Americans when I say I've been on tenterhooks waiting for the right opportunity to grovel to the French. And now we have it -- a major win is the perfect opportunity! That Kerry has an uncanny sense for what the average American is thinking.
Actually, he lost me with that one. Maybe it's a good opportunity for the French and the United Nations to reach out to us, but by what logic is this an opportunity for us to reach out to them? As I understand it, the situation is: We caught Saddam. So the obvious next move is ...
(a) Put him on trial.
(b) Get information from him.
(c) Torture him.
(d) Turn him over to the Iraqis.
(e) Appeal to the French.
What was interesting about Kerry's suggestion was that it was the exact same suggestion liberals were making when they claimed the war was going badly. The day before Saddam's capture, The New York Times editorialized: "The way to deal with all that is going wrong in Iraq remains as clear as it was on the day that Mr. Bush declared an end to major combat operations. ... Instead of driving away France, Germany, Russia and Canada with financial sanctions, the president should be creating the room for compromise ..." Damn that Bush. He squandered the good will of a bunch of people who hate our guts.
Apparently, this is what liberals mean by "a plan":
Military setback: Appeal to the French.
Military victory: Appeal to the French.
Saddam captured: Appeal to the French.
Osama captured: Appeal to the French.
Osama catches Saddam: Appeal to the French.
In 24 months, Bush has perceptibly degraded terrorist operations throughout the world. The rebuilding in Iraq is going better than could possibly be expected. Liberals don't care. They just want to turn everything over to the French. (And, apparently, the recent capture of Saddam presents us with a golden opportunity to do so!) The Birchers were right about these people. They believe in world government more than they believe in the United States.
In fact, with Saddam Hussein's capture, the real question on most people's minds was: Who was the last chump to make a snippy remark about Bush not finding Saddam? We're still taking votes, but the current winner is ... Frank Rich. On the very day Saddam's capture was revealed to the world, The New York Times ran an article by Frank Rich discussing the "Lord of the Rings" movies. Rich wrote: "(T)he evil wizard Saruman (Christopher Lee), has vanished -- as out of sight, if not mind, as Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein."
One strongly suspects that the White House sat on the story of Saddam's arrest for a day so the Times could put out its regular Sunday bad news: "A Baghdad Neighborhood, Once Hopeful, Now Reels As Iraq's Turmoil Persists," "Saboteurs, Looters and Old Equipment Work Against Efforts to Restart Iraqi Oil Fields," "It's Going to Be a Bloody Christmas," "Dean Strives for a Nuanced Approach to Foreign Policy." The New York Times hasn't looked this foolish ... well, I guess since the day before.
Liberals should perk up. It's not all bad news. True, Saddam Hussein has been captured. But Norman Mineta is still at large.
IT'S LIKE CHRISTMAS IN DECEMBER!
Thu Dec 18, 8:01 PM ET Add Op/Ed - Ann Coulter
By Ann Coulter
Say, has anyone asked Dick Gephardt if this falls under "miserable failure"?
Ann Coulter
Obviously we'll have to wait for all the politics to play out, but at this stage it's hard to say which was worse for Howard Dean : the capture of Saddam Hussein or Al Gore's endorsement. Until Sunday, Gov. Mean's big applause line in speeches has been to sneer about the Bush administration's failure to catch Saddam Hussein. It seems the governor is better at prescribing bitter pills than at swallowing them.
In a speech to the Pacific Council the day after Saddam was captured, Dean nearly choked on the words, "The capture of Saddam is a good thing," and then quickly added, "but the capture of Saddam has not made America safer." (Possible headline: "Dean Says Saddam's Capture Good Thing, Just Not Really Good Thing.") If George W. Bush announced that a cure for cancer had been discovered, Democrats would complain about unemployed laboratory rats.
Liberals are against terrorism in a theoretical sense, but they oppose any concrete action to stop it (which is kind of how I feel about that whole Ashton Kutcher/Demi Moore business). They are unhappy the World Trade Center was bombed, and that's about all one can say with certainty. They talk about 9/11 like it was a cholera epidemic. Liberals would try to share in the joy over Saddam's capture, except they are so blue that we haven't let the French take over the United States yet.
On Fox News Sunday, Sen. John F. Kerry, D-Mass., said of Saddam's capture: "This is a great opportunity for this president to get it right for the long term. And I hope he will be magnanimous, reach out to the U.N., to allies who've stood away from us."
It's as if he were reading my mind! After listening to all the bellyaching from European leftists for the past eight months, I think I speak for all Americans when I say I've been on tenterhooks waiting for the right opportunity to grovel to the French. And now we have it -- a major win is the perfect opportunity! That Kerry has an uncanny sense for what the average American is thinking.
Actually, he lost me with that one. Maybe it's a good opportunity for the French and the United Nations to reach out to us, but by what logic is this an opportunity for us to reach out to them? As I understand it, the situation is: We caught Saddam. So the obvious next move is ...
(a) Put him on trial.
(b) Get information from him.
(c) Torture him.
(d) Turn him over to the Iraqis.
(e) Appeal to the French.
What was interesting about Kerry's suggestion was that it was the exact same suggestion liberals were making when they claimed the war was going badly. The day before Saddam's capture, The New York Times editorialized: "The way to deal with all that is going wrong in Iraq remains as clear as it was on the day that Mr. Bush declared an end to major combat operations. ... Instead of driving away France, Germany, Russia and Canada with financial sanctions, the president should be creating the room for compromise ..." Damn that Bush. He squandered the good will of a bunch of people who hate our guts.
Apparently, this is what liberals mean by "a plan":
Military setback: Appeal to the French.
Military victory: Appeal to the French.
Saddam captured: Appeal to the French.
Osama captured: Appeal to the French.
Osama catches Saddam: Appeal to the French.
In 24 months, Bush has perceptibly degraded terrorist operations throughout the world. The rebuilding in Iraq is going better than could possibly be expected. Liberals don't care. They just want to turn everything over to the French. (And, apparently, the recent capture of Saddam presents us with a golden opportunity to do so!) The Birchers were right about these people. They believe in world government more than they believe in the United States.
In fact, with Saddam Hussein's capture, the real question on most people's minds was: Who was the last chump to make a snippy remark about Bush not finding Saddam? We're still taking votes, but the current winner is ... Frank Rich. On the very day Saddam's capture was revealed to the world, The New York Times ran an article by Frank Rich discussing the "Lord of the Rings" movies. Rich wrote: "(T)he evil wizard Saruman (Christopher Lee), has vanished -- as out of sight, if not mind, as Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein."
One strongly suspects that the White House sat on the story of Saddam's arrest for a day so the Times could put out its regular Sunday bad news: "A Baghdad Neighborhood, Once Hopeful, Now Reels As Iraq's Turmoil Persists," "Saboteurs, Looters and Old Equipment Work Against Efforts to Restart Iraqi Oil Fields," "It's Going to Be a Bloody Christmas," "Dean Strives for a Nuanced Approach to Foreign Policy." The New York Times hasn't looked this foolish ... well, I guess since the day before.
Liberals should perk up. It's not all bad news. True, Saddam Hussein has been captured. But Norman Mineta is still at large.
1 - 20 of 85 Posts
Of course there is no shortage of Democrats who would sacrifice OUR future for the same thing.
How is G.W. sacrificing HIS future? He came into the White House accepting the fact that he'd be a one-term president because of how the election went.
Now, he's sitting pretty for a guaranteed second-term.
I suppose if you have nothing to loose, you're not risking anything by taking a wild chance.
Now, he's sitting pretty for a guaranteed second-term.
I suppose if you have nothing to loose, you're not risking anything by taking a wild chance.
Okay, first let me make my formal endorsements.
BUSH 2004
CHENEY 2008
#1Great article..Too many points to comment on...but she hit on ALOT of good points.
#2 Fuck the French...and boycott their products. (this is not meant to offend any french patrons on this board, but the French Gov't and anyone in FRANCE that hates the US)
#3 The best thing that can happen for the republicans is that Dean gets the democratic ticket. Despite what he thinks, Americans are not stupid, and they know he's a liar. Bush will beat him by a landslide.
#4 PRESIDENT Bush is doing a fabulous job, he inherited a failing economy when he took office (Clinton was too busy visiting the chinese when the stock market tanked, and he didn't really give a shit because he though most americans are stupid and will only remember the rally.)(I'll refrain from the blowjob jokes)
#5 I'm tired of the liberals claiming this was a unilateral attack. We had 60 countries support us either by troops, info or whatever. Not having the French, Germans and Japanese did not make it unilateral. It's not our fault they can't enforce their own resolutions.
Ok...I'm done...
BUSH 2004
CHENEY 2008
#1Great article..Too many points to comment on...but she hit on ALOT of good points.
#2 Fuck the French...and boycott their products. (this is not meant to offend any french patrons on this board, but the French Gov't and anyone in FRANCE that hates the US)
#3 The best thing that can happen for the republicans is that Dean gets the democratic ticket. Despite what he thinks, Americans are not stupid, and they know he's a liar. Bush will beat him by a landslide.
#4 PRESIDENT Bush is doing a fabulous job, he inherited a failing economy when he took office (Clinton was too busy visiting the chinese when the stock market tanked, and he didn't really give a shit because he though most americans are stupid and will only remember the rally.)(I'll refrain from the blowjob jokes)
#5 I'm tired of the liberals claiming this was a unilateral attack. We had 60 countries support us either by troops, info or whatever. Not having the French, Germans and Japanese did not make it unilateral. It's not our fault they can't enforce their own resolutions.
