posted on September 28, 2004 06:01:46 AM
Kerry's newest ad has kerry saying we are alone in Iraq, must imaginary Britons, Danes, Dutch, Bulgarians...etc that are getting hurt also...
How can people vote for this moron? doesn't even have a clue who our allies are... the people of the UK should see that commercial, wonder how quick they will want him in office...
posted on September 28, 2004 10:16:14 AM
I totally agree, twelve. How could they? Here we have a weakling with no backbone running for CIC who's slamming our current allies and his sister is trying to convince them they need to quit helping us. Then he's promising he'll do better at getting cooperation from other countries...but that's been pubically denied too. So...just who does he think is going to help us that's not helping us now. He has no one...it's all talk.
------------------
reamond - Maybe you're not aware that since the beginning of this occupation our US military troops have taken the 'hot areas' and as they were settled down...the country was divided into groups that our allies, like the UK, would be in control of. That is a large part of why they have not suffered the losses we have....we're handling the more volatile areas.
posted on September 28, 2004 12:29:47 PMMaybe you're not aware
I am aware that the other countries that have combat boots on the ground in Iraq are in very small numbers. Many are only there with humanitarian missions such as Japan.
The reason we are taking the casualities is because we are the only people there is significant numbers.
Your "hot spot" reasoning is nothing but hot air and not even close to the truth..
posted on September 28, 2004 12:45:44 PM
For all purposes, we are alone there. The local paper did a tally of all losses. The Brits have the second largest amount with 68 as stated here, and about two of the other countrys have 5 dead, the others have 3 or less. We are carrying MOST of the burden.
Bigots are miserable people. Prevent Bigotry through Education.
posted on September 28, 2004 01:12:57 PMThe local paper did a tally of all losses. The Brits have the second largest amount with 68 as stated here, and about two of the other countrys have 5 dead, the others have 3 or less.
Why do these numbers surprise anyone? Bush decided to go to war without the support of our allies so the numbers should be a great surprise. Bush now must suffer as the result of his inability to get the support of other countries. DICK CHENEY SUPPORTS MY RELATIONSHIP: People ought to be free to enter into any kind of relationship they want to
Let's have a BBQ, Texas style, ROAST BUSH
------------------------------
YOU CAN'T HAVE BULLSH** WITH OUT BUSH.
------------------------------
posted on September 28, 2004 01:29:47 PM
twelvetoes and linda_k can only twist the truth trying to defend their failed leaders Bush/Cheney. Both twelvetoes and linda_K need medical help they are both delusional
posted on September 28, 2004 04:27:44 PM
Delusional is what all you left wingers are for prefering to fight terrorism on US soil rather than in Iraq.
Hey, hey Ho, ho Kerry - sign the 1-8-0
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The person who has nothing for which he is willing
to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
--John Stuart Mill
posted on September 28, 2004 05:37:11 PM
peepa, at least I am lucid enough to know who I am voting for and why... unlike yourself... people like you should not be allowed to vote...
Bear, Linda... see how the left thinks? well I don't know if you can call that thinking... at least yeager seems to know the difference between ALL and Most... but if it is most we are not alone... more kerry lying...
posted on September 29, 2004 05:11:40 AM
Hey Twelvepole, like you members of another political party said words like the words you wrote. I quote your words "people like you should not be allowed to vote".
People of the other political party that said words like yours were called Nazi's.
I can see why people with your mind set would love to tell people who could and could not vote.
posted on September 29, 2004 09:00:53 AMDelusional is what all you left wingers are for prefering to fight terrorism on US soil rather than in Iraq.
Delusional ? You mean like WMDs is Iraq ?
Delusional ? You mean like saying the war on terrorism when we're talking about the war in Iraq so some people might begin to believe that the war in Iraq had anything to do with terrorism ?
Bush has made a mess of everything and got 1000 of our people killed.
posted on September 29, 2004 11:25:49 AM
Bear1949, its to bad people like you can't see the that Bush has made terrorism worst instead of better with his Iraq war.
BAGHDAD, Iraq, Sept. 28 - Over the past 30 days, more than 2,300 attacks by insurgents have been directed against civilians and military targets in Iraq, in a pattern that sprawls over nearly every major population center outside the Kurdish north, according to comprehensive data compiled by a private security company with access to military intelligence reports and its own network of Iraqi informants
The sweeping geographical reach of the attacks, from Nineveh and Salahuddin Provinces in the northwest to Babylon and Diyala in the center and Basra in the south, suggests a more widespread resistance than the isolated pockets described by Iraqi government officials.
The type of attacks ran the gamut: car bombs, time bombs, rocket-propelled grenades, hand grenades, small-arms fire, mortar attacks and land mines.
"If you look at incident data and you put incident data on the map, it's not a few provinces, " said Adam Collins, a security expert and the chief intelligence official in Iraq for Special Operations Consulting-Security Management Group Inc., a private security company based in Las Vegas that compiles and analyzes the data as a regular part of its operations in Iraq.
posted on September 29, 2004 01:17:06 PM
reamond - While you continue to place the blame on this president...you totally ignore/overlook/don't acknowledge kerry's part [along with the rest of our Congress] in believing saddam DID have womd....the reason the UN spent 12 years dealing with saddam...the reason sanctions were placed on Iraq...etc.
Kerry himself stated over and over saddam was a threat. To ignore kerry's position on Iraq only makes you look like a fool. Can't change history....kerry wanted saddam out too. kerry thought Iraq had womd too. kerry's just a flip-flopped who to this day is still continuing to change his positon on Iraq. All to be elected...doesn't matter if he can't make up his mind after 14 years I guess. Doesn't matter to the dems here that the man is TOTALLY confused on just WHICH of his many positions he will take.
--------
Kerry is AWOL from Iraq...
Mark Alexander (back to web version) | Send
August 6, 2004
"I will be a commander-in-chief who will never mislead us into war," claims John Kerry, with a none-too-subtle implication that President George W. Bush lied about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein. On that note, we decided to take a look at the historical record. Indeed, we wanted to know precisely what the senator from Massachusetts had been saying all along about the Butcher of Baghdad. Lo and behold, we found that Kerry makes a compelling argument in support of President's Bush's actions to free the Iraqi people--and the world--from Saddam's terror.
Back in 1991, Kerry voted against the use of force in removing Iraq from neighboring Kuwait (S. J. Res. 2), later explaining that he only "voted against the timing of it. I said very clearly in my statement on the Senate floor that I was committed to getting Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait...and that I was prepared to go to war if it took that...."
Regarding Bill Clinton's attacks on Iraqi targets, Kerry said in 1997, "So clearly the allies may not like it...where's the backbone of Russia, where's the backbone of France, where are they in expressing their condemnation of such clearly illegal activity?"
A year later, after additional bombing, Kerry said, "We have to be prepared to go the full distance, which is to do everything possible to disrupt [Saddam's] regime and to encourage the forces of democracy. ... [H]e can rebuild both chemical and biological. And every indication is, because of his deception and duplicity in the past, he will seek to do that. So we will not eliminate the problem for ourselves or for the rest of the world with a bombing attack. ... I believe that in the post-Cold War period this issue of proliferation, particularly in the hands of Saddam Hussein, is critical."
Three months after the 9/11 attack on our countrymen by state-supported Jihadi terrorists, Kerry argued, "Saddam is one who is and has acted like a terrorist. ... For instance, Saddam Hussein has used weapons of mass destruction against his own people....He is and has acted like a terrorist, and he has engaged in activities that are unacceptable."
Reiterating his position on Saddam prior to 9/11, Kerry said, "I think we ought to put the heat on Saddam Hussein. I've said that for a number of years. I criticized the Clinton administration for backing off of the inspections...." He then added, "I think we need to put the pressure on, no matter what the evidence is about September 11."
Regarding Afghanistan and Iraq, Kerry said, "I think we clearly have to keep the pressure on terrorism globally. This doesn't end with Afghanistan by any imagination. And I think the president has made that clear. I think we have made that clear. Terrorism is a global menace. It's a scourge. And it is absolutely vital that we continue [to combat terrorism], for instance, Saddam Hussein."
Regarding diplomatic solutions and the Bush administration's efforts to get the UN to enforce the Security Council's unanimous mandates on Iraqi arms, Kerry said, in May of 2002, "Saddam is buying time and playing a game, in my judgment. Do we have to go through that process? The answer is yes. We're precisely doing that. And I think that's what Colin Powell did today."
In July of 2002, Kerry told the Democrat Leadership Council, "I agree completely with this Administration's goal of a regime change in Iraq....Saddam Hussein is a renegade and outlaw who turned his back on the tough conditions of his surrender put in place by the United Nations in 1991."
That's "completely," fellow Patriots.
A month later in a New York Times op-ed, Kerry asserted, "If Saddam Hussein is unwilling to bend to the international community's already existing order, then he will have invited enforcement even if that enforcement is mostly at the hands of the United States, a right we retain even if the Security Council fails to act." That's even if it's "mostly at the hands of the United States."
In September of 2002, a year after 9/11, Kerry said: "It is imperative that we issue an ultimatum to Saddam Hussein, and that would require immediate and full compliance, and if Hussein doesn't comply, the United States must be prepared to go in and...if need be, largely alone remove Saddam Hussein from power. There is also no question that Saddam Hussein continues to pursue weapons of mass destruction, and his success can threaten both our interests in the region and our security at home. ...Saddam may even miscalculate and slide these [WMD] off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It's the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat."
A few days later, he told MSNBC, "The president...always reserves the right to act unilaterally to protect the interests of our country."
On 11 October 2002, Kerry voted for the Iraq War Resolution (H.J. Res. 114).
That's "unilaterally."
In May of 2003, Kerry defended that vote, saying, "I think it was the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein, and when the President made the decision, I supported him, and I support the fact that we did disarm him."
But when Howard Dean turned up the heat with his anti-war message, Kerry began to waffle.
Announcing his candidacy, Kerry's support for regime change morphed into, "I voted to threaten the use of force to make Saddam Hussein comply with the resolutions of the United Nations."
Notice the head of the pin on which Kerry is now attempting to dance. He's claiming that he only "voted to threaten the use of force." In other words, he's now insisting that he only voted to deliver a hollow threat. Not exactly a profile in courage, eh?
As the Demo-primary season approached, Kerry began to hone his newfound opposition to the removal of Saddam: "They rushed to war. They were intent on going to war."
When it came time to provide supplemental appropriations for our troops in Iraq, Kerry (who planned to run his campaign on his veteran status) claimed, "I don't think any United States senator is going to abandon our troops and recklessly leave Iraq to whatever follows as a result of simply cutting and running. That's irresponsible. I don't think anyone in the Congress is going to not give our troops ammunition, not give our troops the ability to be able to defend themselves. We're not going to cut and run and not do the job."
But on 17 October 2003, Kerry abandoned our troops, voting against S. 1689, the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Iraq and Afghanistan Security and Reconstruction. Thus, he put pure political expedience ahead of his obligation to arm and equip our fighting forces -- specifically those fighting forces currently standing in harm's way.
In January of this year, when asked if he was "one of the anti-war candidates," Kerry answered firmly, "I am--yeah."
After announcing his running mate in March, he said of John Edwards, "I'm proud to say that John joined me in voting against that $87 billion...."Got that? He's actually "proud" of having stiffed our troops.
Last month, when asked by CBS if his vote for the removal of Saddam was a mistake (which, politically, it clearly was), Kerry fumbled his answer: "What -- what -- what I voted for, you -- you -- you see, you're playing here. What -- what I voted for was a -- an authority for the president to go to war as a last resort if Saddam Hussein did not disarm and we needed to go to war." When pressed for a direct answer to the question, Kerry responded curtly, "I think I answered your question."
When asked why he "voted for the war, but didn't vote for the money to finance the war," Kerry responded, "That's not a flip-flop. That's not a flip-flop."
And this week remember Aug. 2004, Kerry claims, "I believe this administration is actually encouraging the recruitment of terrorists. The policies of this administration, I believe and others believe very deeply, have resulted in an increase of animosity and anger focused on the United States of America." (Here we suppose "others" is in reference to the same yet-to-be-identified foreign leaders who Kerry claims support his candidacy.)
The reality is, of course, that it's our very existence, and not our actions, that the Jihadis really object to. Kerry's failure to acknowledge this fact is indicative of just how deeply he has delved into the fevered swamp.
Last week, greeting Demo-conventioneers with a limp Clintonesque salute, Kerry intoned that he was "reporting for duty." To which we say, it's about time--because he has been AWOL from Iraq since he voted to invade.
------------
Mark Alexander is Executive Editor and Publisher of The Federalist Patriot, a Townhall.com member group.
[ edited by Linda_K on Sep 29, 2004 02:13 PM ]
posted on September 29, 2004 06:01:22 PMkerry's part [along with the rest of our Congress]
Congress was duped by the misrepresentations and over reaching, and overstating of the intel by Bush.
It has been shown time and again that the intel reports that went to Bush were nothing near what Bush Powell and the rest of the liars publicly asserted.
JACKSONVILLE, Fla. - Sen. John Kerry set his jaw, and even sighed at one point, as he confronted anew the confusion over his stand on the Iraq war, a fog that has enveloped his candidacy for months.
"I have one position on Iraq," Kerry insisted this week during a rare news conference. "One position."
In fact, he's right, his image as a "flip-flopper" notwithstanding.
Kerry voted in October 2002 for the congressional resolution that authorized President Bush to go to war in Iraq. He now says that the invasion was not justified and has made the United States less secure.
These positions are not contradictory, but his attempts to explain the distinction between them are often complicated, and they have given President Bush an opening to caricature Kerry as a flip-flopper. However, beneath the torrent of campaign verbiage, Kerry's position on Iraq for the past two years has been consistent and defensible - just difficult to sell in a sound-bite world.
Kerry always called for a broad international coalition to confront Saddam Hussein, and going to war only as a last resort. Like most senators, he thought Bush needed the authority - it passed the Senate 77-23, and Kerry was one of 29 Democrats who supported it.
But once Bush got the authority, Kerry believes, he misused it.
In his Tuesday news conference, where 10 out of 11 questions probed his position on Iraq, Kerry said that he voted to authorize Bush to go to war if necessary in order to present a united U.S. front to the world and thus strengthen Bush's hand.
It was only one year after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. The president was challenging the United Nations to support him in confronting Saddam, whom Bush painted as a clear and present danger to the world. He told Congress that the best hope of avoiding war was to stand strong and united, first at home, then together with the United Nations in backing Saddam down.
"The vote for authorization is interpreted by a lot of people as a vote to go to war," Kerry said Tuesday. "But if you read it, and if you think about what it gave the president, it gave the president what he said: America will speak with one voice ... It was not a vote to go that day. It was a vote to go through the process of going to the U.N., building the allies and then making a judgment of whether we had to go."
It is clear from Kerry's remarks during the 2002 Senate debate that he did not consider the resolution a declaration of war.
"Let there be no doubt or confusion about where we stand on this. I will support a multilateral effort to disarm (Saddam) by force, if we ever exhaust ... other options," Kerry said in debate.
Then as now, he urged Bush to work with the United Nations.
"If we do wind up going to war with Iraq, it is imperative that we do so with others in the international community," Kerry said.
In fact, Bush promised at the time to build a broad coalition and go slow.
In an Oct. 7, 2002, speech in Cincinnati, just four days before the Senate vote, the president pledged to exhaust other options and said that war was "not inevitable." He urged Congress to pass the resolution to give him leverage.
Republicans scoff at Kerry's distinction. They say Kerry surely knew that Saddam was unlikely to yield.
"He voted for it," said Republican National Committee chairman Ed Gillespie. "Look at the coverage at the time. It was pretty clear what was going on."
Kerry drew groans from Democrats on Aug. 9 when he remained consistent to his stand in offhand remarks to reporters at the Grand Canyon. Responding to a mocking question from Bush, Kerry said that even if he had known in October 2002 that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction, he still would have voted to authorize Bush to go to war.
"Yes I would have voted for the authority. I believe it's the right authority for a president to have," Kerry said.
The president then hammered Kerry for more than a week, portraying the Democratic presidential nominee as endorsing his own approach.
But Kerry's position had not changed. He also emphasized in the Aug. 9 exchange that he would have used the war authority differently than Bush did.
The distinction was lost in the din.
Perhaps harder for Kerry to explain has been his October 2003 vote against $87 billion for operations in Iraq.
"I actually voted for the $87 billion before I voted against it," Kerry said once, a line that the Bush campaign used in commercials to mock Kerry for inconsistency.
However, Kerry's line was but a clumsy way of saying that he had voted for a Democratic version of the bill that would have raised the $87 billion by repealing Bush's income tax cuts for people making over $300,000 a year.
When that measure failed, Kerry voted against the $87 billion on final passage. He said his vote was a protest against adding $87 billion to the burgeoning federal budget deficit. He also said he was protesting what he saw as sloppy planning for securing the peace. That position, at least, is consistent with a belief that Bush mishandled the authority that Congress gave him.
"Because I saw what was happening, I voted against it," Kerry said Monday night on the "Late Show with David Letterman."
However, other analysts have also noted that Kerry's vote against the $87 billion came at a time when his presidential campaign was stalled and Democratic voters were flocking to the candidacy of former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean - whose entire campaign was based upon condemning the war in Iraq. Kerry's vote looked like an opportunistic effort to curry favor with anti-war Democratic primary voters.
By concentrating fire on Kerry's votes, Bush turned the campaign debate over the war in Iraq, which remains unpopular, into a referendum on the challenger's consistency rather than his own judgment in going to war and managing its aftermath.
Now Kerry is shifting from defense to offense.
Beginning Monday with a forceful speech at New York University blasting Bush's conduct of the war, Kerry has begun to reframe the Iraq debate toward what needs to be done now, and away from his two Senate votes.
"If we do not change course, there is the prospect of a war with no end in sight," he said. "At every fork in the road, he has taken the wrong turn and led us in the wrong direction."
The next day Kerry explained his shift in emphasis: "The president wants to shift the topic, and I'm not going to let him shift the topic. This is about President Bush and his decisions and his choices and his unwillingness ... to live in a world of reality."
There is at least one large inconsistency remaining in Kerry's record on Iraq.
