Have Another Drink Teddy

[KrustyKidd]

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002

What a drunken idiot. Now look what this clown is saying.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/09/18/...iraq/index.html

Thursday, September 18, 2003 Posted: 10:27 PM EDT (0227 GMT)

Kennedy's 'Texas' remark stirs GOP reaction

Kennedy speaks to reporters Thursday: "There was no imminent threat. ... This whole thing was a fraud."

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Sen. Ted Kennedy's comment Thursday to The Associated Press that the Iraq war was "made up in Texas" provoked no White House response but did stir a Republican official.

In the AP interview, Kennedy questioned how much of a threat Saddam Hussein had posed in the U.S. fight against terrorism.

"There was no imminent threat. This was made up in Texas, announced in January to the Republican leadership that war was going to take place and was going to be good politically. This whole thing was a fraud," the Massachusetts Democrat told the AP.

He said Bush officials employed "distortion, misrepresentation, a selection of intelligence" to justify the war.

[Luigi71585]

I actually read that earlier this evening. The one fact that got me the most was where kennedys says "My belief is this money is being shuffled all around to these political leaders in all parts of the world, bribing them to send in troops." How much support did the US get in the pre-war phase. Nearly none. Tony Blair wouldve stood with Bush f he had decided to go to war against martians so i doubt that the money is going there. People need to realize that the war is happening still and regardless of its justification we need to finish the goal we set our for.

Although the $87 Million seems like a rather drastic price tag, its not a WAR budget. Its a reconstuction budget for our recent military actions INCLUDING resconstruction/aide of Afghanistan (Clintons baby).

Some democrats are whining because they havent seen results in the last couple of months when they let UN inspectors roam the country for 10+ years with no results (thanks Saddam). Have some patience and let what needs to be done be done.

[Whistler]

It’s an election year so of course the Democratic Party is going to pick at the fringes ignoring the total. That’s just good politics. However, who outside of New England listens to Teddy anyway.

When Teddy talks, the Democratic Party suffers. He’s just too easy of a mark. Why do the good have to die young.

[FastNed]

The magnitude of the gamble being taken by the left wing Democratic Party leadership is huge. They are betting either that President Bush has terrorism sufficiently under control to prevent a major incident before the election or that they will be able to 'blame' him and the Republicans for any terrorist incident within America. If an incident occurs and they are unable to 'blame' it on President Bush, they risk the very survival of the Democratic Party.

This is not rational politics, to put it mildly. They have "misunderestimated" the response of the American People to terrorism. This is the segment of the Democrats which have embraced the "Politics of Hate" and they have passed beyond reality! This is the "Elite" group which embraces the multicultural post-modern beliefs of the European Intelligencia and their hatred is not directed so much at Bush, the individual (although much is) but at what he represents, a power structure which they - obviously the elite leadership of America - do not control. The peons and plebes - the middle class - are unfit for leadership and need to be 'guided' by their intellectual betters to a proper word-view and if you doubt that, just listen, they will tell you.

The New Democrats, the Clinton 'Wing' of the Party has watched this leftward swing and is fighting for survival of the Party, but under their guidance, of course. Gen. Clark is not viable as a Presidential candidate but as 'Vice' on a Hillary/Clark Ticket he enables them to negate the ineffectual military record of Slick Willie which would be used against Hillary with great effectiveness. Her votes and statements on Iraq and terrorism have been cast quite wisely and she can NOT be tied to the radical left wing. It could work as the only alternative to allowing the Left Wing to destroy the Party with their current rabid mindset.

[Luigi71585]

I agree with FastNed in that Kennedys brash remarks are out to set up the Left Wing to look intelligent when WMD are not found (even though the odds are astronomical). These "new party" democrats could be harmful, if not destructive, to their party.

This is an interesting theory I heard the other day about Hillary Clintons restoration of the old-party in the future. In perfect Darek fashion, i've added my own special twists.

Hillary Clinton knows that the odds of anyone beating Bush are rather limited as of now. Shes going to stand back gaining more and more ground and then come in as a liberal reformist denouncing some of the democratic problems of the here and now.

--> If WMD are found she will denounce the democratic parties reluctance to help or give ANY support, even in the reconstruction phase.

--> If WMD are not found, she then can jump on the band wagon and claim that her party was right all along and praise them for their wisdom.

OF COURSE, this is all based on the fact that Gore doesnt run in the 2004 election (highly improbable). If he DOES run, the left wingers will have 2 strong old-party democrats to choose from and she will undoubtedly appear better than Gore. She would rather risk loosing in 2004 and returning stronger in 2008 than Gore becoming president and taking two terms, pushing her presidency out of the picture.