Skip to comments.
Bush's war gain is Democrats' pain (LAUGH ALERT)
Chicago Sun-Times ^
| May 4, 2003
| WILLIAM O'ROURKE
Posted on 05/04/2003 4:19:05 PM PDT by Chi-townChief
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-28 next last
"National traumas such as 9/11, like private ones, often erase history, cause amnesia, leave a clean slate. Bush was given a fresh start, a new contract with the American people."
It amazes me how these lefties keep trying to peddle this crap one minute and then trying to act like September 11th never happened the next:
" ... inventing a terrorist warning alert system that has never gone to green--the state of no alert--making sure we never forget that the president is fighting the war on terror."
To: Chi-townChief
Nd.edu=New democrat education.
2
posted on
05/04/2003 4:23:05 PM PDT
by
dts32041
(The power to tax, once conceded, has no limits; it continues until it destroys.- RAH)
To: Chi-townChief
Balderdash
3
posted on
05/04/2003 4:29:01 PM PDT
by
MEG33
To: Chi-townChief
I must have missed the news that says he will privatize Social Security. Allowing an individual to choose his own investment with a very small percentage of his own money that is being sucked in by the system does not seem like privatizing to me.
4
posted on
05/04/2003 4:29:07 PM PDT
by
doug from upland
(my dogs ran from the room when they heard Hillary shrieking on the radio)
To: dts32041
It matters not what they say? ED says Bushis a hottie. He has the soccer mom's vote.
To: Chi-townChief
"On Sept. 10, 2001, half of his administration was implicated in the corporate scandals that were finally getting their moment in the sun."
Who is he taking about besides White? Cheney was never a serious problem in my eyes. And, I thought that Enron and the rest of those scandals broke after 9/11. What say the rest of you?
6
posted on
05/04/2003 4:29:36 PM PDT
by
mass55th
To: Chi-townChief
To: Chi-townChief
Every time they refuse to give him an inch of credit, he earns a mile.
privatizing Social Security, privatizing Medicare,
And were they not in the hands of the "People" before they were SOCIALIZED!!!
8
posted on
05/04/2003 4:35:13 PM PDT
by
tet68
(Jeremiah 51:24 ..."..Before your eyes I will repay Babylon for all the wrong they have done in Zion")
To: Chi-townChief
These morons don't want to accept that President Bush was very popular long before 9/11.
To: Chi-townChief
On Sept. 10, 2001, half of his administration was implicated
Lie.
I think about the only one who was even remotely implicated was the army guy who just resigned, and that was only because he didn't want to divest. Everyone else was clean.
Heck, the complaint seemed to be that Bush saw the Enron folks, and then did nothing to cover their graft.
10
posted on
05/04/2003 5:04:31 PM PDT
by
William McKinley
(You're so vain, you probably think this tagline's about you)
To: Chi-townChief
11
posted on
05/04/2003 5:07:51 PM PDT
by
ALOHA RONNIE
(Vet-Battle of IA DRANG-1965 www.LZXRAY.com)
To: Chi-townChief
E-mail I sent to Mr. O'Rourke:
Dear Mr. O'Rourke,
You wrote: "On Sept. 10, 2001, half of his administration was implicated in the corporate scandals that were finally getting their moment in the sun. Bush's one victory--the large tax cut for the wealthy--was beginning to look not so victorious as the economy continued to sour."
You should be ashamed of yourself for the way you invented facts out of whole cloth. Bush's administration was not implicated in the corporate scandals; in fact, the Democrats put the skids on investigating Enron and other corporations because it turns out Ken Lay and his pals were much chummier with the Clintons. As one example, look at the skids greased by the Clintons for Enron to get a big contract in India.
Next, the idea that Bush's tax cuts were (1) large; and (2) for the wealthy is just a plain lie on both counts. The tax cuts were small by the standards set by Presidents Kennedy and Reagan. And the top 5% of taxpayers pay over half of the income taxes, meaning that any meaningful tax cut is going to affect the wealthy more than it does others. In fact, as shown here, the bottom 50% of wage earners pay less than 4% of income taxes.
If you have to resort to lies and half-truths in order to defend your beliefs, then perhaps you ought to re-examine those beliefs.
Best regards,
-Michael XXXXXXXXX
Dallas, Texas
To: William McKinley
Re:
Lie. Good catch. Plus, the story didn't get legs untill well after 9/11.
13
posted on
05/04/2003 5:13:49 PM PDT
by
ChadGore
(Freedom is as natural as a drawn breath.)
To: Chi-townChief
he had been relegated to friendly grade-school audiences, where he could count on respectful treatment.
I would love to have someone take the pic of GW reading to the school kids and put X-42 in its place. Then further alter pic to show college co-eds sitting on the floor being read to. That would be the class that BC would like to have for an audience.
To: Chi-townChief
Bush responded with what we have an overabundance of: military might.Yep, our defenses are just too damn strong.
15
posted on
05/04/2003 5:45:06 PM PDT
by
Rudder
To: mass55th
And, I thought that Enron and the rest of those scandals broke after 9/11. I am not sure of the timing. I do know that this fraud started and flourished during the Clinton administration and was uncovered and prosecuted by President Bush's administration.
16
posted on
05/04/2003 6:03:19 PM PDT
by
RJL
To: Chi-townChief; Liz; Howlin; Mudboy Slim
He was born great, insofar he was born to a wealthy and powerful family...Wealth and power does all that? Would ANYONE ever consider Unca Teddy - 'great'? Maybe in size...
17
posted on
05/04/2003 6:16:46 PM PDT
by
Libloather
(And it STILL isn’t safe enough to vote DemocRAT or Liberteen…)
To: MEG33
I second the motion: BALDERDASH.
To: Chi-townChief
HEY!!! WILLIAM O'ROURKE!!! Your storys are funny...
19
posted on
05/04/2003 6:33:24 PM PDT
by
rface
(Ashland, Missouri)
To: Chi-townChief
It is clear that his tax cuts exist not just to give money to the rich, but to take services away from the poor for ideological reasons. Just what constitutes rich, and what "services" would the rest of us be losing? I for one would love to defund the Internal Revenue "Service", that would more than pay for any tax cuts.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-28 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson