Here come the Dems! Dean is "over the line," IMO.
On Day After Bush Speech, Democrats Stay on the Attack
By DAVID STOUT -
[The New York Times] [Sponsored by Starbucks]
September 8, 2003
WASHINGTON, Sept. 8 - Democrats kept up their criticism today of President Bush's prime-time speech on Sunday night, accusing him of being too vague or even deceptive about the cost and duration of the campaign in Iraq.
The attacks were led by Howard Dean, the former governor of Vermont, and Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, both of whom accused the president of misleading the American people. Senator John Reed of Rhode Island and Representative David Obey of Wisconsin also found fault with Mr. Bush's stance.
Mr. Dean, who is seeking his party's presidential nomination, appeared on ABC's "Good Morning America" to reiterate the remarks he made immediately following the speech, in which the President said he would seek an additional $87 billion from Congress and warned the American people to prepare for a long road ahead.
Mr. Dean noted that Mr. Bush had described Saddam Hussein's Iraq as a danger to the United States, and that Al Qaeda terrorists were in league with Mr. Hussein.
"None of those things have been documented nor are they likely to be true," Mr. Dean said. "In fact, it's more likely that there are more Al Qaeda in Iraq today shooting and bombing both American troops and Iraqi civilians than there ever were before the president started his war."
Mr. Dean went on to call Mr. Bush's speech part of "an additional campaign of some misinformation to the American people to try to justify spending $80 billion additional, additionally, on top of the $80 billion he's already spending in Iraq."
"We can't afford this, and this is a mess," Mr. Dean said. "I believe that at this time the security of the United States is in more danger than it was when we attacked Saddam Hussein.
Nonetheless, early reaction from lawmakers of both parties indicated that they would probably approve Mr. Bush's request, albeit after some sharp questioning. Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the Democratic minority leader, said she thought Congress would provide American troops "whatever resources they need to accomplish their mission." But she said legislators would be much more skeptical about money for rebuilding Iraq's infrastructure.
Of the $87 billion, the White House said today, $66 billion would go to support the troops, with everything from body-armor and other equipment to two weeks of recreation for soldiers deployed in Iraq for a year. The remaining $21 billion would go toward rebuilding roads, water facilities, clinics and other services. Mr. Kerry, also seeking the Democratic nomination, criticized the president during an appearance before the Service Employees International Union, whose support he is seeking.
"I warned the president, as many of us did: `Mr. President, don't rush to war. Take the time to build the kind of support we need because winning the war is not hard for the United States of America, it's winning the peace,' " Mr. Kerry told the union audience. "And I warned the president above all the United States of America should never go to war because it wants to, we should go to war because we have to, and we have a standard in this country that we will live up to."
"We've been misled," Mr. Kerry said. "We have not been told the truth, and we deserve a president of the United States who knows the meaning of the words `last resort' and tells the American people the truth."
Mr. Bush did get some strong support on the same "Good Morning America" broadcast from Senator Richard Shelby, Republican of Alabama.
"Well, Howard Dean's running for president of the United States," Mr. Shelby said. "It's the political season. But I think President Bush has shown strong leadership in the fight against terrorism. He's shown it in Iraq."
Mr. Shelby said he thought Congress and the American people would remain behind the president. "I believe they will follow him and we will prevail," said Mr. Shelby, chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee's defense and foreign operations subcommittees."We will win."
While the Democrats' criticism was sharp, and likely to grow sharper, Capitol Hill was relatively quiet. Senate and House leaders had not planned a busy schedule this week, since Thursday will mark the second anniversary of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
Mr. Reed, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said in an interview on CNN that Mr. Bush's speech had too many uncertainties about how much the United States would have to spend in Iraq, both in money and time.
"This is a very complex, complicated set of issues in Iraq and it's going to be extremely costly," Mr. Reed said. "In fact, the only thing certain last night in President Bush's speech was at least the initial price tag of $87 billion. There was no other certainty in terms of the duration of our presence there or even our approach to solving these difficult issues."
Mr. Obey, the ranking Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, said Mr. Bush's speech amounted to "an admission of gross miscalculation" by the White House.
"And if you want to know the absolute truth, they're going to require a whole lot more money than he asked for last night," Mr. Obey said on CNN "The Army is stretched incredibly thin. We don't have the personnel to respond, if we had other problems in the world."
nytimes.com |
