Cheney Accused of Politicizing Terrorism

sj23 · 08-12-2006, 12:32 AM

About time the Dems said something about this. IMO the fear card

is the main reason we're stuck with Pres. Douche for another 2 years.

Preview:

Senate Democratic leaders on Friday accused Vice President Dick Cheney of playing politics with terrorism and contended that voters won't buy Republican arguments that the GOP is stronger on national security.

"They've run this play one too many times," Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said in a conference call with reporters. "The American people simply do not recognize any validity in what they're saying."

BREITBART.COM - Cheney Accused of Politicizing Terrorism

Concept · 08-12-2006, 12:41 AM

The Republican pessimism toward the capacity of the Democrats to handle state security is finally biting them in the ass... I think Cheney was way too harsh when he called Lamont's electoral victory a victory for Al Qaeda. One thing is advocating stronger security - another thing is to bring about a sort of unnecessary guilt upon the American people for not voting for the Republican party.

Thorgrim · 08-12-2006, 01:03 AM

guilty, wheres the poll so i can vote?

JaJae · 08-12-2006, 01:17 AM

There was a time when I would have said I would only trust the Republican party with the presidency to take care of Iraq since the Democrats were in such disarray. This is no longer so. And I think the majority of the nation no longer believes it.

There was a time when the Democrats were weak and stupid on defense. But their constant criticism has made them ultra conservative on defense to where they've made themselves stronger than the Republicans in a lot of ways (other than the cut and run).

It's starting to get to the point where I'm begining to think the war effort needs to change hands. And quotes like this show just how desperate the Republicans are getting. The fear mongering needs to stop. A Democrat who opposes the war winning the primary in a small state is not the end of the world for the Republicans, yet we can see here just how desperate they are.

DosEquis · 08-12-2006, 01:20 AM

They have politicized terrorism from day number one. How in the hell is this any different? WELL, this time we have been fighting their campaign that claims we are safer....that terrorists wouldn't attack us here because we are fighting them there. Its all complete horse shit. Complete horse shit. Its amazing how a group of 20 something year old people on the internet, in a (generally speaking) non-partisan way recognize this guy is completely, on amazing levels, full of bull shit. Its just amazing how full of shit this guy is. The vice president has earned every bit of his 82% disapproval rating.

DosEquis · 08-12-2006, 01:23 AM

Originally Posted by JaJae

There was a time when I would have said I would only trust the Republican party with the presidency to take care of Iraq since the Democrats were in such disarray. This is no longer so. And I think the majority of the nation no longer believes it.

There was a time when the Democrats were weak and stupid on defense. But their constant criticism has made them ultra conservative on defense to where they've made themselves stronger than the Republicans in a lot of ways (other than the cut and run).

It's starting to get to the point where I'm begining to think the war effort needs to change hands. And quotes like this show just how desperate the Republicans are getting. The fear mongering needs to stop. A Democrat who opposes the war winning the primary in a small state is not the end of the world for the Republicans, yet we can see here just how desperate they are.

other than "cut and run". Cut and run was also dubbed by the conservatives. I want a withdrawl just like other democrats but what are the details? That is what is important. "Cut and run" is what happens if we just pack up ships and roll out. I doubt any democrat, even the most liberal, would just pack up everything and roll. I tend to believe that most will follow John Murtha's idea in that we will withdrawl to a point where our boys are out of the line of fire, and will be available for support if the Iraqi democracy needs it.

Concept · 08-12-2006, 01:32 AM

Originally Posted by JaJae

There was a time when I would have said I would only trust the Republican party with the presidency to take care of Iraq since the Democrats were in such disarray. This is no longer so. And I think the majority of the nation no longer believes it.

sj23 · 08-12-2006, 01:35 AM

Originally Posted by Concept

The Republican pessimism toward the capacity of the Democrats to handle state security is finally biting them in the ass... I think Cheney was way too harsh when he called Lamont's electoral victory a victory for Al Qaeda. One thing is advocating stronger security - another thing is to bring about a sort of unnecessary guilt upon the American people for not voting for the Republican party.

I didn't hear about the Lamont-Cheney situation. That's just plain stupid and he should be shot in the face for making that comment.

Concept · 08-12-2006, 01:46 AM

Originally Posted by sj23

I didn't hear about the Lamont-Cheney situation. That's just plain stupid and he should be shot in the face for making that comment.

Hey, welcome to the forums

Here's the Chenney-Lamont thread; check it out when you get a chance.

Cheney: Lieberman Loss ‘Disturbing,’ A Victory For Al-Qaeda

motivez · 08-12-2006, 09:33 AM

Glad they're finally standing up to these horse shit allegations.. I know I'm sick of the Republicans constantly trying to label anyone who opposes any of their political things supporters of terrorists, terrorism, or who want America to fail, etc..

I don't think most people are going to keep buying it

ballz2wallz · 08-12-2006, 11:08 AM

politicians politicizing national issues...hmmm.

dems politicizing republicans politicizing terrorism. hmmm.

they all do, they all should, and they all will.

motivez · 08-14-2006, 05:55 PM

Why do you think they "should"?

ballz2wallz · 08-14-2006, 06:34 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

Why do you think they "should"?

it's only one of the most pressing international issues. terrorism should definitely be a political issue, and it needs to be addressed properly. they'd be stupid not to politicize it.

motivez · 08-14-2006, 10:27 PM

It's one thing to make it a political issue that should be discussed and debated on how best to move forward with the US goals relating to it.

It's entirely another to label someone a terrorist for disagreeing with you.. or brand them as this or that in order to score political points.

I seem to remember some griping over a recent Democratic campaign video that did the same thing

IminWonderland · 08-15-2006, 01:33 AM

Originally Posted by motivez

It's one thing to make it a political issue that should be discussed and debated on how best to move forward with the US goals relating to it.

It's entirely another to label someone a terrorist for disagreeing with you.. or brand them as this or that in order to score political points.

I seem to remember some griping over a recent Democratic campaign video that did the same thing

This is true.

Concept · 08-15-2006, 05:01 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

It's one thing to make it a political issue that should be discussed and debated on how best to move forward with the US goals relating to it.

It's entirely another to label someone a terrorist for disagreeing with you.. or brand them as this or that in order to score political points.

I seem to remember some griping over a recent Democratic campaign video that did the same thing

Politicians are power-mongers.