In 1991, he voted against the resolution authorizing President George H.W. Bush to go to war to dislodge Iraq's army from Kuwait. At the time most Democrats feared invading Iraq would produce heavy U.S. casualties, and they remained haunted by the Vietnam War. Most Democrats, including Kerry, opposed giving the first President Bush authority to go to war.
But recently Kerry was asked: Wasn't that the same thing you said the younger Bush needed this time around?
Kerry brushed off the question.
"That's not the real debate," he said. "The debate now is whether or not you have a plan to win, and whether or not you are facing the realities on the ground in Iraq."
posted on September 29, 2004 10:06:40 PM
What a bunch of absolute BS that article is.
There's no changing ALL the kerry quotes on why saddam needed to be removed. No changing them....someone can say all they want he hasn't changed positions ....then we ALL can have a good laugh.
Matter of fact...at one point, right before we invaded, kerry was #*!@1ing that President Bush wasn't moving fast enough to get us into Iraq.
[shaking head in total disbelief that anyone not only could write such lies - when there are kerry quotes all over the internet from the news sources that quoted him....but that some, like you helen, would actually believe him.] LOL ABSOLUTELY UNBELIEVABLE!!! ROFL
posted on September 29, 2004 10:14:11 PMCongress was duped by the misrepresentations and over reaching, and overstating of the intel by Bush. Nope....they all had the same material to review if they wanted to. You don't seriously expect us to believe that kerry, who was on the Senate Intelligence Committee himself....wasn't allowed to see the reports. I hope not reamond...because I've previously posted showing they all DID have an opportunity to read the material - if they requested it....just like hillary clinton did. Not saying some didn't BOTHER to read the reports out of pure laziness...and depended on being briefed rather than taking the time to read it themselves. But to put the blame on the President 'lying' has been discounted by the 9-11 investigation committee.
It has been shown time and again that the intel reports that went to Bush were nothing near what Bush Powell and the rest of the liars publicly asserted.
I've read YOU saying that over and over...I've never seen you post any proof of that....nor have I ever read it anywhere else. You might want to re-read the 9-11 Commissions report...THEY state the President didn't lie.
posted on September 30, 2004 01:04:36 AM
Did SOMEONE mention flip-flopping ???
posted on September 12, 2004 06:39:04 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
. Social Security Surplus
BUSH PLEDGES NOT TO TOUCH SOCIAL SECURITY SURPLUS... "We're going to keep the promise of Social Security and keep the government from raiding the Social Security surplus." [President Bush, 3/3/01]
...BUSH SPENDS SOCIAL SECURITY SURPLUS The New York Times reported that "the president's new budget uses Social Security surpluses to pay for other programs every year through 2013, ultimately diverting more than $1.4 trillion in Social Security funds to other purposes." [The New York Times, 2/6/02]
2. Patient's Right to Sue
GOVERNOR BUSH VETOES PATIENTS' RIGHT TO SUE... "Despite his campaign rhetoric in favor of a patients' bill of rights, Bush fought such a bill tooth and nail as Texas governor, vetoing a bill coauthored by Republican state Rep. John Smithee in 1995. He... constantly opposed a patient's right to sue an HMO over coverage denied that resulted in adverse health effects." [Salon, 2/7/01]
...CANDIDATE BUSH PRAISES TEXAS PATIENTS' RIGHT TO SUE... "We're one of the first states that said you can sue an HMO for denying you proper coverage... It's time for our nation to come together and do what's right for the people. And I think this is right for the people. You know, I support a national patients' bill of rights, Mr. Vice President. And I want all people covered. I don't want the law to supersede good law like we've got in Texas." [Governor Bush, 10/17/00]
...PRESIDENT BUSH'S ADMINISTRATION ARGUES AGAINST RIGHT TO SUE "To let two Texas consumers, Juan Davila and Ruby R. Calad, sue their managed-care companies for wrongful denials of medical benefits ‘would be to completely undermine' federal law regulating employee benefits, Assistant Solicitor General James A. Feldman said at oral argument March 23. Moreover, the administration's brief attacked the policy rationale for Texas's law, which is similar to statutes on the books in nine other states." [Washington Post, 4/5/04]
3. Tobacco Buyout
BUSH SUPPORTS CURRENT TOBACCO FARMERS' QUOTA SYSTEM... "They've got the quota system in place -- the allotment system -- and I don't think that needs to be changed." [President Bush, 5/04]
...BUSH ADMINISTRATION WILL SUPPORT FEDERAL BUYOUT OF TOBACCO QUOTAS "The administration is open to a buyout." [White House spokeswoman Jeanie Mamo, 6/18/04]
4. North Korea
BUSH WILL NOT OFFER NUCLEAR NORTH KOREA INCENTIVES TO DISARM... "We developed a bold approach under which, if the North addressed our long-standing concerns, the United States was prepared to take important steps that would have significantly improved the lives of the North Korean people. Now that North Korea's covert nuclear weapons program has come to light, we are unable to pursue this approach." [President's Statement, 11/15/02]
...BUSH ADMINISTRATION OFFERS NORTH KOREA INCENTIVES TO DISARM"Well, we will work to take steps to ease their political and economic isolation. So there would be -- what you would see would be some provisional or temporary proposals that would only lead to lasting benefit after North Korea dismantles its nuclear programs. So there would be some provisional or temporary efforts of that nature." [White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, 6/23/04]
5. Abortion
BUSH SUPPORTS A WOMAN'S RIGHT TO CHOOSE... "Bush said he...favors leaving up to a woman and her doctor the abortion question." [The Nation, 6/15/00, quoting the Lubbock Avalanche-Journal, 5/78]
...BUSH OPPOSES A WOMAN'S RIGHT TO CHOOSE "I am pro-life." [Governor Bush, 10/3/00]
6. OPEC
BUSH PROMISES TO FORCE OPEC TO LOWER PRICES... "What I think the president ought to do [when gas prices spike] is he ought to get on the phone with the OPEC cartel and say we expect you to open your spigots...And the president of the United States must jawbone OPEC members to lower the price." [President Bush, 1/26/00]
...BUSH REFUSES TO LOBBY OPEC LEADERS With gas prices soaring in the United States at the beginning of 2004, the Miami Herald reported the president refused to "personally lobby oil cartel leaders to change their minds." [Miami Herald, 4/1/04]
7. Iraq Funding
BUSH SPOKESMAN DENIES NEED FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR THE REST OF 2004... "We do not anticipate requesting supplemental funding for '04" [White House Budget Director Joshua Bolton, 2/2/04]
...BUSH REQUESTS ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR IRAQ FOR 2004 "I am requesting that Congress establish a $25 billion contingency reserve fund for the coming fiscal year to meet all commitments to our troops." [President Bush, Statement by President, 5/5/04]
8. Condoleeza Rice Testimony
BUSH SPOKESMAN SAYS RICE WON'T TESTIFY AS 'A MATTER OF PRINCIPLE'... "Again, this is not her personal preference; this goes back to a matter of principle. There is a separation of powers issue involved here. Historically, White House staffers do not testify before legislative bodies. So it's a matter of principle, not a matter of preference." [White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, 3/9/04]
...BUSH ORDERS RICE TO TESTIFY: "Today I have informed the Commission on Terrorist Attacks Against the United States that my National Security Advisor, Dr. Condoleezza Rice, will provide public testimony." [President Bush, 3/30/04]
9. Science
BUSH PLEDGES TO ISSUE REGULATIONS BASED ON SCIENCE..."I think we ought to have high standards set by agencies that rely upon science, not by what may feel good or what sounds good." [then-Governor George W. Bush, 1/15/00]
...BUSH ADMINISTRATION REGULATIONS IGNORE SCIENCE "60 leading scientists—including Nobel laureates, leading medical experts, former federal agency directors and university chairs and presidents—issued a statement calling for regulatory and legislative action to restore scientific integrity to federal policymaking. According to the scientists, the Bush administration has, among other abuses, suppressed and distorted scientific analysis from federal agencies, and taken actions that have undermined the quality of scientific advisory panels." [Union of Concerned Scientists, 2/18/04]
10. Ahmed Chalabi
BUSH INVITES CHALABI TO STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS...President Bush also met with Chalabi during his brief trip to Iraq last Thanksgiving [White House Documents 1/20/04, 11/27/03]
...BUSH MILITARY ASSISTS IN RAID OF CHALABI'S HOUSE "U.S. soldiers raided the home of America's one-time ally Ahmad Chalabi on Thursday and seized documents and computers." [Washington Post, 5/20/04]
11. Department of Homeland Security
BUSH OPPOSES THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY..."So, creating a Cabinet office doesn't solve the problem. You still will have agencies within the federal government that have to be coordinated. So the answer is that creating a Cabinet post doesn't solve anything." [White House spokesman Ari Fleischer, 3/19/02]
...BUSH SUPPORTS THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY "So tonight, I ask the Congress to join me in creating a single, permanent department with an overriding and urgent mission: securing the homeland of America and protecting the American people." [President Bush, Address to the Nation, 6/6/02]
12. Weapons of Mass Destruction
BUSH SAYS WE FOUND THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION..."We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories...for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them." [President Bush, Interview in Poland, 5/29/03]
