Article

2005-11-01 Home Front: Politix

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve 2005-11-01 15:21|| || Front Page|| [1 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 As Reid yells, "I want Rove and Bush charged and I want a pony!"

Posted by mmurray821 2005-11-01 15:34|| 2005-11-01 15:34|| Front Page Top

#2 Just because you were not paying attention, or cynically calculated you had to vote with the President to stay in office and now regret that, does not mean that the President lied or misled.

Reid is such a tool.

Posted by rjschwarz (no T!) 2005-11-01 15:34|| 2005-11-01 15:34|| Front Page Top

#3 This is a logical extension of the John Fn Kerry non-position on Iraq (I was for it before I was against it; I want more troops and less troops). You take a position, but you do it behind closed doors so that the voters can't hold it against you.

Posted by Matt 2005-11-01 15:36|| 2005-11-01 15:36|| Front Page Top

#4 they say was prompted by "misinformation and disinformation" given by President Bush and his administration prior to entry into the war in Iraq.

You mean statements like this?:
"Iraq repeatedly made false declarations about the weapons that it had left in its possession after the Gulf War. When UNSCOM would then uncover evidence that gave lie to those declarations, Iraq would simply amend the reports. For example, Iraq revised its nuclear declarations four times within just 14 months and it has submitted six different biological warfare declarations, each of which has been rejected by UNSCOM.

In 1995, Hussein Kamal, Saddam's son-in-law, and the chief organizer of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program, defected to Jordan. He revealed that Iraq was continuing to conceal weapons and missiles and the capacity to build many more. Then and only then did Iraq admit to developing numbers of weapons in significant quantities and weapon stocks. Previously, it had vehemently denied the very thing it just simply admitted once Saddam Hussein's son-in-law defected to Jordan and told the truth. Now listen to this, what did it admit?

It admitted, among other things, an offensive biological warfare capability notably 5,000 gallons of botulinum, which causes botulism; 2,000 gallons of anthrax; 25 biological-filled Scud warheads; and 157 aerial bombs. And I might say UNSCOM inspectors believe that Iraq has actually greatly understated its production."
---------
"Now, let's imagine the future. What if he fails to comply, and we fail to act, or we take some ambiguous third route which gives him yet more opportunities to develop this program of weapons of mass destruction and continue to press for the release of the sanctions and continue to ignore the solemn commitments that he made?

Well, he will conclude that the international community has lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction.
And some day, some way, I guarantee you, he'll use the arsenal. And I think every one of you who's really worked on this for any length of time believes that, too."

Oh, wait. That wasn't Bush, that was President Clinton. You want to ask him to testify?

Posted by Steve">Steve 2005-11-01 15:37|| 2005-11-01 15:37|| Front Page Top

#5 It is now time to cross the Rubicon

Posted by Yosemite Sam 2005-11-01 15:41|| 2005-11-01 15:41|| Front Page Top

#6 Frist needs to take off the gloves stop them cold. A simple majority can stop rules and he needs to gain the upper hand with regards to the PR factor. I would start with "Why go behind closed doors?" Play out here in public and let everyone see your moonbattery in full. This smacks of desperation because Fitz didn't give them what they expected.

Posted by Cyber Sarge">Cyber Sarge 2005-11-01 15:42|| 2005-11-01 15:42|| Front Page Top

#7 And don't forget John Kerry:

GRAND CANYON, Ariz. (Reuters) - Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry said on Monday he would have voted for the congressional resolution authorizing force against Iraq even if he had known then no weapons of mass destruction would be found. Taking up a challenge from President Bush, whom he will face in the Nov. 2 election, the Massachusetts senator said: "I'll answer it directly. Yes, I would have voted for the authority. I believe it is the right authority for a president to have but I would have used that authority effectively."

Posted by Steve">Steve 2005-11-01 15:43|| 2005-11-01 15:43|| Front Page Top

#8 Is Reid as stupid as he comes across? I've seen 15W bulbs that were brighter than he seems. How did this guy ever get elected to anything beyond dogcatcher (apologies to any dogcatchers in the audience)?

Posted by Xbalanke 2005-11-01 15:46|| 2005-11-01 15:46|| Front Page Top

#9 I wonder of the Pubs have the balls to shut him down as they should.

"We're serving notice on them at this moment: be prepared for this motion every day until you face the reality. The Senate Intelligence Committee has a responsibility."

Looks like Reid is planning on doing this every day until he gets what he wants. Time to shut him down cold.

This is crap. using the fillibuster to hold up Court appointments is crap. Time for the pubs to realise that they won the last election and grow a pair.

