Outrage! Bush attacks Rockefeller, Reid, Levin, to cheers from our troops!

[DeepModem Mom]

Is it appropriate for a President to use our military for political purposes like this? Has it been done before?

He's speaking to troops in Alaska. CNN has cut it off now. He didn't name the Senators, but called them senior "Democrat" Senators. Wolf Blitzer said that he was talking about Rockefeller, Reid and Levin. Bush said when they supported him about Saddam as a threat they were being patriotic, or something -- I don't remember the word he used -- but now they're being political.

The people of West Virginia, Nevada and Michigan are seeing their elected representatives in the Senate trashed by a President, to the cheers of our troops? I know he's used the troops as support and backdrop, but I don't think he's trashed Dems in this partisan way until Veterans Day, and now again today.

Is this an outrage???

[wtmusic]

1. When the military is used for political purposes

it's called a "coup".

[murray hill farm]

19. Yes..it sure is!

u were right on with that one...great..and so correct a response...thanks for it...i will use it..if ok with you..too good to pass up something so right on!

[colbushwhacker_2000]

22. Next move by Bu$h

will be a declaration of martial law and the suspension of the writ of habeaus corpus.

If we don't fight back, this will happen.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

52. Don't you read the news? Habeas corpus already suspended. Bush admin

has reserved the right to itself to designate people as terrorists, by its own criteria, to be held as long as it pleases with no charges whatsoever. It has reserved the right to do this with at least one U.S. citizen, Jose Padilla. U.S. citizen, seized on U.S. soil.

[mom cat]

69. New fight to restore habus corpus: Binganham Amendment needs you!

SENATOR GRAHAM PULLS A FAST ONE TO ABORT HABEAS CORPUS

With virtually no advance notice the Republican majority in the Senate (with the shameful complicity of Democrats Conrad, Landrieu, Lieberman, Nelson, and Wyden) approved a last minute amendment to the Defense Authorization Act to deny U.S. courts jurisdiction to examine the legality of detainee detention in Guantanamo and elsewhere. They did this in defiance of the not yet completely packed Supreme Court (another reason to reject Alito), whose authority they would annul.
This is all despite the well-known FACT that many scooped up into these hell holes of torture are not terrorists at all, some even having been sold for bounty. Senator Bingaman immediately responded with a proposed corrective amendment (S.AMDT.2517) to restore jurisdiction.

ACTION PAGE: (Restore Habeas Corpus)http://www.millionphonemarch.com/habeas.htm


ACTION PAGE: http://www.nocrony.com/ (No right wing conservative to replace Sandra Day O'Connor)

Is our government telling us that there is no possible way any of those people can be convicted of a crime, by even an American jury, if they were to have a fair trial? We also know that our own military attorneys were fired for protesting because the tribunals already established were such miscarriages of justice. If there is nobody in detention who can be convicted of anything without special kangaroo courts, then the real terrorists have indeed won, for we will then have abdicated all moral authority. Please contact your senators at once to tell them to support the Bingaman amendment.

Please take action NOW, so we can win all victories that are supposed to be ours, and forward this message to everyone else you know.

If you would like to get alerts like these, you can do so at http://www.usalone.com/in.htm

Or if you want to cease receiving our messages, just use the function at http://www.usalone.com/out.htm

Powered by The People's Email Network
Copyright 2005, Patent pending, All rights reserved

[Vincardog]

2. The troops have always been used this way. Look at the Movies

All the propaganda films put out about and during WW2. What is wrong is that Mr. Proud to be the WAR TIME pRESIDENT now wants to say the Dems. got us in this. I call BS

Hey Commander Bunny Pants WHAT THE FUCK IS THE MISSION?
How will we define MISSION ACCOMPLISHED this time?

[DeepModem Mom]

4. But did previous Presidents criticize the opposition party...

using the cheers of troops in wartime for political purposes? I know they've used the troops in support of an ongoing war.

[librechik]

27. In Bushworld WE are the enemy--sad perversion of both politics

and warfare.

I have to :puke: now

[AX10]

3. It's called treason.

Also, Levin OPPOSED the war in Iraq and voted no on IWR.

[rodeodance]

5. yes, Jr/WH do it all the time. Whenever he needs a boost he chats to

the troops.

Is it appropriate for a President to use our military for political purposes like this? Has it been done before?

