Oliver North - Who's the Boss?

Washington, D.C. – Last weekend at Fed Ex Field, just outside the nation’s capital, the self-styled all-American rock and roller Bruce Springsteen played one of his marathon sessions to an enthusiastic crowd. They were approving, that is until “The Boss” interrupted his performance to complain about domestic politics and the war on terror.

Mr. Springsteen informed the crowd that people of all political stripes attend his concerts and everybody is welcome – “with the exception of Dick Cheney.” Springsteen has banned the Vice President of the United States from his concerts – not that Cheney would go anyway – because he is part of an administration that Springsteen accuses of “playing with the truth during wartime.” Springsteen is so upset that George W. Bush is actually attacking the terrorists that he announced to the crowd, “it’s time to impeach the President and replace him with the Big Man,” referring to his long-time saxophonist Clarence Clemons.

No thanks, Bruce, the American people have already suffered through one saxophone-playing President.

Springsteen’s tirade is part of the echo chamber that emanates from the presidential campaign trail in which Democrat candidates are using hateful and craven rhetoric to attack the President and his efforts to defend Americans from terrorism. Dick Gephardt calls the President a “miserable failure,” and Al Sharpton calls him a “gang leader.” They carp about “quagmire,” whine about “winning the peace” and insist that America’s fate in the war on terrorism should be turned over “to the UN and the international community.”

Three days after Springsteen’s tirade, Democrats on Capitol Hill were singing the same song. Representative John Murtha (PA), a strong supporter of the war in Iraq, with Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (CA) at his side, now claims that he was duped into voting for the war and demands that “somebody has to be held responsible” for what he now perceives as a good idea gone bad.

Who should be held responsible – Defense Secretary Don Rumsfeld who has won two wars in two years or Attorney General John Ashcroft who, unlike Janet Reno, is actually taking steps to capture and incarcerate terrorists? The United States is engaged in a war on terrorism – a war that started long before September 11, 2001 – and while it may not be pretty (no war is), President Bush and his team are actually fighting it – unlike his predecessor.

And so the criticisms of presidential wannabes and Hollywood elites beg the question: Do you really want to return to the days of Bill Clinton when the United States refused to participate in a war that was being foisted upon us?

Clinton’s initiation to the evils of terrorism came early in his tenure. About a month after his inauguration – on February 26, 1993 – terrorists rented a van, packed it with more than 2,000 pounds of explosives, and parked it in the garage of the World Trade Center killing six people and injuring over 1,000. Their goal was to bring down the building and murder tens of thousands of Americans, and Bill Clinton’s response was to “discourage the American people from overreacting.”

We know that Clinton did not overreact. He went back to the bungling and fumbling of his administration – trying repeatedly to nominate an Attorney General sans a “nanny problem.” We wound up with “Fireball” Janet Reno. Reno immediately went to work to teach the terrorists a lesson – a lesson in death and destruction that is – and she used the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas as her tutorial. In the immediate aftermath of a major terrorist attack on American soil, Bill Clinton’s Attorney General directed the attention of the FBI, Justice Department and media on a barn in Waco where 80 people, including 25 children would be killed in a conflagration.

Bill Clinton’s response to the bombing of the Murrah Federal Office Building in Oklahoma City was to blame it on conservative radio talk show hosts. The constant distractions of the Whitewater controversy, among others, in 1995 and 1996 prevented Mr. Clinton from doing much about the terrorist attacks which killed 26 people and injured nearly 600 on November 13, 1995 in Riyadh and June 25, 1996 at the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia.

On August 7, 1998, terrorists attacked U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, killing more than 300 and injuring over 5,000. Then, three days after Bill Clinton went on national television to finally admit that he did have sexual relations with “that woman,” he further depleted our precious supply of cruise missiles by attacking a tent camp in Afghanistan and an aspirin factory in Khartoum.

Then came the bombing of the USS Cole in Aden, Yemen on October 12, 2000 which killed 17 sailors and wounded 39 others. The Clinton administration treated the attack more like a bank robbery in Peoria than an act of war against our nation. That would explain why for days after the attack, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright insisted we were “unable to state with certainty that this was a terrorist attack.”

Bruce Springsteen and his liberal cronies may not like it, but in George W. Bush, America has a commander in chief who will ensure the safety of the nation and her citizens. After all, Bruce, when it comes to the war on terrorism, Bill Clinton’s theme was “Born to Run,” but George W. Bush’s is “No Surrender.”

Great article by a great patriot!

This thread might be a good place to post the following. I didn't put it together but I'm trying to get it passed around ......

Subject: Weapons of Mass Destruction.....

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...." Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

SO NOW THE DEMOCRATS SAY PRESIDENT BUSH LIED, THAT THERE NEVER WERE ANY WMD'S AND HE TOOK US TO WAR FOR HIS OIL BUDDIES???

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.