Bush snubbing war opponents

Fort Worth Star Telegram/Knight Ridder ^ | May. 07, 2003 | Ron Hutcheson

[ellery]

Rewarding friends and punishing enemies is the ESSENCE of diplomacy. It is fundamental to our national interests that we act in a way that will encourage other countries to side with us, rather than against us. The anti-war folks who wanted to rely on diplomacy rather than force should be applauding this.

[RJL]

"It's petty, and it puts personal animus ahead of the national interest. You lose the high ground when you make it personal," said Lee Feinstein, a former State Department official under President Clinton who is now at the Council on Foreign Relations.

Hey Lee, it's not quite as petty or sleazy or corrupt as having to pay Clinton though, is it!

[Howlin]

Good news!

[Dacus943]

"You lose the high ground when you make it personal," said Lee Feinstein, a former State Department official under President Clinton"

feinstein sounds like a mouth piece for clintoon. A mouth piece not unlike Monica Lewinsky!!!

[The Brush]

Clinton didn't get a chance to punish his enemies, they all died mysteriously before he ever got the opportunity.

[Cicero]

"It's petty, and it puts personal animus ahead of the national interest. You lose the high ground when you make it personal," said Lee Feinstein, a former State Department official under President Clinton who is now at the Council on Foreign Relations.

Count on the clintonoids to come out with something nasty, and count on the Startlegram to consult them.

The difference between Bush and clinton is that clinton was PERSONALLY vindictive, whereas Bush is standing up for our country.

Note that Bush was personally insulted by Eurotrash for two years, and did nothing in retribution. But treachery to the United States deserves a pay-back. It's Bush's duty to see that countries pay for betraying us.

[Wolfstar]

At last weekend's press conference between President Bush and Australian Prime Minister John Howard, Barney takes up a position in front of the press corps as if guarding the two leaders from the reporters...

...then Barney decides he's had enough of being ignored, so he goes over to the President...

...who picks Barney up as soon as the news conference is over.

The little scamp sure has the President wrapped around his little paw!

[Howlin]

That is so cool! Thanks.

[Defender2]

Post #20.
Amen, AmericanAge!!!! After September 11th, 2001, IT IS, "IT'S THE AMERICAN WAY OR THE HIGHWAY"!!!!:-)

[winner3000]

"It's petty, and it puts personal animus ahead of the national interest. You lose the high ground when you make it personal," said Lee Feinstein, a former State Department official under President Clinton who is now at the Council on Foreign Relations.

IT SURE WILL MAKE THEM THINK TWICE BEFORE CHOSING A TERRORIST DICTATOR OVER THE U.S. NEXT TIME, WON'T THEY?

[CT]

Under Clinton you risked an audit of your taxes or worse. Much worse. But because the "mainstream" press ignored it, it just didn't happen.

As to world "leaders" that actively tried to hurt us....they ought to go pound sand!

[Wolfstar]

Of course, sometimes the Boss means business...

Speaking of punishing enemies, I wonder if the Boss was sending Barney after a pesky reporter. [wink]

[GrandMoM]

BUMP

[onehipdad]

Personally, I'm glad he has canceled his visit. All he has done since he has taken office is snub our government and our country," one angry Canadian wrote in a letter to the Edmonton Journal. "I was glad that Chretien had the courage to stay out of the war. ... I was taught as a child to stand up to the bully next door, not to cave in to demands for lunch money."

How puerile...guess that pretty much defines the appeal, huh?

[Wolfstar]

Of course, when the news conference was shown on TV last weekend, none of this could be seen, although the President did make a crack about whether or not Barney wanted to ask a question. Thank goodness for the Web and print photographers so we can get "the rest of the story."

[Southack]

"The anti-war folks who wanted to rely on diplomacy rather than force should be applauding this."

Except that being "anti-war" was simply a facade. They never really *meant* that they were anti-war (after all, they applauded Clinton's regime change via U.S. Marines in Haiti, and they were silent about Clinton and Chiraq's war on Serbia four years ago), they simply wanted Joe Sixpack in Flyover Country to think that they had noble intentions for attacking President Bush.

[Wolfstar]

The writer of the above article probably had to scour Lexis-Nexis to come up with that letter to the editor.

[WoofDog123]

"One prominent war critic, Russian President Vladimir Putin, seems to have escaped White House retaliation. The decision to go easy on Putin reflects Bush's desire to have Russia's cooperation in the war on terrorism, the standoff with North Korea, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and efforts to stop the spread of nuclear weapons. "

An oblique reference to the fact Russia has more nukes than any other country? Bush would be crazy to let this iraq thing interfere. I wouldn't be surprised if, once it became clear france would prevent the un sc votes from being gained, it was suggested putin also go against it publicly in order to avoid creating domestic problems for himself for nothing.

[Southack]

"one angry Canadian wrote in a letter to the Edmonton Journal... "I was glad that Chretien had the courage to stay out of the war. ... I was taught as a child to stand up to the bully next door, not to cave in to demands for lunch money."

Why do I get the impression that this balderdash is coming from a Canadian who won't stand up to Kim Il Jung's demands for money in exchange for "stopping" his atomic weapons program??

[dfwgator]

Interesting that today Bush officially put the Basque separatists on the official list of terrorists, do you think he would have done that if Spain hadn't supported us?