Posted by CrazyFool 2005-11-01 15:56|| 2005-11-01 15:56|| Front Page Top

#10 Since it's a closed session, why doesn't one of these pissed off Republicans take the opportunity to stuff Harry Reid upside down in a trash can?

Posted by tu3031 2005-11-01 16:14|| 2005-11-01 16:14|| Front Page Top

#11 The donks must be pretty upset with how well the Alito nomination is going down and how it has made everyone forget "Tricycle" Libby or whatever his name was. They know that after Alito is confirmed they will enter at least 20 years of irrelevance like the Republicans from 1932 to 1980. Too bad, so sad.

Posted by Thans Slons9665 2005-11-01 16:17|| 2005-11-01 16:17|| Front Page Top

#12 You want a investigation? So do I. How about we start with these questions:

Why did Sandy Berger steal top secret documents during the 9/11 hearings?? Exactly what did he destroy?

Why did Joe Wilson lie in his Op/Edâ¦and what did he REALLY find out?

Why was Joe Wilson chosen in the first place?

What did Valerie know and when did she know it?

Why did Clinton close down Able-Dangerâ¦and what did they learn?

Posted by Steve">Steve 2005-11-01 16:27|| 2005-11-01 16:27|| Front Page Top

#13 Don't forget Jim 'wiretap' McDermitt's release of private cell-phone conversations to the public which some DNC 'operatives' just happened to have 'overheard' (and record) one day in Florida while on 'vacation'....

I am still waiting for him to be censored for that one.

Posted by CrazyFool 2005-11-01 16:33|| 2005-11-01 16:33|| Front Page Top

#14 Steve, those questions won't be repeated in the lamestream media. We're obviously not deserving of any straight answers to a large variety of questions _they_ don't care about.

The Dems are actually smarter than everyone here thinks. They have a small core number of ideas in their version of the (un)truth, and as per Goebbels' admonishment, they're repeating them (or having the media repeat them) once-every-fifteen-minutes-to-half-an-hour... even on Fox.

Posted by Phil 2005-11-01 16:37|| 2005-11-01 16:37|| Front Page Top

#15 this is also a fund raising stunt

The theory is that if the Dems act leftist enough, that Move-on, etc. money will donate big time to them through the 2006 elections.

Posted by mhw 2005-11-01 16:42|| 2005-11-01 16:42|| Front Page Top

#16 Was it over when the germans bombed Pearl Harbor?

Posted by Seafarious">Seafarious 2005-11-01 16:44|| 2005-11-01 16:44|| Front Page Top

#17 Apply as needed...

Posted by .com 2005-11-01 16:45|| 2005-11-01 16:45|| Front Page Top

#18 Great minds think alike, Sea.

Posted by Steve">Steve 2005-11-01 16:47|| 2005-11-01 16:47|| Front Page Top

#19 A simple majority can stop rules and he needs to gain the upper hand with regards to the PR factor.

And how, exactly, can he do that?

The press is in the bag for the Democrats. Donks can lie endlessly, and the press laps it up like a dog with its own vomit.

Posted by Robert Crawford">Robert Crawford 2005-11-01 17:20|| http://www.kloognome.com/]">[http://www.kloognome.com/] 2005-11-01 17:20|| Front Page Top

#20 "Congressmen who willfully take actions during wartime that damage morale and undermine the military are saboteurs who should be arrested, exiled or hanged."

A Lincoln

Posted by doc 2005-11-01 17:28|| 2005-11-01 17:28|| Front Page Top

#21 I'll go for implementing three doc....

Good Quote.

Posted by CrazyFool 2005-11-01 17:49|| 2005-11-01 17:49|| Front Page Top

#22 I'll go for implementing all three doc....

Posted by CrazyFool 2005-11-01 17:49|| 2005-11-01 17:49|| Front Page Top

#23 Having looked at a couple of leftie blogs, I can tell you that the progressives would likely fellate Harry Reid if he came walking down their street right now.

GWB needs to get in front and remind people of ALL the reasons why we went to war. He has to stop the MSM and the Donks from redefining the reasons to include only WMD. The new meme is that Cheney and company lied about the intel and buffaloed the rest of us into going to war (which we're losing, of course). That has to stop, and GWB is the only one whose voice can penetrate the MSM.

Posted by Steve White 2005-11-01 17:55|| 2005-11-01 17:55|| Front Page Top

#24 Having looked at a couple of leftie blogs... Eeeww!

Posted by Matt 2005-11-01 18:06|| 2005-11-01 18:06|| Front Page Top

#25 That has to stop, and GWB is the only one whose voice can penetrate the MSM.

No, he can't. He's tried before, and the press just keeps up the lies. A one-hour prime-time speech at this point would be covered by, oh, CSPAN and the cable nets, and MSNBC and CNN would probably dub their own voice track.

Posted by Robert Crawford">Robert Crawford 2005-11-01 18:11|| http://www.kloognome.com/]">[http://www.kloognome.com/] 2005-11-01 18:11|| Front Page Top

#26 Reid invoking article 21 without consulting Frist in advance is truely a headshaker. Then to allow Durbin and Schumer to pontificate about the Libby indictments once again confirms he is a baffoon and a political grand stander. Rockefeller got what he wanted but at what cost?

Posted by DepotGuy 2005-11-01 18:21|| 2005-11-01 18:21|| Front Page Top

#27 It appears, when taken with the Libby thingy and the NYT Editorial about Cheney, and this shutdown stunt, that the Dhimmidonks actually expected the WH to be destroyed by now, Rove in chains, Pub meltdown.

Instead, what we have, since their wetdream scenario has gone up in smoke, as all of their slam-dunk moronic meme schemes do, is Dhimmidonk meltdown. There is no difference between Dean and Reid, Schumer, Durbin, Leahy, Kennedy, Kerry, Rockefeller, et al.

There is no process left. The rhetoric, lies, damned lies, screech speech, Moonbattery, and blind hate now overwhelms the Dhimmis. Negative IQ. Total meltdown.

Popcorn and hunter / killer teams.

Posted by .com 2005-11-01 18:26|| 2005-11-01 18:26|| Front Page Top

#28 Every month, there are more murders and bombings around the world by Muslims against all others. The world is sinking into widespread armed conflict and we know from many experiences that the prepared, the willing, and the able will prevail. How can the democrats expect to twist this into an anti-Bush crusade ? I am beginning to realize that they are not as smart as we are. Simply put, they are 45 stupid jerks. Most of them have gained power because the African-Americans are even dumber, and vote for the democrats. I'm trying not to feel superior here, but I can't get a grasp of their logic to respond. It's like; while the whole town is fighting a massive fire, some firemen are sitting in the firehouse pissed that the truck left without them. 45 total asshats.

Posted by wxjames 2005-11-01 18:27|| 2005-11-01 18:27|| Front Page Top

#29 wx, this is how a drowning man behaves. He knows the end is near and th4er is nothing else he can do. Watch for the third finger.

Posted by Unearong Phaiting8282 2005-11-01 18:42|| 2005-11-01 18:42|| Front Page Top

#30 I posted this at the Washington Monthly blog (Kevin Drum). I tried to be moderate (e.g., not my usual Rantburg self :-) just to see what kind of reaction I'll get, though I think I know.

For the record: I think this was a bone-headed move by Reid, unless he honestly thinks he can re-define the entire reason why we went to war.
=====
I guess I'm missing something in all of this.

We've known since the end of major combat operations that the WMD that most everyone thought were to be found in Iraq aren't there. That's been investigated, and it's clear that we had a substantial failure of intelligence and interpretation.

I think most Americans would agree with that, even if they don't read blogs. It's been in the news, and thee's been sufficient time for average Americans to consider and digest it. We had a national election and the WMD issue certainly was kicked around then.

Most average Americans also understand that there were other reasons why we went to war in Iraq. GWB stated those reasons on several occasions in his major set-piece speeches prior to the war: Saddam was evil, he violated the ceasefire and the UN resolutions, he was supporting terrorism, etc. None of that has changed, and indeed, those reasons are immune to any challenge regarding the Plame scandal -- even if Cheney himself were indicted, Saddam's behavior and the nature of his threat was what it was.

Further, most Americans will recall (especially when reminded) that right up to the time of the war, a fair number of prominent Democrats also believed, based on Clinton-era documentation, that Saddam had WMD. Okay, they were wrong too, but that doesn't change all the embarrassing (to Democrats) quotes out there from Clinton, Gore, Allbright, Kennedy, Kerry, etc.

So my question is this: what does Sen. Reid's action today prove? You want a debate on the intel, sure, fine, be my guest. You want a debate on why we went to war? Sure, fine, and let's trot out those pictures of gassed Kurds one more time. And let's remind everyone about how the sanctions weren't working, and why (as we know now). And let's remind everyone how impotent the UN is.

I honestly don't see how this does anything other than boomerang back at the progessive Democrats, because as much as average Americans don't like war, they liked Saddam a lot less. Screaming that 'Cheney lied!' inevitably asks the question, 'lied about what?' And as that question gets answered, progressives don't look so good. It either leads to the morass of the CIA (which has failed our last two presidents, don't forget) with all the inside-baseball nonsense that can only make Tom Maguire happy, or it leads to a perception that Democrats will do anything -- anything -- to tear down the country to seize power. That's not a winning strategy.

It strikes me that a better strategy for Democrats is to look forward, not backward. Tell Americans how you're going to ensure that Iraq is a stable democracy, and how that will lead to a better Middle East, and how that in turn will let us bring our boys home, and you'll have a receptive audience in middle America. America doesn't like war and doesn't like its soldiers in harm's way, but they'll vote for war when the alternatives are less good. They voted for the war by re-electing GWB in 2004. Keep re-visiting that, and you'll guarantee another loss in 2008.

Look forward, folks.

Posted by Steve White 2005-11-01 18:46|| 2005-11-01 18:46|| Front Page Top

#31 Harry's a little slow--not the brightest bulb in the box. Although not a requirement for office, many elected politicians possess this characteristic, e.g. Kennedy, Byrd, Kerry, et al.

Posted by Tholusing Whoger3203 2005-11-01 19:23|| 2005-11-01 19:23|| Front Page Top

#32 Truth to tell, Reid pulled this stunt to get back at Bush. According to Reid, he "TOLD" Bush not to nominate Alito and, by God, he did it anyway! Reid just doesn't seem to get the fact that he can't TELL this President to do anything. Hey Harry, get a clue. The PRESIDENT nominates Supreme Court Justices, not Democrat Wankers like yourself.

Posted by Deacon Blues">Deacon Blues 2005-11-01 19:29|| 2005-11-01 19:29|| Front Page Top

#33 good advice SW, for a party that frames everything in Vietr Nam and Watergate and the New Deal. What new ideas have they proposed? New framewaorks? None, nada, zip, zilch. Hence, the rabidity, cynicism, and yes, anger.... to the point of violence.

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2005-11-01 19:35|| 2005-11-01 19:35|| Front Page Top

#34 The Libby indictment provides a window into what this is really about: How the administration manufactured and manipulated intelligence in order to sell the war in Iraq and attempted to destroy those who dared to challenge its actions

Blah, blah, blah: you're a fool, a snake, and a traitor Harry. You also aren't getting another term in my state, you tricky bastard.

Posted by Secret Master 2005-11-01 19:43|| 2005-11-01 19:43|| Front Page Top

#35 In Closed Session doesn't mean a hill of beans, what is that going to do, erase the ink from their John Hancock on the bottom line of the vote? What goes on in the dark will ALWAYS come to light, even at Los Alamos!!

Posted by smn 2005-11-01 19:51|| 2005-11-01 19:51|| Front Page Top

#36 Amen, SM. If the Pubs will field a decent candidate against him, I'll help him out.

Posted by .com 2005-11-01 20:00|| 2005-11-01 20:00|| Front Page Top

#37 Once again, the Dems have absolutely nothing to offer in alternatives to the President's agenda. They do nothing but tear down. All they have now to gain in their position are mistakes by the Republicans and legislation by LLL members of the courts.

Posted by Alaska Paul">Alaska Paul 2005-11-01 20:21|| 2005-11-01 20:21|| Front Page Top

#38 I'm still trying to digest the sum of it, but I believe it's far worse than nothing to offer - they've become cumulatively insane and, simply put, the faces of the enemy within. From Code Pink to Soros to Move-On to ANSWER to the Dhimmidonk Party - the whole fucking spectrum of Rainbow rubes.

I really thought that they would rally somewhere along the line and make it to 2008, and even have a good shot at the WH then, but I doubt it, now. Today tells us that there just isn't anyone left in the "leadership" with even a hint of a clue about where they're headed - down. Smells of desperation - and pointless, at that. They were thoroughly ridiculed from all sides on Fox, today, even Mara Liasson (sheesh) - I don't bother with the rest, anymore.

Mebbe the descent into violence will come well before '08. The failure of this moronic coup attempt centering around the laughable "Plame Affair" seems to have utterly unhinged them.

Hell, now is good. Let's get this farce over with.

Bring it on, bitches.

Posted by .com 2005-11-01 20:42|| 2005-11-01 20:42|| Front Page Top

00:01 DMFD
23:36 SJB
23:26 Alaska Paul
22:53 God Save The World AKA Oztralian
22:50 macofromoc
22:49 macofromoc
22:47 trailing wife
22:35 Alaska Paul
22:31 trailing wife
22:29 Frank G
22:29 NotMike Moore
22:27 DMFD
22:27 trailing wife
22:23 Bomb-a-rama
22:18 DMFD
22:11 Alaska Paul
22:11 trailing wife
21:53 mmurray821
21:50 plainslow
21:50 anymouse
21:45 lotp
21:42 plainslow
21:39 Hupealet Thraviger9618
21:38 Uneaper Clinens4047