Ok...I'm done...
Cheney in 2008? I pray he dies of a heart attack first. That man would cause WWIII if it didn't happen sooner. He's nothing more than a fearmonger. The only person I'd fear more than him is Wolfowitz becoming president. :shocked
These political threads are just becoming giant Democratic bashing threads.
I vote for whoever the better man is. Democrats haven't had anyone decent to vote for in 40 years.
Give me a decent Democrat to vote for, and I'll vote for Democrat every time.
GW has great foreign policy, but his domestic policies suck ass.
I vote for whoever the better man is. Democrats haven't had anyone decent to vote for in 40 years.
Give me a decent Democrat to vote for, and I'll vote for Democrat every time.
GW has great foreign policy, but his domestic policies suck ass.
not saying true or false on that.. but democrats are the polar opposite.. great domestic.. shitty foreign...GW has great foreign policy, but his domestic policies suck ass.
His suck ass domestic policy has put the Market over 10K again. Unemployment is down. Economic growth is expanding at its best rate in over a dozen years. I can hardly wait for his GOOD policy!SD72GSXR said:GW has great foreign policy, but his domestic policies suck ass.
Why is it die hard republicans are always trying to prove something?Speed_Addiction said:His suck ass domestic policy has put the Market over 10K again. Unemployment is down. Economic growth is expanding at its best rate in over a dozen years. I can hardly wait for his GOOD policy!
:rolleyes
My 401K is just growing leaps and fucking bounds....:rolleyes
Bush's policies have an effect on economic growth.
Clintons policies had no effect on economic growth.
Reagan's policies had an effect on economic growth, but no effect on when the economy went sour.
Carters policies were responsible for the poor US economy.
Is that how it works?
Clintons policies had no effect on economic growth.
Reagan's policies had an effect on economic growth, but no effect on when the economy went sour.
Carters policies were responsible for the poor US economy.
Is that how it works?
Wow, you just gave me a great idea...Let me revise my endorsements:Baby Gorilla said:
Cheney in 2008? I pray he dies of a heart attack first. That man would cause WWIII if it didn't happen sooner. He's nothing more than a fearmonger. The only person I'd fear more than him is Wolfowitz becoming president. :shocked
CHENEY/WOLFOWITZ 2008 !!
Standard political maneouver for any leader who has domestic policy problems: start to get people looking at foreign policy issues. Liberal or Conservative, it doesn't matter. The playbook works the same way for both teams.
I would say that's an oversimplification.Papa_Complex said:
Standard political maneouver for any leader who has domestic policy problems: start to get people looking at foreign policy issues. Liberal or Conservative, it doesn't matter. The playbook works the same way for both teams.
If only it really were that cut and dry.
What the Fuck is wrong with you, wishing someone evil. I just don't understand your kind of thinking. It is devoid of all common sense and decency:confusedBaby Gorilla said:Cheney in 2008? I pray he dies of a heart attack first. That man would cause WWIII if it didn't happen sooner. He's nothing more than a fearmonger. The only person I'd fear more than him is Wolfowitz becoming president. :shocked
Then watch the next time that you have a liberal president. I think that you'll be surprised at how little there is to separate politicians, despite their stated goals. They all try to get what they want the same way.VstarVixxen said:
I would say that's an oversimplification.
If only it really were that cut and dry.
Please....I'm trying to have my lunch here....:barfPapa_Complex said:
Then watch the next time that you have a liberal president.
As your last federal election showed, the difference between having a Republican or Democrat in your figurehead position is balanced on a knife's edge. In the fat times the balance shifts to liberal. In the lean times, conservative. When in transition, you get something like the debacle you've just had.VstarVixxen said:
Please....I'm trying to have my lunch here....:barf
Perhaps it's easier for someone looking in through the "shop window" to see this?
That has nothing to do with my desire to puke when I think a Democrat could possibly be in control of the presidencyPapa_Complex said:
As your last federal election showed, the difference between having a Republican or Democrat in your figurehead position is balanced on a knife's edge. In the fat times the balance shifts to liberal. In the lean times, conservative. When in transition, you get something like the debacle you've just had.
Perhaps it's easier for someone looking in through the "shop window" to see this?
:barf :barf :barf
Then you must have been positively bolemic when Clinton was in office :nananaVstarVixxen said:
That has nothing to do with my desire to puke when I think a Democrat could possibly be in control of the presidency
:barf :barf :barf
1 - 20 of 85 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Cycle Forums: Motorcycle and Sportbikes Forum
A forum community dedicated to all motorcycle owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about performance, reviews, racing, touring, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Recommended Communities