...BUSH SAYS WE HAVEN'T FOUND WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION "David Kay has found the capacity to produce weapons.And when David Kay goes in and says we haven't found stockpiles yet, and there's theories as to where the weapons went. They could have been destroyed during the war. Saddam and his henchmen could have destroyed them as we entered into Iraq. They could be hidden. They could have been transported to another country, and we'll find out." [President Bush, Meet the Press, 2/7/04]
13. Free Trade
BUSH SUPPORTS FREE TRADE... "I believe strongly that if we promote trade, and when we promote trade, it will help workers on both sides of this issue." [President Bush in Peru, 3/23/02]
...BUSH SUPPORTS RESTRICTIONS ON TRADE "In a decision largely driven by his political advisers, President Bush set aside his free-trade principles last year and imposed heavy tariffs on imported steel to help out struggling mills in Pennsylvania and West Virginia, two states crucial for his reelection." [Washington Post, 9/19/03]
14. Osama Bin Laden
BUSH WANTS OSAMA DEAD OR ALIVE... "I want justice. And there's an old poster out West, I recall, that says, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive.'" [President Bush, on Osama Bin Laden, 09/17/01]
...BUSH DOESN'T CARE ABOUT OSAMA "I don't know where he is.You know, I just don't spend that much time on him... I truly am not that concerned about him."[President Bush, Press Conference, 3/13/02]
15. The Environment
BUSH SUPPORTS MANDATORY CAPS ON CARBON DIOXIDE... "[If elected], Governor Bush will work to...establish mandatory reduction targets for emissions of four main pollutants: sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, mercury and carbon dioxide." [Bush Environmental Plan, 9/29/00]
...BUSH OPPOSES MANDATORY CAPS ON CARBON DIOXIDE "I do not believe, however, that the government should impose on power plants mandatory emissions reductions for carbon dioxide, which is not a 'pollutant' under the Clean Air Act." [President Bush, Letter to Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE), 3/13/03]
16. WMD Commission
BUSH RESISTS AN OUTSIDE INVESTIGATION ON WMD INTELLIGENCE FAILURE... "The White House immediately turned aside the calls from Kay and many Democrats for an immediate outside investigation, seeking to head off any new wide-ranging election-year inquiry that might go beyond reports already being assembled by congressional committees and the Central Intelligence Agency." [NY Times, 1/29/04]
...BUSH SUPPORTS AN OUTSIDE INVESTIGATION ON WMD INTELLIGENCE FAILURE "Today, by executive order, I am creating an independent commission, chaired by Governor and former Senator Chuck Robb, Judge Laurence Silberman, to look at American intelligence capabilities, especially our intelligence about weapons of mass destruction." [President Bush, 2/6/04]
17. Creation of the 9/11 Commission
BUSH OPPOSES CREATION OF INDEPENDENT 9/11 COMMISSION... "President Bush took a few minutes during his trip to Europe Thursday to voice his opposition to establishing a special commission to probe how the government dealt with terror warnings before Sept. 11." [CBS News, 5/23/02]
...BUSH SUPPORTS CREATION OF INDEPENDENT 9/11 COMMISSION "President Bush said today he now supports establishing an independent commission to investigate the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks." [ABC News, 09/20/02]
18. Time Extension for 9/11 Commission
BUSH OPPOSES TIME EXTENSION FOR 9/11 COMMISSION... "President Bush and House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) have decided to oppose granting more time to an independent commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks." [Washington Post, 1/19/04]
...BUSH SUPPORTS TIME EXTENSION FOR 9/11 COMMISSION "The White House announced Wednesday its support for a request from the commission investigating the September 11, 2001 attacks for more time to complete its work." [CNN, 2/4/04]
19. One Hour Limit for 9/11 Commission Testimony
BUSH LIMITS TESTIMONY IN FRONT OF 9/11 COMMISSION TO ONE HOUR... "President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have placed strict limits on the private interviews they will grant to the federal commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks, saying that they will meet only with the panel's top two officials and that Mr. Bush will submit to only a single hour of questioning, commission members said Wednesday." [NY Times, 2/26/04]
...BUSH SETS NO TIMELIMIT FOR TESTIMONY "The president's going to answer all of the questions they want to raise. Nobody's watching the clock." [White House spokesman Scott McClellan, 3/10/04]
20. Gay Marriage
BUSH SAYS GAY MARRIAGE IS A STATE ISSUE... "The state can do what they want to do. Don't try to trap me in this state's issue like you're trying to get me into." [Gov. George W. Bush on Gay Marriage, Larry King Live, 2/15/00]