[DeepModem Mom]

7. I don't think he's called out individual Democrats, or even our party....

in speeches to troops. I think he's used that same 9/11, terror speech, and given rosy reports about Iraq. I don't think he's done this until Veterans Day, and again today.

[liveoaktx]

12. This is the FIFTH time he's given that terror speech

It's like
Part 1- welcome and mention everybody
Part 2 -scare the beejesus out of people, mention 9/11 and islamo-fascism
part 3-insert trashing the democrats
part 4- put in the last part of standard TERROR speech

If you compare on the White House site, you will see this is nothing new, just has a TRASH THE DEMS insert

[DeepModem Mom]

15. But I think that's a big diff. nt

[liveoaktx]

16. I mean from this perspective-he can't give a new speech, its like

a sales presentation where you have your patter down. He wants to scare people so he has a standard speech, and the chunk added on Veterans day to the SAME SPEECh is designed to go on the offensive.
But the wrapper is OLD and familiar and in most cases, word for word.

[NightOwwl]

34. Yes...it is a big difference. He has always stayed above the fray.

This is the first time he personally (not Rove, not Smear Vets, not his other attack dogs) has attacked the Dems. It shows just how pathetically desperate he is.

[wryter2000]

63. Partisan, partisan, partisan

Partisan has to be our new mantra. The sheeple hate partisan, even if they don't know what it means.

[tlsmith1963]

42. I Know!

He always gives the same stupid speech! Geez, Bush, can't you *change* it once in awhile?

Tammy

[Tesla]

60. They are given orders to be on his side!

Smile for the camera!!

[thefloyd]

6. Bush is desparate. Kerry needs to call out Bushs

panty waste for having daddy protect him

[rzemanfl]

14. Panty waste? I agree Bush is full of it and so are his pants. Did

you mean to say this?

[Divernan]

20. Pantywaist: child's undergarment where top buttons to trunks, or a sissy.

I always mean to start a collection of the odd ways people spell words they have heard but never read. And since we are less and less a country of readers, these bizarre terms crop up more and more. The other day some DUer wrote "tow the line". The actual expression is "toe the line", meaning, I believe, draw a line in the dirt with your toe, which no one is to cross, or alternatively, not stepping a toe over a line, referring to boundaries.

But re panty waist, in Bush's case, he is basically panty waste!

[druidity33]

59. i've seen these two...

"irregardless" is a favorite non-existent word of mine...
then i've seen this one... "for all intents and purposes"...
what does that mean anyway?

[eggman67]

67. Yeah

"irregardless" is a favorite non-existent word of mine...

That one is annoying :)

then i've seen this one... "for all intents and purposes"...
what does that mean anyway?

Pretty much what it says, though I's seen that one written as "for all intensive purposes." Made me spit coffee.

[rzemanfl]

70. This one came through our office a few years ago, you have to

think Southern and phonetically to get it. "I had no eyedear that I could get in trouble for this."

[thefloyd]

21. Yeah I guess

I was typing fast.

[sellitman]

8. Remember he turned an Aircraft Carrier Around for a photo op.

And who can forget the shot of him in his nifty little flight suit! What a man! :sarcasm:

[alfredo]

9. so bush is trying to turn the military against his political foes.

I think that is criminal.

[DeepModem Mom]

11. Me, too. I, as said, am outraged! nt

[thefloyd]

23. No

HE is trying to make people feel guilty. You are either with us or against us. America has become sick

[alfredo]

44. But he did say it before a military crowd.

I don't trust him. Maybe he thinks he can hold onto power by using the military against his critics. If he can invade a country, killing tens of thousands of people to promote his political and financial goals, he could turn the military against us.

[spanone]

10. Just when I think that Bastard couldn't stoop lower. He shames our nation

[Neil Lisst]

13. This is an outrage. The CIC should never give such a speech

to active duty troops. It's wrong.

[Bluebear]

57. Extremely wrong. nt

[LevelB]

17. You are absolutely correct - this is wrong, wrong, wrong.

No excuses, no spin, no "everybody does it" - it is wrong. period.

B.

[thefloyd]

24. No

just ignore Roves little temper tantrum

[IChing]

18. This is what a coward does, he yells at his enemies and then runs away

out the country so that reporters can't question him or even discuss this in the media.

This is as brave as when he met up with Cindy in Texas and DC or when he went "absent" in his "honorable" service in the Air National Guard.

[DeepModem Mom]

25. UPDATE: Bush said Dems giving mixed signals to troops --

Heard this as I heard a recap of the speech. When will he just go on and accuse Dems of treason?

[Catherine Vincent]

26. Did any of the so called "reporters" point this out?

Because the only ones that ever listen to dubya when he is on the tube are his bushbots and maybe a few political junkies.

[DeepModem Mom]

28. There was no mention on CNN about the possibility...

that this might be inappropriate. There was much talk about Bush's lowest poll numbers ever -- that was pretty much the story, so no boosting Bush -- but no commentary on this as using troops for political purposes.

[ultraist]

29. He is so pathetic. Pitiful.

Using our troops and hiding behind them to promote his twisted political ideology.
:puke:

[Solly Mack]

30. He's not supposed to "campaign" to the troops

He is allowed to address the troops and to talk policy - but by the rules, a President is not allowed to "campaign" to the troops - he can't tear one party down while bolstering another - by doing so he is attacking members of the US government and that's a no-no.

I heard the speech and that's exactly what he did.

[DeepModem Mom]

32. Thanks for the confirmation, Solly! nt

[Solly Mack]

35. Welcome. Bush did this in his first 4 years as whitehouse idiot

He would use the troops to make what were more or less campaign speeches...they are a captive audience and can't disrespect the CinC even if they are Democrats themselves.

He can't do this. It's a conflict of interest - and there is a regulation on it. I'll have to look it up though.

[NightOwwl]

31. Rove - the one-trick pony.

No wonder the two of them get along so well...Rove loves to think of ways to smear people and Bush the psycopath gets off on smearing them.

[lonestarnot]

33. What a freak show!

[DanCa]

36. I have never seen things as bad as this even when pappy and ronnie were

in charge. I believe a sitting president should never ever insult half the country. That's why were in such a political dissary/ in this country. And note to the president if y ou want me to stop insulting you than you should stop insulting me.

[leftchick]

37. I have the Yahoo link here DMM and you are right..

This man Is Despicable! I can only hope that Levin, Reid and Rockefeller come out and scream how inappropriate and tasteless and hopefully breaking some codes this is! Outrageous! :grr:

"They spoke the truth then and they're speaking politics now," Bush charged.

<snip>

"I don't think you're going to see headline breakthroughs," National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley said on Air Force One. He dashed any prospect that Japan would lift its ban on American beef imports during Bush's visit and said a dispute with China over trade and currency would remain an issue after the president returns home.

<snip>



He quoted pre-war remarks by three senior Democrats as evidence of that Democrats had shared the administration's fears that were the rationale for invading Iraq in 2003. Bush did not name them, but White House counselor Dan Bartlett filled in the blanks.

_"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons." — Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va.

_"The war against terrorism will not be finished as long as (Saddam Hussein) is in power." — Sen. Carl Levin (news, bio, voting record), D-Mich.

<snip>

"The truth is that investigations of the intelligence on Iraq have concluded that only one person manipulated evidence and misled the world — and that person was Saddam Hussein," Bush charged.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051115/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_asia_27

What A Pig...

[DeepModem Mom]

39. That is the link, indeed, leftchick -- thank you! nt

[Catamount]

38. Must be then --he got his boner! Yeeks

[B Calm]

40. Our little Hitler is still spreading his propagandi..

[tlsmith1963]

41. He's Desperate

Hopefully it will backfire on him. And those "cheering" troops? Probably sound-effects. Wouldn't surprise me, since nothing is beneath these slimeballs.

Tammy

[jazzjunkysue]

43. Catapult at 2:00! Incoming!

:scared:

[FreedomAngel82]

45. Hopefully it'll backfire

I think people are getting tired of negative political attacks such as this. Look at his recent poll raitings. I think this is why they're doing this because the polls are leading in favor of the democrats and he has to remind people he's a "war president" and the "threat" to our country and yada yada. I remember seeing a report last week after the Virgina and New Jersey wins and there was a report about negative attacking and they basically were telling how people were fed up with negative attacking.

[MsMagnificent]

46. He's preaching only to his choir

as usual.

I don't think you're going to see much change,
that is unless our champions like Reid, Pelosi, Dean, etc. retreat from their counter-attack --nay SELF-DEFENSE!-- and LET this guy get away with his lies and propaganda some more!

