Democrats Turn On Bush Over Handling Of National Security

Independent (UK) ^ | 5-19-2003 | Andrew Gumbel

[blam]

Democrats turn on Bush over handling of national security

By Andrew Gumbel in Los Angeles
19 May 2003

Democratic contenders for next year's presidential election made their first spirited attack on George W Bush over the weekend on the issue widely regarded within the United States as his greatest strength – his handling of national security and the so-called "war on terrorism".

With bombs attributed to a revived al-Qa'ida wreaking havoc in Saudi Arabia and Morocco, the candidates sensed a vulnerability in the White House strategy and hammered the president for failing to find Osama bin Laden, for failing to fund domestic security measures adequately, for fostering a climate of fear at home and for allowing himself to be distracted by the invasion of Iraq. "We have let al-Qa'ida off the hook," said Bob Graham, a Florida senator and a former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, whose words carry particular weight.

"We had them on the ropes close to dismantlement, and then we moved resources out of Afghanistan and Pakistan to fight the war in Iraq. We let them regenerate," he said.

Several other candidates, including former governor Howard Dean of Vermont, former House minority leader Richard Gephardt, and North Carolina's Senator John Edwards said funding for the new Department of Homeland Security had been compromised by the President's obsession with tax cuts and cheap non-unionised labour.

Mr Gephardt said: "When you get to the bottom line, the money is not there. We are vulnerable to further attacks because this Administration has not done its job."

Senator Edwards said: "We should not cede this issue to a President and a party whose idea of homeland security is plastic wrap and duct tape."

Saturday's debate took place in Iowa, traditionally the first state to give its verdict on the Democratic presidential candidates in a party caucus, and featured seven of the nine declared contenders. In a sign, perhaps, of modestly increased confidence in an otherwise battered and demoralised Democratic Party, the seven avoided petty partisan attacks on each other, reserving their fire exclusively for the current incumbent of the White House.

Mr Dean said: "This President has ruled by making us fear each other. We've lost a lot in the past two and a half years."

Carol Moseley Braun, the former senator of Illinois, focused on Mr Bush's tax cuts: "This crowd is into fighting the needy and helping the greedy."

Mr Dean agreed with her, saying: "The President's prescription for everything is take two tax cuts and call me in the morning."

Such sentiments went down well with the union-heavy crowd in Des Moines. A long struggle still lies ahead, however, in convincing a scared and largely trusting electorate that the man in the White House, with his talk of war and crisis without end, is part of the problem and needs to be replaced.

Two prominent candidates did not attend the Iowa debate. The former vice-presidential candidate Joe Lieberman, a conservative Democrat whose campaign has suffered because he supports much of Mr Bush's foreign policy agenda, was observing the Sabbath but sent a videotaped message saying he was from the "victorious wing" of the party.

Massachusetts Senator John Kerry, widely regarded as the initial frontrunner, was in New Hampshire, meanwhile. He, like much of his party until now, has seemed reluctant to attack Mr Bush too hard on issues of national security for fear of alienating voters.

The new-found vigour of the Democrats in Iowa went only so far, however. Like all presidential candidates since the Cold War, they avoided discussing the United States' role in the world. There was no mention of Mr Bush's diplomatic isolationism or policies of pre-emptive defence or drastically increased military budgets.

[killermosquito]

Gee, I'm not aware of any attacks on US soil since 911. And Bush pitched a shutout in Afganistan and Iraq. I'm feeling pretty secure.

[Ahban]

Don't underestimate pure audaciousness when the networks won't call you on it. Remember Clintoon lameting those who resorted to "the politics of personal destruction"? When the facts are against them, they try to turn truth on its head.

It is an old trick of the Devil, accuse your enemy of what you yourself are guilty of. Are they weak on security? Then accuse him of it over and over.

[harpo11]

Democrat leaders are in no position to gripe about President Bush's efforts to secure and defend our country against terrorist scum attacks as they haven't lifted one finger to unite with the President or to offer any solutions other than complain and demean.

They certainly never complained when Clinton was faced with such attacks. As I recall, Clinton couldn't be bothered with terrorism and it was not even close to being a priority in his Administration.

I do know however, that screwing and chasing Monica in the Oval Office with cigars was.

[ladyinred]

Let me see now, before the bombings last week, they attacked him for focusing too much on security, and not enough on the economy. Now, after the bombings that no one on earth can prevent, they attack him for not focusing enough on security. Do they realize how ridiculous and out of touch with reality this makes them sound?

[WorkingClassFilth]

"Democrats Turn On Bush Over Handling Of National Security"

Uh huh. Yup. That's the ticket. Yeesh!

Democrats lecturing anyone on issues of national security is like a hairdresser of florist teaching combat pistol-craft. I think not, girls.

[okie01]

"Or maybe the Democratic presidential candidates should try reading it for the first time."

Can't. They burned their copies. Back in the sixties.

