You (And George Bush) Should Read This

[MossMan]

A quote we would all do well to consider:

"The true defeatists today are not those who call for recognizing the facts on the ground in Iraq. The true defeatists are those who believe America is so weak that it must sacrifice its principles to the pursuit of illusory power.

The true pessimists today are not those who know that America can handle the truth about the Administration's boastful claim of 'Mission Accomplished' in Iraq. The true pessimists are those who cannot accept that America's power and prestige depend on our credibility at home and around the world. The true pessimists are those who do not understand that fidelity to our principles is as critical to national security as our military power itself.

And the most dangerous defeatists, the most dispiriting pessimists, are those who invoke September 11th to argue that our traditional values are a luxury we can no longer afford,"​

What is amazing to me is that these very powerful words were delivered by none other than John Kerry last weekend. For the life of me I wish he could have showed this type of clear-sighted conviction back in 2004 when it mattered.

 

[sodaseller]

I also thought that was strong statement and I was also shocked to see the source

 

[Laura]

I am proud to say I voted for John Kerry. At first, I was one of those "Anybody But Bush" Democrats and felt lukewarm towards Kerry. But as the 2004 campaign went on and the more I saw of him, the happier I was to vote for him. I am very sorry he's not our president right now.

 

[Teejay32]

I notice it's snipped, how many times did he mention Vietnam?

 

[dennis99ss]

He is transforming into an elder statesman

 

[Tink's Pixieduster]

To the quote from John Kerry I would like to add,

"I fear you do not fully comprehend the danger of abridging the liberties of the people. Nothing but the very sternest necessity can ever justify it. A government had better go to the very extreme of toleration, than to do aught that could be construed into an interference with, or to jeopardize in any degree, the common rights of citizens."

Abraham Lincoln said this in 1864, during a war. And he was a Republican.

 

[DawnCt1]

I particularly like the quote; "I voted for it before I voted against it".
How about his stance on CIA employees who leak operational information; "Well if its the truth..."

 

[kelleigh1]

Were you at his speech on Saturday? I wanted to be there, but had other commitments that day so I wasn't able to attend.

 

[rayelias]

The true defeatists today are not those who call for recognizing the facts on the ground in Iraq. The true defeatists are those who believe America is so weak that it must sacrifice its principles to the pursuit of illusory power.

The FACTS are that war, no matter how much you plan, NEVER goes according to plan. The enemy's job is to screw up your plan. So, the fact is that we're doing the best in Iraq to provide a government where the citizens have a say amd no one has to worry about being thrown into mass graves after being tortured or having weapons of mass destruction (chemicals) used on you and your neighbors simply because of your religion or political affiliation.

The true pessimists today are not those who know that America can handle the truth about the Administration's boastful claim of 'Mission Accomplished' in Iraq. The true pessimists are those who cannot accept that America's power and prestige depend on our credibility at home and around the world. The true pessimists are those who do not understand that fidelity to our principles is as critical to national security as our military power itself.

There is more behind the "Mission Accomplished" statement that you may realize. Before the restart of the war (remember, we never stopped being at war with Iraq after they invaded Kuwait. Saddam, after being made numerous offers to comply, remained in violation of FOURTEEN UN regulations) many countries promised financial support as well as ground troops for the rebuilding of Iraq at the end of "major conflict" (or major fighting... I forget the actual, proper phrase). That is the reason there was so much hoopla surrounding the "Mission Accomplished" and the "end of major conflict." We were signaling to those "allies" (France, Germany, Russia) that it was time for them to help us rebuild Iraq. This is one of those things that, as mentioned above, you plan for, but war doesn't always follow the plan.

And the most dangerous defeatists, the most dispiriting pessimists, are those who invoke September 11th to argue that our traditional values are a luxury we can no longer afford,"

John Kerry... traditional values? Kind of an oxymoron. But so is "I voted for the war before I voted against it." It's awful nice to be able to play both sides of the fence.

Isn't he the same guy who in the past week actually supported the official at the CIA who committed treason by giving out military secrets to the press?

Believe me, I'm no blind Bush supporter. There are dozens of things I don't agree with him. The war is not one of them. I am VERY glad he is the Commander in Chief during these VERY important times rather than John Kerry.

War is never an easy choice. We did not decide to go to war in Iraq. Saddam Hussein decided for us to go to war when he refused to comply with the terms of the cease fire. 14 terms. Many times. What was the world to do, let him continue to ignore the rules? That would have just sent the message that the rules don't matter and that there are no consequences for breaking them.

The true defeatists today are those people and those countries who are afraid to stand up to tyrants, who allow them to walk all over them, and who who are too cowardly to do something about it. But, you're not too cowardly to protest the brave people who are.

Nice.
​

 

[sodaseller]

To the quote from John Kerry I would like to add,

"I fear you do not fully comprehend the danger of abridging the liberties of the people. Nothing but the very sternest necessity can ever justify it. A government had better go to the very extreme of toleration, than to do aught that could be construed into an interference with, or to jeopardize in any degree, the common rights of citizens."

Abraham Lincoln said this in 1864, during a war. And he was a Republican.

Argh! Today's GOP is NOT the Party of Lincoln. Just the opposite! Though I agre with the sentiments, and you quoted the greatest American in history

 

[cats7494]

I am proud to say I voted for John Kerry. At first, I was one of those "Anybody But Bush" Democrats and felt lukewarm towards Kerry. But as the 2004 campaign went on and the more I saw of him, the happier I was to vote for him. I am very sorry he's not our president right now.

I agree 100%! He would have been the better man for the job and I sure would feel safer!

 

[MossMan]

Were you at his speech on Saturday? I wanted to be there, but had other commitments that day so I wasn't able to attend.

No, I didn’t attend the speech. In fact, I don’t know if I would ever attend one of his speeches. Kerry’s quote, as impressive as it is, only serves to irritate me further at Kerry’s unsuccessful candidacy in the last election.

Back in 2004 it was pretty much apparent to anyone paying attention that George Bush was turning out to be a phenomenally incompetent President. He still had some vocal supporters, but the arguments they used to bolster Bush were pretty much bankrupt of any intellectual integrity. (As a Republican, I still don’t understand how fellow Republicans were able to overlook the obscene spending by the federal government. And how could anyone who says they admire Reagan ever in a thousand years turn a blind eye to torture?)

All the Democrats had to do was put up a decent candidate and we could have gotten rid of Bush once and for all. The problem is, of course, that we didn’t get that candidate. Instead we got Kerry. All Kerry had to do to win was exhibit a little conviction. How he mucked it up is still beyond me. So instead we got stuck with Bush for another 4 horribly incompetent years.

That’s why when I read Kerry’s quote I couldn’t help but be a little irritated. Why couldn’t he have talked like this 2 years earlier?

 

[salmoneous]

What was the world to do, let him continue to ignore the rules?

Well, here's one thought. Instead of just "letting him ignore the rules", would could have taken a number of steps. Send in the UN to dismantle all his WMD programs. Put in place sanctions. Set up no fly zones. That sort of thing. That way, we could get rid of the threat Saddam posed to his neighbors and the rest of the world, as well as greatly reduce the harm Saddam could do to his own people.

Nah, that's a crazy plan.

 

[sodaseller]

The FACTS are that war, no matter how much you plan, NEVER goes according to plan. The enemy's job is to screw up your plan. So, the fact is that we're doing the best in Iraq to provide a government where the citizens have a say amd no one has to worry about being thrown into mass graves after being tortured or having weapons of mass destruction (chemicals) used on you and your neighbors simply because of your religion or political affiliation.





There is more behind the "Mission Accomplished" statement that you may realize. Before the restart of the war (remember, we never stopped being at war with Iraq after they invaded Kuwait. Saddam, after being made numerous offers to comply, remained in violation of FOURTEEN UN regulations) many countries promised financial support as well as ground troops for the rebuilding of Iraq at the end of "major conflict" (or major fighting... I forget the actual, proper phrase). That is the reason there was so much hoopla surrounding the "Mission Accomplished" and the "end of major conflict." We were signaling to those "allies" (France, Germany, Russia) that it was time for them to help us rebuild Iraq. This is one of those things that, as mentioned above, you plan for, but war doesn't always follow the plan.



John Kerry... traditional values? Kind of an oxymoron. But so is "I voted for the war before I voted against it." It's awful nice to be able to play both sides of the fence.

Isn't he the same guy who in the past week actually supported the official at the CIA who committed treason by giving out military secrets to the press?

Believe me, I'm no blind Bush supporter. There are dozens of things I don't agree with him. The war is not one of them. I am VERY glad he is the Commander in Chief during these VERY important times rather than John Kerry.

War is never an easy choice. We did not decide to go to war in Iraq. Saddam Hussein decided for us to go to war when he refused to comply with the terms of the cease fire. 14 terms. Many times. What was the world to do, let him continue to ignore the rules? That would have just sent the message that the rules don't matter and that there are no consequences for breaking them.

The true defeatists today are those people and those countries who are afraid to stand up to tyrants, who allow them to walk all over them, and who who are too cowardly to do something about it. But, you're not too cowardly to protest the brave people who are.

Nice.
​

We're not "doing our best," not even close. This Administration has been criminally negligent in that regard. The man at the top never resolved the debates and caused those actually implementing policy to try to make it happen.

You are just repeating talking points, but they're not reflective of the actual reality. Sort of like the President

Mission Accomplished was for domesttic political consumption. We never seriously sought involve our alll;ies in rebuilding. In fact, we took precisely the opposite step, stating that reconstruction contracts would not go to companies that were not from nations in the invading coalition. Again, you are spewing talking points divorced from reality. Things don't go as planned, but we never had a plan and took actions contrary to what you think was the goal. Iraq today is the result of incompetence, not bad luck.

Bush has been an incompetent CinC. The decision to go to war was not hard for him - it was exceedingly easy. He was gung ho regardless of the reports or the facts. And it had nothing to do with courage. Courage is another form of truth, to paraphrase Manley Hopkins, and there is no value George W, Bush is more opposed to than objective truth

 

[Jimbo]

Then there's the other John Kerry, the one that was on "This Week" with George Stephanapoulos this weekend. GS asked him about the CIA leak, and whether a CIA officer should get to decide what should be released, and what should not.

Kerry replied

Of course not. Of course, not. A CIA agent has the obligation to uphold the law and clearly leaking is against the law, and nobody should leak. I don't like leaking. But if you're leaking to tell the truth, Americans are going to look at that, at least mitigate or think about what are the consequences that you, you know, put on that person. Obviously they're not going to keep their job, but there are other larger issues here. You know, classification in Washington is a tool that is used to hide the truth from the American people. Daniel Patrick Moynihan was eloquent and forceful in always talking about how we needed to, you know, end this endless declassification that takes place in this city, and it has become a tool to hide the truth from Americans.

He's opposed to what happened, he's OK with what happened, and everything in between. That's the Kerry that ran for president in 2004.

 

[MossMan]

Courage is another form of truth, to paraphrase Manley Hopkins, and there is no value George W, Bush is more opposed to than objective truth

This couldn’t be more correct. I think it goes right to the very essence of what makes Bush so terrible a President.

There has never been a truth that Bush couldn’t ignore. Facts seem to have no effect on this man. The dispassionate dissection of events is an inconvenient burden for our President, a chore he does his best to ignore.

Take a look at what’s happening in the military right now. A few more generals have just come out and are calling for Rumsfeld to resign. Rumsfeld made a mess of this invasion and his obvious incompetence will ensure our troops are there for years to come. The military understands this truth. But Bush refuses to act. Bush is less interested in what Military experts know to be the truth than he is with maintaining a reality he hopes will come to pass.

Whatever happened to hard-headed practical conservatives?

 

[bsnyder]

Whatever happened to hard-headed practical conservatives?

I consider myself one. And the unavoidable fact is that the Democrats and the especially the rabid Bush Haters are no closer to the truth than are the Republicans. There are incompetents and crooks and cowards, of varying degrees, in all parties.

 

[sodaseller]

Then there's the other John Kerry, the one that was on "This Week" with George Stephanapoulos this weekend. GS asked him about the CIA leak, and whether a CIA officer should get to decide what should be released, and what should not.

Kerry repliedHe's opposed to what happened, he's OK with what happened, and everything in between. That's the Kerry that ran for president in 2004.

I must concede that the President's position on leaking previously classified materials is the model of clarity, i.e., I'm the "decider" that decides when to leak select and misleding elements of a previously classified documents for my own political benefit so that I can further the deception of the citizens I am purportedly accountable to, which is far preferable to those that leak in order to expose lawbreaking and moral failures by my administration.

Very clear. Morally bankrupt ond logically indefensible, but clear

 

[MossMan]

I consider myself one. And the unavoidable fact is that the Democrats and the especially the rabid Bush Haters are no closer to the truth than are the Republicans.

I couldn't agree more bsnyder. Just because I oppose Bush doesn't mean I'm a Democrat though. It pains me terribly to go against my party in this regard.

But as a practical conservative I have to be willing to accept obvious truths. And one of those truths is that our current President is doing horrible job. It doesn't matter what party he supposedly represents, the thing that matters to us hard-headed types is that he is incompetent and we have to find a way to minimize the damage he is wreaking upon our country.

I'm a conservative before I'm a Republican. I'm loyal to the ideals, not the party that is supposed to represent those ideals. If Republicans cannot adhere to conservative values, then I will find other political representatives who can.

 

[bsnyder]

I couldn't agree more bsnyder. Just because I oppose Bush doesn't mean I'm a Democrat though. It pains me terribly to go against my party in this regard.

But as a practical conservative I have to be willing to accept obvious truths. And one of those truths is that our current President is doing horrible job. It doesn't matter what party he supposedly represents, the thing that matters to us hard-headed types is that he is incompetent and we have to find a way to minimize the damage he is wreaking upon our country.

I'm a conservative before I'm a Republican. I'm loyal to the ideals, not the party that is supposed to represent those ideals. If Republicans cannot adhere to conservative values, then I will find other political representatives who can.

There are plenty of things I'm unhappy with the Bush Administration about. But I don't think he's incompetent. And there's simply no way you can reduce that to a "truth", it's a subjective value.

The "damage" you speak of is mostly made up of the hysterical hyperbole that we're inundated with on a daily basis by the MSM as they carry water for the out-of-power party.