Repeating something enough times gives it strength may be a sad but true thing, but it works both ways! Let Bu$h flap his gums with his obfuscations -- as long as WE stand strong and reiterate our position at every possible moment! We can't give them one single inch!

Truth is on OUR side!!

[Beam Me Up]

47. The United States is about a half inch away from a civil war right now.

And the damndest thing is, most people are completely unaware of what is going on. That is what makes this situation truly dangerous. At some point the people are going to be given an 'explanation' for events unfolding--the way they were given an 'explanation' to the events that unfolded on 9/11. The 'explanation' may not in fact be accurate or true, any more than the 'explanation' for what happened in New Orleans (to use one example).

This not a good sign. But, on the other hand, does the military REALLY support *? I don't think so.

[nadinbrzezinski]

49. but every time I mention we are one inch from a HOT civil

war some call it tin foil nuttery, or others a call to arms... by the way we are in the midst of a cold civil war and you are right.. the troops ain't but if given orders it is called a mandatory fun time. Don't expect leslie to explain this to the viewers

[Beam Me Up]

51. Well, they attacked us first, and they've held the high ground for five

years now.

The selection of 2,000; the events of 9/11; the selection of 2002; the Iraq war; and the selection of 2004--to name but a few--everything about this Presidency has been a lie. Everything. And they've gotten away with it because the media has given them credibility when they should have been rounded up and thrown in the hoosegow years ago.

Either we have enforceable laws or we do not and if we DO NOT, then the only way to do things is by force:

Those who make peaceful change impossible Make violent revolution inevitable.
-President John F. Kennedy

[nadinbrzezinski]

54. Hmm I guess Kennedy was calling for Revolution too

the civil war actually started iwth the hunting of the President, just that must of us did not notice... but that is where the radicalization of some started. When we take the reins of power back I fear what they will do... for they will fear loosing their precious 30 year old plus project

[Beam Me Up]

55. They ARE going to loose. The question is, how are they going to play the

End Game. Are they going to SURRENDER to those valiant ideals of Truth and Justice? Or are they going to take us into the hot civil war you speak of? As someone once said, "you don't steal two elections, murder 3,000 civilians, launch an illegal and immoral war killing and maiming tens of thousands more, just to go quietly into the night."

[nadinbrzezinski]

56. That has been my point

and you forgot the USPA and other aparatus of the police state... no my friend, they don't intend to go out quietly into that good night, espedically when that good night may lead to Geneva...

[nadinbrzezinski]

48. mandatory fun time and the troops have no choice

[LaPera]

50. And Kennedy, Boxer, Dean, Kerry and Harkin!!!

[libhill]

53. Not an outrage -

more like stupidity. When these guys return from Shrubs little war, assuming they return alive, and find their benefits reduced, and V.A. funding slashed, and bill collectors start harassing them for monies due for lost equipment or housing costs, let's see how fucking loud they cheer then. I'm sure Shrub and the Repukes will take real good care of these folks - just like the 200,000 homeless vets they are so concerned about right now. Not.

[CanOfWhoopAss]

58. Repukes will blame all that on the Dems when we win back congress in '06

Pass the bills now and let them go into effect when Dems are in control.

[ComerPerro]

61. "Cheer and applaud, or else!"

[DeepModem Mom]

64. Indeed! As OP I want to CLARIFY that the troops are blameless...

here. I'm assuming that they have no choice but to cheer Shrub on. I think also that operatives in the room encourage and/or begin the most raucous cheering. My outrage is directed at Rove/Bush placing our troops in this position, and using them for very partisan, very negative political purposes.

[wryter2000]

62. Good luck, ahole

This should work as well for him as last Friday's speech did.

[fooj]

65. What do you expect from a spoiled, rotten brat?

Boo fucking hoo! It sucks to be George!:spank:

peace.

[Ganja Ninja]

66. He doesn't have the balls to give a speech in front of ...

the general public. He only speaks in front of hand picked crowds and military personnel and I suspect that they're careful to pick military units from the most Bush loyal red states.
If he ever tried to speak in front of a general admission blue state crowd he'd never finish before fleeing for his life.

[The_Casual_Observer]

68. He wears a little green nylon military jacket, pretending he is a warrior

And then uses a group of hapless military people as props as he goes on a rant about how anybody who questions his stupidity puts the troops in "harms way". jr is actually behaving as badly as Hitler did.