Hussein May Be Weapon for Dems

NY Newsday ^ | December 19, 2003 | Ross K. Baker (PolySci Professor at Rutgers)

[presidio9]

George W. Bush has to restrain himself from running victory laps to celebrate the Saddam Hussein capture. Republican leaders are gleeful about facing a Democratic ticket likely led by Howard Dean. So, it may seem odd, even perverse, to suggest that rooting the Iraqi dictator out of his hole might actually be an ace-in-the-hole for Democrats.

For starters, seizing Hussein shifts the focus of the hunt for America's most dangerous enemies from Iraq to the rugged Afghanistan-Pakistan border where Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar, the deposed leader of the Taliban, are said to lurk. As elusive as Hussein was in Iraq, the terrain around bin Laden's lair is far more forbidding and the population, if anything, more hostile to Americans and the chances of success less likely.

While Bush steadfastly maintains that somehow we have dealt the worldwide terrorist network a punishing blow by apprehending Hussein, most experts deny that the Iraqi ever fomented much terrorist activity against this country. The U.S. government itself concedes that an alleged meeting between an Iraqi intelligence agent and an al-Qaida operative in Prague before September 2001 never took place.

The president's boast that snaring Hussein was a major gain could easily blow up in his face if there is another outrage directed against this country. If such an attack were to take place before the 2004 election, it could spell real trouble for Bush and make the capture of Hussein appear less consequential.

[Lazamataz]

An improving economy can only hurt Bush, too.

And the rising poll numbers for Bush? Hurts him.

Everything hurts Bush. It's a Democrat law.

[Shermy]

The U.S. government itself concedes that an alleged meeting between an Iraqi intelligence agent and an al-Qaida operative in Prague before September 2001 never took place

Nope. Untrue. One faction has been very busy trying to dismiss it. IMO opinion, where there's smoke...

[presidio9]

They are on the wrong side of history, and will soon become history.

Sounds like something that would come out of Clubber Lang's mouth.

"I reject this challenge, because there IS no challenge!"

[SF Republican]

I believe some of this article is true: it may seem odd, even perverse, to suggest that rooting the Iraqi dictator out of his hole might actually be an ace-in-the-hole for Democrats.

[sanchmo]

And now, a message for the DNC:

"Having a filthy, lice-infested, pants-pooped Saddam captured strengthens the Democratic advantage by showing the weakness of the Bush adminsitration's foreign policy. This will only make it easier for us to defeat him. Little Bush, this man is a war criminal, and we will see that he is brought to trial. He is not worth an old shoe. My feelings, as usual, is that we will win all eight branches of government by a landslide! The republicans are nowhere near the White House... they are lost... they cannot read a compass... they are retarded!! Our initial assessment is that they will all die! I triple guarantee you, that was not Saddam Hussein at all, it was all a camera trick performed by the Joooz in Hollywood!! "

[Nick Danger]

On behalf of the Club, I'd like to apologize for allowing the Professor there to take up your time. Even on amateur night, we try to do better than that.

So... how 'bout those Democrats? Didja see where Madeleine Albright says that Bush already has Osama in custody? Yeah, she oughta know, she and her boss turned down two chances to take delivery of the guy. FedEx guy says "sign here," and Clinton goes "no." He probably thought it was another subpoena from Larry Klayman.

[At _War_With_Liberals]

"How can they be so treasonous and how can we have a public so willing to blindly follow?"

Dims are international socialists, and the idea of strong US sov in anathema to their goals.

[TheCrusader]

Maybe President Bush needs to publicly address these liberals who are against the Iraq war and who sympathize with Saddam. Bush should ask them bluntly if they prefer we pull our troops out of Iraq and release Saddam back into Tikrit and the Baathist Party. In the name of liberal compassion, of course.

[At _War_With_Liberals]

Clinton had a 'hands off' agreement with Bin Laden, in exchange for no attacks on US soil.

[Wild Irish Rogue]

" One needs to seriously worry about what our senate and congressional intelligence committies might be doing with matters of national security. After all in academia circles and at the DNC, Bush is a greater threat than terrorism hitting our shores. Someone rings a bell at the DNC everytime a body bag for our troops is used like it's a sales quota.
I just do not understand the ground on which the democrats stand? How can they be so treasonous and how can we have a public so willing to blindly follow?"

Bravo!! The Democrats and the media were obviously counting the dead and waiting and waiting, fingers crossed, for the day that they could announce that the number of soldiers killed in Iraq ( many non combat) had finally, Hallelujah!!-exceeded the number of soldiers who died during the active combat phase But, slavering over body counts wasn't good enough-then they had to demand that they be able to photgraph flag draped coffins at Dover.I truly believe the Democrats next demand will be to actually open the coffins on the tarmac at Dover and take pictures. Unpatriotic traitorous ghouls just begins to detail my feelings about the Democrats.

[Steve_Seattle]

"The president's boast that snaring Hussein was a major gain could easily blow up in his face if there is another outrage directed against this country. If such an attack were to take place before the 2004 election, it could spell real trouble for Bush and make the capture of Hussein appear less consequential."

I don't think I'm being unfair in saying I think this prof HOPES there will be another major attack.

[John Lenin]

It is also possible that his captivity, if it continues in Iraq, will serve as a beacon to and focal point for violent anti-American resistance.

Better Iraq than Atlanta.

[eureka!]

LOL. Almost sounds like an upbeat Terry McAuliffe touting the Rat gains under Clinton....

[Steve_Seattle]

"George W. Bush has to restrain himself from running victory laps to celebrate the Saddam Hussein capture."

Of course, this totally misrepresents the White House reaction to Saddam's capture. Bush made it clear that - although important - Saddam's capture does not mean the end of the war or the end of American casualties.

[You Dirty Rats]

Not just this idiot professor. Too many people in this country obviously wish for bad things to happen to our troops and our country so that Dubya will look bad and the 'Rats can resume power.

All of these people are dead wrong. Their attitudes are seen for what they are by a majority of the voters and ensure that their decline will continue into the future.

[happydogdesign]

[presidio9]

[FReepaholic]

>>...Saddam to speak at next Democratic Convention...<<

Speak hell, he's gonna be Deans' running-mate.

VOTE DEAN/HUSSEIN....has a nice ring to it doncha think?

[rabidralph]

Remember, JRob said to not mention it too much, as the FRN has to move him to another undisclosed location each time it's brought up in the media.

[backhoe]

The president's boast that snaring Hussein was a major gain could easily blow up in his face if there is another outrage directed against this country. If such an attack were to take place before the 2004 election...

First things first- I don't recall the President "boasting..."

But beyond that, further attacks will not only draw the average citizen closer to our Commander-in-Chief, but draw the undying wrath of the nation that hammered the "Thousand-Year Reich" into a smoking scrapheap.