Posted on 03/17/2003 6:25:54 PM PST by PhiKapMom
RNC Research
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BLAME AMERICA FIRST? ON THE EVE OF WAR, DASCHLE TRIES TO GAIN PARTISAN ADVANTAGE
With American Troops Poised To Fight, Daschle Blames Potential War Casualties On President Bush
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
SENATOR TOM DASCHLE: “I’m Saddened, Saddened That This President Failed So Miserably At Diplomacy That We’re Now Forced To War. Saddened That We Have To Give Up One Life Because This President Couldn’t Create The Kind Of Diplomatic Effort That Was So Critical For Our Country.” (Senator Tom Daschle, Remarks At International Association Of Firefighters Conference, 3/17/03)
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
BEFORE LAST NOVEMBER’S ELECTION, DASCHLE SUPPORTED USE OF FORCE IN IRAQ AND RECOILED AT POLITICIZING DEBATE
Senator Daschle Voted For The Resolution “To Authorize The Use Of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq” Last October. (H. J. Res. 114, Roll Call #237: Passed 77-23: R 48-1; D 29-21; I 0-1, 10/11/02, With Daschle Voting Yea.)
Last Fall, Daschle Decried “Accusations” Over “National Security.” “We ought not politicize this war. We ought not politicize the rhetoric about war and life and death. … We have to rise to a higher level. … [I]t is not too late to forget the pollsters . . . the campaign fundraisers . . . [the] accusations about how interested in national security,” different parties are. (Senator Tom Daschle, Congressional Record, 9/25/02)
Daschle Said “Never Once” Did He Politicize The War In Iraq In 1991-92, And Hoped We Would Have the “Same Level Of Debate This Time.” “I can recall in 1991 and 1992 … when President Bush made the decision he did. I can recall several of my staff coming to me, suggesting that we say this or that. But never once did I have someone on my staff … refer to the politics of the war with Iraq. … We need that same level of debate this time …” (Senator Tom Daschle, Congressional Record, 9/25/02)
IN 1998, DASCHLE SUPPORTED USE OF FORCE IN IRAQ AND CALLED FOR BIPARTISANSHIP
Daschle Recognized That “Saddam Hussein Leaves Us Little Choice” But “The Use Of Force.” “[C]learly the intransigence on the part of the Iraqi government and Saddam Hussein leaves us little choice at this point … So I would think that, if nothing changes, the use of force at some point would be inevitable.” (William Neikirk, “Congress Talks Tough On Iraq,” Chicago Tribune, 2/5/98)
Daschle Wanted A “United” And “Bipartisan” Message That “Iraq Must Comply.” “Iraq must comply. There is no choice. We stand united in our determination to do whatever is necessary … The United States has the resolve to ensure that compliance and we stand united today in an effort to articulate that very clear message as loudly, as unequivocally, and in as much of a bipartisan way as we can.” (Senator Tom Daschle, Congressional Record, 2/12/98)
Daschle Called For “Immediate Iraqi Compliance” Or “Threat By Force” Would Be “Required.” “[A]bsent immediate Iraqi compliance … the security threat doesn’t simply persist – it worsens. Saddam Hussein must understand that the United States has the resolve to reverse that threat by force, if force is required.” (Senator Tom Daschle, Congressional Record, 2/12/98)
SO WHY, ON THE EVE OF WAR, HAS DASCHLE CHANGED HIS TUNE?
A Publication of the RNC Research Department
Think of how history will treat this period, in which Bush I turned back the invasion of Kuwait and then nothing happened for eight long years of the clinton administration, only to be followed by Bush II finishing the job. clintigula will look grossly ineffectual.
The left is very bitter that W. is going to have this victory.
I'm sure most of them aren't, but he does have 100% support from the dead Indian bloc, and that's all he needs.
Are you sure it wasn't Tarik Azziz and the pictures just got mixed up!!??
Do you know how these comments were received by the firefighters?
Think of how history will treat this period, in which Bush I turned back the invasion of Kuwait and then nothing happened for eight long years of the clinton administration, only to be followed by Bush II finishing the job. clintigula will look grossly ineffectual. The left is very bitter that W. is going to have this victory.
He doesn't care how many of his own previous positions he has to betray or how two-faced he has to be...just as long as he gets to oppose Bush on every single thing he does.
I wanted to throw something at the TV when I heard the BS he was spouting today.
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.