Tony Snow: Ned Lamont (and Bush 41) are terrorist enablers
Bush loyalists point to a blogger who has doubts about escalating to Code Red. "I see nothing reasonable in these reactions," says Rosemary, with (unintended?) irony. "They are shameful and just a little bit sick."
Fair enough. But if you really want to talk about "shameful and sick," I'd like to refer you to Press Secretary Tony Snow's comments following the defeat of Joe Lieberman in the Connecticut primary yesterday:
...[T]he real question for the American people to ask themselves is, do you take the war on terror seriously, with all the developments going on around the world? And, if so, how do you fight it to win? There seem to be two approaches. And in the Connecticut race one of the approaches is ignore the difficulties and walk away.Yes. Well. That's the real question? I think the "real question" is whether or not we can believe anything this administration tells us anymore. Their credibility is zero.
But beyond that, Snow (translation: "Bush") is wagging his finger and scolding the 60% of this country who now believe that the war was not worth it.
If that's their strategy for November, then good luck with that. Like they say, "Bring it on."
But wait, there's more:
Now, when the United States walked away, in the opinion of Osama bin Laden in 1991, bin Laden drew from that the conclusion that Americans were weak and wouldn't stay the course, and that led to September 11th.You heard him: George H.W. Bush, 41st president of the United States, was a terrorist appeaser.
Now, you can rail against bloggers all you want. But when everything is said and done, this important question still remains: Is there a bigger bunch of morons around here than this current crew in the White House?
I'm not sure about the particular bin Laden quote you're referencing but, if I'm not mistaken it was Ronald Reagan's withdrawal from Lebanon that he claimed convinced him of our weakness.
That makes Snow an even bigger moron, then.
P.S. You remember Beirut, but I remember bin Laden pointing to Somalia in '93. Go figure.
P.S. I think I'm older than you - at least in dog-tired-of-Republican-hypocrisy-years.
Check this out:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003168943_binlebanon02.html
I stand corrected.
P.S. I was born the year Eisenhower took office. How about you?
JFK sent 18,000 "advisors" to 'nam the day I hatched, which is when many point to as the real start of the war.
"I was born the year Eisenhower took office. How about you?"
Now I stand corrected - you're at least one Eisenhower administration senior, so you probably have me on the dog-tired age as well (I'm thinking mine go back to around 1973).
Mark, you're an infant but unlucky enough to live in the age where you can catch up in a mere two Republican terms.
Shep:
1968 was the first year that I remember being interested in politics. I remember waking up at 3 am the morning after the California primary to see who had won -- McCarthy or Kennedy. The resulting news was pretty shocking.
P.S. I think I'm older than you - at least in dog-tired-of-Republican-hypocrisy-years.
Check this out [deleted link to seattle times]
I call bullshit on that article. I mean it's certainly not unlike the press to make shit up if it happens to fit...
If Lebanon had been "the" moment then he would have mentioned it during his personal interview in 1998. Lebanon didn't even garner the slightest mention.
Read it yourself: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/binladen/who/miller.html
Well, leave it to a Republican to call a journalist a liar while putting her faith in the words of Osama bin Laden:
“But bin Laden denied to me that he was behind the [first World Trade Center] bombing and claimed he didn't know Ramzi Yousef."
So why would you think a newspaper would be making up bin Laden’s words, rather than he was just lying – at first or now? That's pretty f*cking paranoid. Anyway, it’s not the first time he’s claimed that our retreat from Lebanon was an inspiration:
http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,515039782,00.html
Good point Sheppie. How about this I think everyone is lying. Bin Laden then, now and everytime in between. When his lips move, he's lying.
Journalist lied too. He knew Bin Laden was lying and he reported it as fact.
All liars!
You heard him: George H.W. Bush, 41st president of the United States, was a terrorist appeaser.
No, he called him weak and he is right. That's why Poppy Bush didn't get re-elected. He lost a lot of Republican support for being a liar and a weak ass leader.
He lost because he raised taxes. Period.
P.S. The irony is that it contributed to the boom that Clinton's administration ushered in.
I caught up in one GOP administration, carrying Humphry signs in front of my grade school in '72. At the time I was (and in retrospect still am) glad Wallace didn't get elected.
Read MY Lips.
Who in their right mind ever though Bush Sr. wasn't a pro at foreign policy? His own people, well Reagan Democrats, did him in.
"Good point Sheppie.[snip] Journalist lied too. He knew Bin Laden was lying and he reported it as fact.
All liars!"
Thanks, Rosie. You're starting to get it. Now, apply that same level of skepticism to the Republican Party and you may just see the light.
But, to be fair to journalists, when they report what bin Laden or Republicans say, it is not the journalist who is lying. Just so you know.
"Who in their right mind ever though Bush Sr. wasn't a pro at foreign policy?"
Who in their right mind ever thought they'd be nostalgic for Bush 41? God help us all.