Ken Mehlman: Democrats Weak on Terror Fight

newsmax ^ | Friday, Aug. 4, 2006 2:43 p.m. EDT | newsmax staff

[do the dhue]

The head of the Republican Party accused Democrats of being willing to surrender the tools necessary to combat terrorism as the GOP tries to capitalize on its national security advantage in a tough election year.

Faced with President Bush's low approval ratings and diminishing support for the Iraq war, the Republican strategy is to make the war on terrorism a central campaign issue and argue that Democrats hold a pre-Sept. 11 view of the world.

Ken Mehlman, the chairman of the Republican National Committee, stressed that argument in a speech Friday at the organization's two-day summer meeting, similar to points made by White House adviser Karl Rove in January.

"America faces a critical question," Mehlman said in his prepared text. "Will we elect leaders who recognize we're at war and want to use every tool to win it, or politicians who would surrender important tools we need to win?"

If Democrats win control of Congress, Mehlman claimed that their leaders will stop the National Security Agency from eavesdropping on foreign terrorists and pursue impeachment of President Bush.

[do the dhue]

The entire Demoratoc party (exclude Leiberman) is a National Security threat.

Pulling out of Iraq early will create terrorist camps that we will have to dig out later.

Removing tools that we use to protect ourselves is communist and treasonous. It would be like taking my gun away in the middle of a gun fight. (Which the demorats want to take my gun away anyway).

They have said words that have inspired our enemy and demoralized our troops. Maybe, I am old fashioned, but if I had it my way, I would have taken the traitors to GITMO myself.

If you don't like being called a traitor, don't give me a reason to do it.

[Puppage]

Ken Mehlman: Democrats Weak on Terror Fight

In other news...the sun sets in the west.

[goldstategop]

The Democrats avoid the issue because they ARE weak on national security. The GOP has nothing to lose and everything to gain by pointing out the Party Of 9/10 offers no answers and no strategy to keep is in the face of today's and tomorrow's current and emerging global threats.

(Go Israel, Go! Slap 'Em Down Hezbullies.)

[do the dhue]

Brilliantly stated. Now, lets go git a 6pack!

[MAD-AS-HELL]

Problem is that this battle cry won't help this time, imho. WE are now a country that gets upset because the microwave takes too long to heat up our coffee. I don't think people have the patience any longer to stay in Iraq because they see this administration as giving more excuses than results in trying to tame down the violence. I believe this is the sentiment that most likely will propel the DEMONRATS into office. I hope I am wrong but the winds as of right now are gusting into the sails of the dems.

[do the dhue]

In other news...the sun sets in the west.

right!! You could also say:

[sachem longrifle]

Just like the wind was going in their direction in 2002? It seems dems always poll well but lose elections

[do the dhue]

I think when in Rome do as Romans. A liberal in the Middle East would get whacked early. We should not be worried about small foot prints. We should do like the Romans and put our great big boot where the sun don't shine. If the Republicans would stop worry about what the Demorats or French might say, their approval rating would remain high. The only time it drops is when the Republicans do something that makes their base un happy. If they would stop doing that their numbers would be good. If the Administration came out and explained themselves more often. Instead, they let the LSM do it for them. They have a lot of things they could fix. The demorats at least have to spend big money to take out Leiberman in CT. If it wasn't for the money they are throwing at Leiberman, they wouldn't stand a chance to beat him. They have to do that so they can say the wind is in their sails.

[PGalt]

The anti-freedom, anti-life Democrat Crime Syndicate enablers show there support for anti-freedom, anti-life terrorists every day.

Watch them. Listen to them.

[do the dhue]

aint that the truth. Have you ever noticed that a Demoratic front runner before the elections begin, never gets the nomination? That is because the LSM picks a candidate they like. Say he is leading and then when the voters vote, they find the front runner running from behind. It is because the LSM is out of touch with America.

[Puppage]

I can't disagree.I think the reason they see the administration in that light is due to the MSM. People not only do not have patience, they wanrt to be told what to think and what to feel. Pure laziness IMHO. Thank God these people weren't around 60 years ago.

[Puppage]

LOL. The short bus....were used to call those that rode them....window lickers 'cause they always had their faces plastered against the windows.

Yes, I should be ashamed.

[do the dhue]

To tell you the truth, I am tired of listening to stupid people. If I had it my way, I would give the liberals a sign that says I am stupid and they would have to put it around their neck. Then I wouldn't waste any of my time listening to these people. I would simply see the sign and walk away.

[do the dhue]

Yes, but I am LOL

[MAD-AS-HELL]

It might be the same case but we have a few more years for things to simmer unilke 2002. Do you think Lieberman would have had a primary fight in 2002 had he been up for re-election? You should know that things change quickly in the political world and I hope I am wrong, but the Republicans haven't done that great of a job making their case either. Add to the mix that we no longer have a population that understands sacrifice and you have a great recipie for a democratic controlled congress.

[Eagles Talon IV]

You are mistaking this war with Viet Nam and expect the reaction of voters to be the same which is exactly the result for which the Dems and the media are aiming. It will fail this time because their is no draft, therefore no mass exodus to Canada that fed the lib media last time.Despite the hand wringing of the media the casualties have been remarkably low and not nearly the issue they were in VN.

Ask yourself this. Why have there been NO mass demonstrations as their were in the late 60's into the 70's? You are hearing the word of a failing liberal media and assuming it speaks for all or the majority of Americans. I could not disagree more. In the VN era the public received all it's news from the networks and major print media and what we saw and heard was controlled by them. This time the effectiveness of the liberal media has been decimated by the explosive growth of the greatest source of information in history, the Internet.

In the VN era their was NO threat to our mainland. People, many of them, never understood what is was we were over there fighting for. This time it is quite different. Each time a market place is blown up in Iraq or Egypt, each time a cell is broken up in Canada, England, Germany, France or here in America, the direct threat to us is again brought home to all of us. Nothing is more important to a person then the safety of his or her family and loved ones. Not health care, not education, not the environment, nothing. Despite what the liberal media is saying through their biased polling, when the time comes to pull the lever in the voting booth the clear choice to a majority will be to choose the one marked "Live" or the one marked "Die". I needn't tell you which Party is associated with each choice.

[TNCMAXQ]

How dare anyone question the Democrats' patriotism!

(Even if the charge is completely legitimate)

[BikerGold]

Presuming y'all vote?

Bring your credit card bills for gas,
your summer electric bills,
your toll tag which now costs you a $1000 more a year to go to work on a road you have already paid for with your taxes,

Then vote your conscious :>

[Christian4Bush]

Hi Eagle. Good rant at 16.

May I also add, despite the opposition to the war, which contained many people who were drafted into service (unlike now), and had exponentially more deaths and casualties than now, Richard Nixon OVERWHELMINGLY won re-election against McGovern in 72. And that's in the era of Woodstock, the Beatles, dope smoking, free to be you and me hug a tree liberalism, a year BEFORE Roe v Wade.

Another thing, many of the people who make this country great, are never "polled". (A slight digression: when one of these lefties starts trotting out their manipulated polls, like Cryptkeeper Colmes did against Irey last night, I would love to hear some gonad-equipped politician say "I don't give two skunks about your manipulated poll. I govern and make my decisions based on Election Day results.")

I digress. So many people who work as hard as they can to make ends meet, take kids to school, soccer practice, sometimes one parent must fulfill the role of two - you think they're going to care about these idiotic polls, the journalistic equivalent of toilet paper and useful for the same reason?

One other thing that would be good to point out: in the prelude to the Iraq War, in 2002, it would be interesting to see which senators were up for re-election (which now oppose the war). I know that John Kerry was one of them. Linguini Spine was one of the most forceful and long winded) advocates of going into Iraq...but, interestingly, not of the previous incursion into Iraq in 1991, which had a bigger coalition than we had in 2003.

One last thought, really. I think that 9/11 affected everyone. On the Democrat side, I think it made some of them cowards. It happened right between a disputed presidential election and the next midterm/group of senatorial races. It happened in high profile places (Shanksville wasn't, but that plane's likely target, the Capitol/WH, was). People who have a natural inclination against America were forced to deal with people that wanted to make sure what happened that Tuesday morning never happened again. (So far, so good on that, btw)

So the lefties sided with the President on this, likely oonfident that they had a no-lose hand. If Iraq was as bad as stated, and the military that many of them loathed was able to complete the job successfully, then they are heroes in their states for standing to protect freedom of peoples around the world, and as such would be unbeatable here.

If Iraq turned into a disaster, much as they THINK it is, that there were no WMD's, much as they THINK there weren't, that Sadaam was no threat, much as they say now versus their statements when bubba was president, then they would say...pretty much what they've been saying since "shock and awe".

Of course, if the President had done nothing, and decided on the "diplomacy" route, and something had happened, that was inexorably linked to Sadaam Hussein (someone that Dan Rather calls Mr. President more than the current US president), the Democrats would come out of their rocks, howling that the President was irresponsible in not dealing with a threat that Democrat president Bill Clinton clearly outlined, and after all, it was Bill Clinton who stated that regime change was the goal of the United States government in 1998. And they would have been just to do so.

For all of his moderate leanings, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger said it perfectly at the 2004 Republican Convention (night 2): "The President did not go into Iraq because the polls told him it was popular - in fact, it was just the opposite! But leadership isn't about polls; it's about making a decision to do what is right, and then standing behind those decisions!"

Ok, rant over. My hands are tired!

[Christian4Bush]

Presuming y'all vote?
Bring your credit card bills for gas,
your summer electric bills,
your toll tag which now costs you a $1000 more a year to go to work on a road you have already paid for with your taxes,

Then vote your conscious :>

---

Very well, Biker.

I will bring my record for purchasing gas, which is still lower than in many areas of the world.

I will bring my summer electric bill, stapled to a copy of my winter, spring and fall electric bill, and will compute the average of it.

I won't have much success with a toll road tag, since I live in Los Angeles and we don't have any toll fees where I commute, and I will do it on a road that is not lined with IEDs, in an area where most people realize there are consequences to illegal behavior.

I will stop at a coffee shop in which I have a more than reasonable chance to not get blown up.

I will go to my polling place that does not have people shooting at me to deny my privilege to vote, and whose poll workers will not demand - on fear of death - that I vote for a certain candidate.

And I WILL vote my CONSCIENCE. Chances are high that our votes would differ.