...BUSH SUPPORTS CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT BANNING GAY MARRIAGE "Today I call upon the Congress to promptly pass, and to send to the states for ratification, an amendment to our Constitution defining and protecting marriage as a union of man and woman as husband and wife." [President Bush, 2/24/04]
21. Nation Building
BUSH OPPOSES NATION BUILDING... "If we don't stop extending our troops all around the world in nation-building missions, then we're going to have a serious problem coming down the road." [Gov. George W. Bush, 10/3/00]
...BUSH SUPPORTS NATION BUILDING "We will be changing the regime of Iraq, for the good of the Iraqi people." [President Bush, 3/6/03]
22. Saddam/al Qaeda Link
BUSH SAYS IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEEN AL QAEDA AND SADDAM... "You can't distinguish between al Qaeda and Saddam when you talk about the war on terror." [President Bush, 9/25/02]
...BUSH SAYS SADDAM HAD NO ROLE IN AL QAEDA PLOT "We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved in Sept. 11." [President Bush, 9/17/03]
23. U.N. Resolution
BUSH VOWS TO HAVE A UN VOTE NO MATTER WHAT... "No matter what the whip count is, we're calling for the vote. We want to see people stand up and say what their opinion is about Saddam Hussein and the utility of the United Nations Security Council. And so, you bet. It's time for people to show their cards, to let the world know where they stand when it comes to Saddam." [President Bush 3/6/03]
...BUSH WITHDRAWS REQUEST FOR VOTE "At a National Security Council meeting convened at the White House at 8:55 a.m., Bush finalized the decision to withdraw the resolution from consideration and prepared to deliver an address to the nation that had already been written." [Washington Post, 3/18/03]
24. Involvement in the Palestinian Conflict
BUSH OPPOSES SUMMITS... "Well, we've tried summits in the past, as you may remember. It wasn't all that long ago where a summit was called and nothing happened, and as a result we had significant intifada in the area." [President Bush, 04/05/02]
...BUSH SUPPORTS SUMMITS "If a meeting advances progress toward two states living side by side in peace, I will strongly consider such a meeting. I'm committed to working toward peace in the Middle East." [President Bush, 5/23/03]
25. Campaign Finance
BUSH OPPOSES MCCAIN-FEINGOLD... "George W. Bush opposes McCain-Feingold...as an infringement on free expression." [Washington Post, 3/28/2000]
...BUSH SIGNS MCCAIN-FEINGOLD INTO LAW "[T]his bill improves the current system of financing for Federal campaigns, and therefore I have signed it into law." [President Bush, at the McCain-Feingold signing ceremony, 03/27/02]
26. 527s
Bush opposes restrictions on 527s: "I also have reservations about the constitutionality of the broad ban on issue advertising [in McCain Feingold], which restrains the speech of a wide variety of groups on issues of public import." [President Bush, 3/27/02]
…Bush says 527s bad for system: "I don't think we ought to have 527s. I can't be more plain about it…I think they're bad for the system. That's why I signed the bill, McCain-Feingold." [President Bush, 8/23/04]
27. Medical Records
Bush says medical records must remain private: "I believe that we must protect…the right of every American to have confidence that his or her personal medical records will remain private." [President Bush, 4/12/01]
…Bush says patients' histories are not confidntial: The Justice Department…asserts that patients "no longer possess a reasonable expectation that their histories will remain completely confidential." [BusinessWeek, 4/30/04]
28. Timelines For Dictators
Bush sets timeline for Saddam: "If Iraq does not accept the terms within a week of passage or fails to disclose required information within 30 days, the resolution authorizes 'all necessary means' to force compliance--in other words, a military attack." [LA Times, 10/3/02]
…Bush says he's against timelines: "I don't think you give timelines to dictators." [President Bush, 8/27/04]
29. The Great Lakes
Bush wants to divert great lakes: "Even though experts say 'diverting any water from the Great Lakes region sets a bad precedent' Bush 'said he wants to talk to Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chrétien about piping water to parched states in the west and southwest.'– [AP, 7/19/01]
Bush says he'll never divert Great Lakes: "We've got to use our resources wisely, like water. It starts with keeping the Great Lakes water in the Great Lakes Basin...My position is clear: We're never going to allow diversion of Great Lakes water." [President Bush, 8/16/04]
30. Winning The War On Terror
Bush claims he can win the war on terror: "One of the interesting things people ask me, now that we're asking questions, is, can you ever win the war on terror? Of course, you can." [President Bush, 4/13/04]
…Bush says war on terror is unwinnable: "I don't think you can win [the war on terror]." [President Bush, 8/30/04]
…Bush says he will win the war on terror: "Make no mistake about it, we are winning and we will win [the war on terror]." [President Bush, 8/
Prevent Bigotry through Education.
