Democrats call White House rhetoric on Iraq 'outrageous'

[rodeodance]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060904/wl_mideast_afp/usattackspolitics_060903214606

Democrats call White House rhetoric on Iraq 'outrageous'

Sun Sep 3, 8:21 PM ET

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Opposition Democrats expressed outrage at a campaign by President George W. Bush'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 Defense 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 (news, bio, voting record) of Massachusetts told CNN's "Late Edition."..........

[Born Free]

1. Democrats need to stand up...

Democrats need to stand up and remain standing, the American people need to know the democrats are willing to call the republicans out - all democrats need to do this, not just an occasional rebel. Democrats need to get the American people to tell the republican party that "We had enough!" It's time to start working on remedies rather than continue playing this who is more patriotic game.

[rodeodance]

2. "We need political solutions, said Biden (He DOES have a 3 prong

'poliical' solution but this article did not list it although I have heard the main points many times.


.....Democratic Senator Joe Biden of Delaware said Rumsfeld had gone "too far."

"He knew exactly what he was doing, the only similarity I find between this war and World War II is that this war is shortly going to have lasted as long as World War II," Biden told ABC's "This Week."

He said the administration's language was too simple and that the various threats and crises facing the United States could not be solved by military power alone.

"We need political solutions, and so it's sad that no one in this administration is speaking to what these solutions are," Biden said.

[thepurpose]

6. The media ignores demo ideas on Iraq and repeat the GOP talking points

that demos have no plan. Like what's going on now is a plan of the GOP it's GWB's plan and its failing.

[Phredicles]

8. Yes; Democrats hurt themselves politically when they don't respond

aggressively to this sort of heavy-handed rhetoric (see Kerry and the Swiftboat dirbags, Dukakis and the Willie Horton crap): When voters see the Democrats appearing unable or unwilling to stand up for themselves, they can't help but wonder who they will stand up for.

[depakid]

14. They also hurt themselves every time

one of them issues some whiney little apology for calling a spade a spade.

I don't think they'll ever learn- which is one reason why unlike others, I'm not optimistic about November.

[life long demo]

11. Democrats need to do more than stand up

Democrats will not get elected if they continue to be "gentlemenly". We all have seen the polls where people SAY they hate negative politics, but they listen to it. John Murtha did it, said Rove sat on his fat backside in an airconditioned room pretending he is "fighting" the war on terror. Remember the cheers!

http://oneamericanspointofview.blogspot.com/

[cyclezealot]

30. IT will take a united front to stand up to their lies and distortions

If we do not go on the attack together, that division will allow their lies to stand.

[sui generis]

31. exactly - we need to stop reacting to the name calling too

The best offense is a good offense, yet here we are once again flapping our arms and sputtering with indignation at being called names.

Why aren't WE the ones delivering the attacks and canvassing the news shows?

[rodeodance]

3. It is good to see some Dems get some headline time on the Iraq war vs

just how they are doing in the polls.

[magellan]

4. Shays' (R) comment is interesting

"I read Rumsfeld's speech and I buy into it entirely," Shays told CNN. "I think people need to wake up to this war that we are confronting, Islamist terrorism is a real threat. We see it in London. We see it in Europe. We're going to see it in the United States and we better wake up."

Subliminal preparing us for another attack? I thought Bush** was keeping us safe? :sarcasm:

I'd really like to know why we haven't seen further attacks. We're big (more places to hide), have virtually undefended borders and insecure ports and airports, yet nothing. And I don't believe for a second that we've become experts at counter-terrorism in five years. They've hit Spain, the UK...Even Israel with all its experience and whiz-bang counter-intelligence can't stop suicide bombers.

[luckyleftyme2]

5. A SIMPLE ANSWER

WE'VE BEEN LUCKY,THERE HAS BEEN ATTEMPS BUT THEY MOSTLY FAILED BECAUSE OF HUMAN ERROR!
TO GIVE ALL THE CREDIT TO OUR SECURITY WOULD BE TO SET YOUR SELF UP TO FALSE SECURITY!
EUROPE HAS HAD CELLS OF TERROR LONGER THAN WE HAVE,AND THEREFORE THEY ARE DEEPER ROOTED.
THE HOME GROWN ONES ARE THE REAL DANGER!
THE SOONER WE VOTE THIS ADMINISTRATION OUT,THE QUICKER WE WILL FIND A SOLUTION!!!

