SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : I Will Continue to Continue, to Pretend....

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Sully- who wrote (18877)3/22/2006 10:48:37 AM
From: Sully-   of 35834
 
    "I did notice that nobody from the Democrat Party has 
actually stood up and called for getting rid of the
terrorist surveillance program. You know, if that's what
they believe, if people in the party believe that, then
they ought to stand up and say it. They ought to stand up
and say the tools we're using to protect the American
people shouldn't be used. They ought to take their message
to the people and say, vote for me, I promise we're not
going to have a terrorist surveillance program. That's
what they ought to be doing. That's part of what is an
open and honest debate."

And They Call Him Dumb

Posted by Mark Noonan
Blogs for Bush

For a man who's critics call him dumb as a box of rocks, he sure has his critics number - from yesterday's press conference:

<<< ...You brought it up; you said, how do I react to a bombing that took place yesterday -- is precisely what the enemy understands is possible to do. I'm not suggesting you shouldn't talk about it. I'm certainly not being -- please don't take that as criticism. But it also is a realistic assessment of the enemies capability to affect the debate, and they know that. They're capable of blowing up innocent life so it ends up on your TV show. And, therefore, it affects the woman in Cleveland you were talking to. And I can understand how Americans are worried about whether or not we can win....

...And it has been a success. But no question about it, we missed sometime as we adjusted our tactics. We had to change our reconstruction strategy. We were -- we thought it made sense, initially, when we went in there to build big, grand projects, which turned out to be targets for the insurgents to blow up. And a better strategy was to be spending reconstruction money at the local level, so that local leaders committed to a peaceful and unified Iraq would benefit. In other words, people would see tangible benefits from an emerging democracy, and the leaders would be viewed as people helping to improve their lives.

And so this is a war in which we've changed tactics. It's a war in which we've adjusted and learned lessons in the process of the war...

... I think during these difficult times -- and they are difficult when we're at war -- the American people expect there to be a honest and open debate without needless partisanship. And that's how I view it. I did notice that nobody from the Democrat Party has actually stood up and called for getting rid of the terrorist surveillance program. You know, if that's what they believe, if people in the party believe that, then they ought to stand up and say it. They ought to stand up and say the tools we're using to protect the American people shouldn't be used. They ought to take their message to the people and say, vote for me, I promise we're not going to have a terrorist surveillance program. That's what they ought to be doing. That's part of what is an open and honest debate.

I did notice that, at one point in time, they didn't think the Patriot Act ought to be reauthorized -- "they" being at least the Minority Leader in the Senate. He openly said, as I understand -- I don't want to misquote him -- something along the lines that, "We killed the Patriot Act." And if that's what the party believes, they ought to go around the country saying we shouldn't give the people on the front line of protecting us the tools necessary to do so. That's a debate I think the country ought to have...
>>>(emphasis added)

President Bush keeps beating his opponents because he's the wiser man - the man more in touch with the truth, with American ideals - and with that inner courage which is necessary for any person in leadership.

The objections to Bush policies, when not entirely based upon lies, are based upon a mixture of ignorance plus ambition - people who don't know, but still believe they should be in charge. The archetype of this sort of person is none other than Nancy Pelosi - the ignormamous's ignoramous, but she just considers herself to be oh, so smart...and so much smarter than President Bush (who runs rings around her intellectually).

In a way, this is kind of fun to watch -even though its the fourth time we've watched this play out since Bush was elected.

blogsforbush.com

whitehouse.gov
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext