Another Reason To Vote For Bush

• November 1, 2004

Here’s another reason to vote for Bush (via Mudville Gazette):

Because this throne in Iraq is empty now. This wouldn’t be true had John Kerry been president.

NBC News:

Brokaw: This week you’ve been very critical of the president because of the missing explosives in Iraq.The fact is, senator, we still don’t know what happened to those explosives. How many for sure that were there. Who might have gotten away with them? Is it unfair to the president, just as you believe he’s been unfair to you, to blame him for that?
Kerry: No. It’s not unfair. Because what we do know, from the commanders on the ground, is that they went there, as they marched to Baghdad. We even read stories today that they broke locks off of the doors, took photographs of materials in there. There were materials. And they left.
Brokaw: The flip side of that is that if you had been president, Saddam Hussein would still be in power. Because you…
Kerry: Not necessarily at all.
Brokaw: But you have said you wouldn’t go to war against him…
Kerry: That’s not true. Because under the inspection process, Saddam Hussein was required to destroy those kinds of materials and weapons.
Brokaw: But he wasn’t destroying them…
Kerry: But that’s what you have inspectors for.

Tags: General

http://Array Seth

Is it really possible that Kerry has more than 50% of the population supporting him? With statements like this? Incredible.
http://feministe.us/blog Lauren

Yes, Seth. Young, dumb, full of whatever. When I grow up I want to be just as disillusioned and cynical as you.
Mark

Another one of Churchill’s ideas – gassing the Kurds.
Mark

‘Then he spews more nonsense about getting more allies involved in Iraq when clear the allies he’s talking about (France, Germany, etc.) aren’t interested in going to Iraq.’

Not interested? I’m sorry? The sentence should read ‘not interested in going to Iraq on whatever terms American dictates.’

France provided 10,000 troops for Operation Desert Storm. Clearly the actions of a craven, corrupt power.

The fact that Germany is unwilling to provide military support stems from its profound pacifism as a nation – an entirely understandable position given the horrors of the two global conflicts of the twentieth century it precipitated.
http://feministe.us/blog Lauren

Seth, 50% of us support him for president because of the rest of the quote that wasn’t cited here. Follow the links.

That’s the insult levied at liberals, right? Take things out of context for either candidate and you can make either look like bumbling idiots.
Seth Yantiss

Lauren,

I never suggested that Kerry is a dumb bumbling idiot. I’ve said “Traitorous slime”, but I’ve never called him dumb.

As for liberals, I think Churchill said it best “If you’re not a liberal by 20 you have no heart, if you’re not a conservative by 40 you have no brains.”

Honestly, I am surprised that 2% of the population supports him. I can only guess that CNN, NBC, NYT, Et al are not doing their jobs in reporting about Kerry. Hmmmm… what are the chances of that?

By the way, the Robin Hood mentality is a bad thing to live your life by, but you’ll learn that at some point, I’m sure.
http://sayanythingblog.com robport

Here’s the last part of that quote:

Kerry: But that’s what you have inspectors for. And that’s why I voted for the threat of force. Because he only does things when you have a legitimate threat of force. It’s absolutely impossible and irresponsible to suggest that if I were president, he wouldn’t necessarily be gone. He might be gone. Because if he hadn’t complied, we might have had to go to war. And we might have gone to war. But if we did, I’ll tell you this, Tom. We’d have gone to war with allies in a way that the American people weren’t carrying the burden. And the entire world would have understood why we were doing it.

Let’s see, he talks about inspectors despite the fact that Saddam wasn’t cooperating with the inspectors. He emphasizes indecision about taking out Saddam. Then he spews more nonsense about getting more allies involved in Iraq when clear the allies he’s talking about (France, Germany, etc.) aren’t interested in going to Iraq. Not to mention the fact that the statement is an oblique jab at our current allies.

I don’t really see much that’s awe-inspiring there.
http://sayanythingblog.com robport

Mark, France has said that they will not send troops to Iraq. Period. And, given the fact that France was in Saddam Hussein’s pocket, I don’t think we want them there. They did enough for Iraqi’s through the corrupt oil for food program.

SayAnythingBlog.com

Another Reason To Vote For Bush

Create a SAB Readerblog

Recent Comments