WHAT W. SHOULD SAY

New York Post ^ | 10/07/02 | MICHAEL LEDEEN

[kattracks]

October 7, 2002 -- IT'S good news that the president has decided to talk to the nation about Iraq. We need refocusing, because there's been a lot of confusion, what with various administration officials stressing one aspect or another of the problem, and everyone from Kofi Annan to Jacques Chirac putting in his two cents' worth, and loopy congressmen racing off to audition for Jesse Jackson's old job as ambassador at small.

[maica]

bump to check this list after the speech. Let's see how close Ledeen is to the mark.

[The Great Satan]

Bush won't make the speech too convincing. This will be calibrated to keep the ball rolling without getting everybody up in arms. It will be more of the usual pabulum (Saddam used gas on his own people, Saddam could have nuclear weapons in six months, yada, yada, yada). Bush has his own schedule for removing Saddam, cognizant of the tools at Saddam's disposal to retaliate in the final showdown, our current unpreparedness to meet that threat, and a realistic time frame to something about it. Figure this will be timed to climax about six months before the next presidential election.

[Pokey78]

Pinging the Ledeen list.

[Poohbah]

Naw, he just say "I have signed legislation outlawing Saddam Hussein, the bombing begins in five minutes."

[kjam22]

W should say "before I get into this little Iraq deal.... let me first say that I think it is a sad day when a court decides that the laws in New Jersey do not need to be followed. That the party who is behind can change candidates after the deadline and appoint someone who their own people didn't elect in the primary. I think it shows how far our system has fallen from doing what is right and fair."

[smith288]

As well as "We decided to press full charges and indict Bill Clinton, his wife Hillary and James Carville for us having to look at them when they get their ugly mugs on the tv."

[Wordsmith]

Should be interesting. I support your theory regarding the nature and intent of the anthrax attack, and what is going on out of public view because of it. My gut feeling is that you're incorrect about the timeframe. So, bump for later!

[Mr. Mulliner]

Bravo! Well said. I consider this paragraph to be a particularly essential part of the President's message.

The president should list the various terrorist groups that have received assistance from Iraq, from Hezbollah to al Qaeda - and he should rehearse the saga of Abu Nidal, including the little-known fact that Nidal created a terrorist sleeper network inside the United States.

It seems to me that if any part of the message has been lost or garbled, it is the clear link between Saddam Hussein and why we are, in fact, already at war against terrorism. The President's critics have been allowed to talk about plans to invade Iraq as if it is irrelevant to what we set out to do a year ago. They cynically accuse President Bush of only creating an excuse to do something that the senior Bush mistakenly left undone.

But if the American people are given the chance to see how central a fight against Saddam Hussein is a fight against terrorism worldwide, there will be unwavering support for the upcoming invasion.

[MeekOneGOP]

Kick arse President Bush !!

[Mo1]

TAKE BACK THE SENATE!

Click The Logo To Donate

SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC

Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794

or you can use

PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com Become A Monthly Donor
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD

[kitkat]

Thanks for the Pokey ping. I mean...thanks for the ping, Pokey.

[MLedeen]

Thanks. And he did it (although he mispronounced the bastard's name)...