[magellan]

7. Okay, first of all, caps off please

I'm not deaf. (Typing in all caps is generally construed as yelling.)

I don't believe human error accounts for the lack of attacks on US soil. As I said, the Israelis have been at this far longer than we have; they have super-duper anti-terrorism systems in place, and they STILL get hit, almost at will, any day of the week that a suicide bomber decides to strap bombs on.

We have nothing like their security. And it doesn't take a fortuitous genius -- homegrown or otherwise -- to blow themselves or something up. If terrorists wanted to cause economic havoc and public pandemonium in the US, they could do so easily. Luck has nothing to do with the reasons they haven't.

[stepnw1f]

10. And The Wya the GOP HAs Done Things

Have literally made us more prone to terrorism. Inflamming the Middle East and doing virtually nothing here to make us more secure is if not incompetent, it's a deriliction of duty. Also, as I recall, terrorism is on a rise globally since dumb ass invaded Iraq, a country that had nothing to do with terrorism (9-11).

Now we don't even have the proper funding for security, since this nation is in the largest debt ever. Our National guard isn't even what it used to... Just look at what happened when Katrina slammed into New Orleans.

Worse yet, Bush hasn't done shit to capture Bin Laden and let him get away. I really don't think the GOP is concerned with terrorism, but more concerned about making a buck. If they really gave a shit, they would have tried working with the Democratic party... instead they divided this nation, gave them the finger, then finally blamed terrorism on them.

Me thinks the GOP like using terrorism for political gain and a way of stripping our civil liberties away from us. They always seemed to hate us on the left for our Freedoms.

[bahrbearian]

27. SO WHY HAVEN'T WE BEEN ATTACKED ?

I THINK IT'S BECAUSE OUR ENEMY MY BE OUR SELF'S. OUR POLICIES , OUR GOVERNMENT. pardon me if I shout!!!! is that to many !!! points too? I hope iI didn't hurt your ears!@!!!!!!!!@

[howmad1]

28. An even simpler answer:

There is absolutely no reason whatsoever that the "terrorist" have to attack the U.S. They have, with help from this administration accomplished everything they intended for this country. The country in now in a constant state of fear, our treasury is rapidly going bankrupt, our freedoms have been greatly diminished, we're losing young men and women in a stupid, sensless war, etc. etc. etc. Seems like this administrations' policies in their alleged effort to fight terrorism are aiding the terrorists rather than fighting them.

[kainah]

24. it's edited down now

Apparently they edited it down because all it says now is "I read Rumsfeld's speech and I buy into it entirely," Shays told CNN.

What a fool he has become. It's very sad to see a man who actually used to have a good deal of integrity sell his soul to remain in the good graces of the hacks running the repug party.

[sui generis]

32. and on that note

there have been terrorists since the dawn of time. They only broke through on the republican watch.

Predators predate. Terrorists terrorize. Those are givens, things are what they are. What counts is how well you protect yourself and yours from predators, and likewise from terrorists.

And clearly the republicans, who had control of both houses, our security agencies, the executive office and the supreme court FUCKED UP what no other party in office has ever let come to pass.

We lost the world trade center on the republican's watch because of their incompetence. This is the point we need to drive home over and over and over.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

9. Rummy's Right!!

Vicious extremists can't be appeased. That's why we have to get them the hell out of Washington before they invade somebody else.

[emald]

12. being preached at by criminals is demeaning

GWBushit and his cronies are international and national criminals. They have committed crimes against humanity with malice aforethought. GW himself is still awol and now a deserter. Every time his onboard marines salute him when he alights from his helicopter I want to puke.
How is it that these people have come to run this country? Why are we as americans allowing this corporate fascist state to be set up?
Appease me you fuckwaded gopers, go straight to prison. Lying sacks of shit.

[WatchWhatISay]

13. I just love that quick response team

What, it took you a week to figure out what to say in reply?

Speaks to me of little conviction.

[crossroads]

21. Will Dems EVER grow a Spine???

We have the worst president in modern days who is floundering and the Dems are enablers IMO! Why can't they go on the attack for a change and play offense?

[thoughttheater]

15. Are Dem Calls For Rumsfeld Firing A Good Strategy?

I would suggest that the Democrats take a play from the McCain game plan...and keep repeating the line that Rumsfeld serves at the request of the President...thereby forcing voters to question the administration's ability to successfully prosecute not only the Iraq war, but also the war on terror. Essentially, the Democrats need voters to doubt the President's overall handling of national security and the war on terror...demonstrated by the fact that he continues to proceed with Rumsfeld as his operative...more than they need to push for the firing of Donald Rumsfeld.

The goal would be to take the accusation that Democrats are defeatists and shift the discussion to point out that so long as the President refuses to make much needed changes, we are already being defeated. If voters accept that the Bush administration is losing the war on terror or is unable to adjust in order to win it, they will be less apprehensive to give Democrats an opportunity.

Voters need to see the GOP plan as an open wound unlikely to get better without a new prescription and they need to be convinced that the President is unwilling to administer the necessary medication to make that happen. My own preference would have been for Democrats to offer a more concrete alternative plan for Iraq and the war on terror...but that is now unlikely...so it seems clear to me that they must now convince voters that keeping Republicans in power will not lead to success in Iraq and more importantly in the war on terror.

Read full text here:

www.thoughttheater.com

[VegasWolf]

16. Thoughtful response! Welcome to DU! nt

[brer cat]

20. Hang a yellow ribbon saying "stay the course"

with a one ton piece from a failed NO levee attached around Bush's neck and let it stay until the back of the evil one is broken.

Great post. I think we do need dems to attack Bush's mule-headed refusal to admit mistakes and make any adjustments to strategy as playing right into the hands of the terrorists from whom he is supposed to be protecting us.

Welcome to DU!:hi:

[RangerSmith]

33. I dunno

this is pretty much saying you have to be a democrat to know that Rumsfeld and Cheney are pulling the strings.

I really think that whole line of thought is as big a problem as anything else. Thinking the voters, especially the independents, aren't as smart as you are and you need to play stupid word games to create images... eh... well, I think the last two presidential elections were run that way and the results of how that all worked out should be considered.

[The Wizard]

17. Bush is the Great Appeaser

bin Laden wanted our bases out of Saudi Arabia and Bush appeased.
bin Laden wanted Saddam Hussein out of power, done.
Bush says they hate us for out freedoms and then he shreds our Constitution.
From what parallel universe are Bush and his supporters?

[19jet54]

18. WWII Reminder

During WWII, the world threat was so obvious to all that Russia, China, France, Great Britain and the U.S.A. were allies against Hitler and his allies: Today, the Iraq coalition is missing Russia, China and France. While the world was united against terrorism after 9/11, the world is becoming united against the U.S.A. since Iraq. And we have even less success with the the U.N. Security council on Iran & North Korea.

The current GOP rhetoric thru 'W's boys is nothing more than a pre-emptive political attack, like the Iraq conflict, because they are loosing the American people's support - Iraq is more like Vietnam than WWII, and they know it!

[gulliver]

19. Whoa! What a blistering response!

That'll show those GOP ruffians! How dare they say those outrageous things?!?!

What's wrong with the following:

"Yeah, Rumsfeld's got a lot to teach us about wars. Cheney too. They are legends in their own minds. But what's the excuse for the Republican Congress?"

[Dems Will Win]

22. DRAFT ALERT COMING SOON!!!!!

[drmondo]

23. Rumsfeld / Cheney highlight Bush Incompetence

Five years into this "war" on terror and two of the Horsemen invoke Godwin's law. Democratic response: expressing outrage. This does not exactly strengthen credentials when trying to win votes with an angry population.

Perhaps one could continue with the World War II analogy: While Bush does not try to appease the evildoers, he strengthens them through his ignorance. He attacked Iraq, the wrong country. If Bush had been president in World War II, perhaps he would have attacked Franco's Spain on the basis of shared ideology. I'm sure he would have put together a stellar coalition just like he did with Iraq. Not satisfied with just imprisoning Japanese Americans, he would have labeled captured civilians all soldiers and ordered his men to use torture on them. The world would have seen America as some nation giving lip service to liberty, but not following its founding principles.

After losing thousands of American lives in vain through "staying the course", he would have finally decided to attack the Germans who by now would have been close to building the A-bomb.

In WW-II we a) attacked the right country, b) built a coalition and c) had support. I like the WWII analogy, it helps to illustrate how incompetent Bush is.

[lumpy]

25. Good post ,drmondo

Thanks

[samsingh]

26. outrageous pack of lies would be even more accurate

[antiblazer]

29. Repukes have a PRE-WWII view of the world

Republicans have a PRE-WORLD WAR II view of the world. And Democrats have a post-9/11 view of the world. That makes the Repukes wrong -- deeply and profoundly and consistently wrong!!