It was a phase...

[Victoria Delsoul]

They sure are desperate; it's hard to go against someone who is perceived as trustworthy with strong national leadership in the war on terror. The Democrats are the ones opposed to Homeland Security by putting caveats on the funds which couldn't be put to use in many cases because half of the funding is to finance other causes such as new facilities for the Smithsonian Institution or pay for fighting forest fires and implementing election reform. So now it is GW's fault for not totally eradicating al-Qa'ida which he has always maintained that the war in terror isn't over yet.

[Ed_in_NJ]

Stupid cheap shots.

[okie01]

The Democrats have next to nothing. No ideas, no candidate with a clue, no hope.

Right now, the odds would probably favor a 50-state sweep.

Except for one thing. The one thing the Democrats have on their side: The mainstream media.

If it were not for the media, the Democrats would be wiped out -- erased from the electoral map.

[blam]

"If it were not for the media, the Democrats would be wiped out -- erased from the electoral map."

It's happening slowly anyway. The lefties are on the run.

[Kay Soze]

Bush had nothing to do with it!

The lead demon-crat : blow job Bubba said the attacks were the result of our PAST history and treatment of the poor misunderstood mass murderers aka Muslims!

Since when have demon-crats been concerned over national security and big brother activities?

[ladyinred]

, as they dont want to offend anyone..

Well then they are failing, cause they sure as shootin' offend me! :-)

[Grampa Dave]

Andrew Gumbel does his version of the Jeffery Blair writing style in the loser the Independent (UK).

[Grampa Dave]

Meanwhile the reality of President Bush's popularity is creating nightmares for the 9 misfits who are the best the Rats have to offer for 2004.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/913884/posts

WASHINGTON — President Bush has a good shot at winning over those states he lost in the controversial 2000 presidential election.


Pollsters say the country's close political balance has shifted at the top of the ticket and Bush is showing surprising strength in many states that will be crucial for Democrats in 2004.

[Grampa Dave]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/913932/posts

Southern wind lifts Bush, buffets Democrats
Orlando Sentinel ^ | 5/18/03 | Mark Silva


Posted on 05/18/2003 10:22 PM PDT by LdSentinal


CHAPEL HILL, N.C. -- The South, it seems, is a little different from the rest of America.

In Alabama, a judge rebuked for posting the Ten Commandments in his courtroom grew so popular that he won election as chief justice of the state's Supreme Court. He erected a granite monument to the commandments in his new rotunda.

In Georgia, the Democrats running for president will compete on a primary-election ballot March 2 alongside a referendum deciding which flag the state will fly -- an old one framed with the marquee of the Confederacy, or a new, politically corrected one.

Here in the Carolinas, voters have not backed a Democrat for the presidency since Jimmy Carter of Georgia in 1976.

[Grampa Dave]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/913930/posts

Graham, Edwards Put Senate Democrats in Bind

Posted on 05/18/2003 10:18 PM PDT by LdSentinal


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Sens. John Edwards and Bob Graham may be busy running for president, but their fellow Democrats back home are in limbo as they anxiously await word on the pair's Senate re-election plans for next year.

Edwards, a freshman from North Carolina, and Graham, a three-term veteran from Florida, have left open the option of running for the Senate again next year if their presidential campaigns do not take off.

The uncertainty has left the Senate races in both states in suspended animation and complicated Democratic hopes of recapturing a Senate majority next year.

"It has put everybody who wants to get in the race in a precarious position," said Florida state Rep. Walter Campbell, who is considering a run for Graham's U.S. Senate seat but expects Graham to eventually wind up back in the Senate race.

"Everybody is on hold, but everybody needs to start making these decisions soon," Campbell said.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

In Alabama, a judge rebuked for posting the Ten Commandments in his courtroom grew so popular that he won election as chief justice of the state's Supreme Court. He erected a granite monument to the commandments in his new rotunda.

That's terrific!

[Grampa Dave]

Since 9/11, there has been a gradual erosion of what the Rats have set up in this country via rat controlled legislatures and rats pretending to be judges.

Their mentally ill outbursts against our president, our military and other conservatives is not playing very well in America's streets.

Now, one of their major weapons in the cultural war, the NY Slimes has shot itself in the foot with the Jayson Blair ordeal.

The Rat control over the media has loosen with the strength of Fox News, Drudge, conservative talk radio and conservative internet sites like Free Republic.

In spite of these changes, the arrogance of rats in politics continue to harm them with the moderate voters.

[Young Werther]

Yeah, like any of those weenies have a clue!!

Ol' JFK hasn't constituency, so his Viet Nam "experience" ain't worth a damn since he's not a leader to brgin with.

[Gritty]

Right now, the odds would probably favor a 50-state sweep. Except for one thing. The one thing the Democrats have on their side: The mainstream media.

Uh, two things!

You forgot to mention "voter fraud". It holds the balance of power in a number of states.