Isn't that gross? His face is riddled like that due to years and years of alcohol abuse.
The face of the "New Democrats:"
Posted on 01/09/2007 10:27:46 AM PST by bnelson44
I've said that my vote against the war in Iraq is the best vote I've cast in my 44 years in the United States Senate. But no matter what any of us thought then, the Iraq War resolution is obviously obsolete today.
It authorized a war to destroy weapons of mass destruction. But there were no WMDs to destroy. It authorized a war with Saddam Hussein. But today, Saddam is no more. It authorized a war because Saddam was allied with al Qaeda. But there was no alliance.
The mission of our armed forces today in Iraq bears no resemblance whatever to the mission authorized by Congress. President Bush should not be permitted to escalate the war further, and send an even larger number of our troops into harm's way, without a clear and specific new authorization from Congress.
In everybody's reality except the Administration's, Iraq is now in the middle of a civil war.
Sectarian violence is on the rise. Militias continue to commit unspeakable acts of violence and torture. Ethnic cleansing is a fact of daily life. Millions of Iraqis are fleeing the violence and leaving their country.
No one can seriously deny that this civil war is radically different from the mission Congress voted for in 2002. Why should even more of our troops be sent to Iraq in the middle of this civil war?
The President may deny the plain truth. But the truth speaks loudly and tragically. Congress must no longer follow him deeper into the quagmire in Iraq.
I recognize the President's almost certain determination to persist in his failed course. It appears that he will not listen to the views of Congress or of the American people.
It is disappointing that he seems ready - even eager - to reject the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group. Instead of heeding the growing call for genuine change, he has used the time since that report to root out dissent in his own Administration and in our armed forces.
This Congress cannot escape history or its own duty. If we do not learn from the mistakes of the past, we are condemned to repeat them. We must act, and act now, before the President sends more troops to Iraq, or else it will be too late.
The legislation that we will introduce today is brief but essential. It requires the President to obtain approval from Congress before he sends even more American soldiers to Iraq. And it prohibits the President from spending taxpayer dollars on such an escalation unless Congress approves it.
Joan? Run away!
Except that it would take something like 100 more years of combat before we have 56,000 dead American soldiers.
Senator Kennedy has forgoten, apparently, that there was a bit of "mission creep" in the US Civil War as well.
he's only there for the open bar.
Fill in the Blank? Tough Question" Tougher answer!
A Billion + names on a sheet of paper! Writers cramp.
There are a couple of quasi-states that would qualify since they have names. The ICU is an excellent choice for loser, and war was declared in that case. Otherwise there are countless small gangs such as the martyrs brigade that could be added whenever they make their presence known.
Would have been funnier if he said, 'Iraq is Bush's Chappaquiddick.'
Vietnam was Teddy's brother's Vietnam.
KGB Letter Outlines Sen. Kennedy's Overtures to Soviets, Prof Says By Kevin Mooney
CNSNews.com Staff Writer
October 20, 2006
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=/Nation/archive/200610/NAT20061020b.html”>(link)
The Kennedy KGB Letter: (link)
Profiles in Duplicity: (link)
Kennedy Outed as Traitor; MSM will ignore per NYT "guiding hand." (link)
(Ted Kennedy) was a 'collaborationist' This is a must read: “Sen. Kennedy played a major role during the 1970s in Grafting the restrictions that made it so difficult for the FBI and CIA to do the job of protecting the American people. One of the most pernicious restrictions was the Foreign Intell If it will not copy……………….
FR site: (link)
Don' t believe one word the Democrats are spewing about Iraq - they want to lose that war..........
Marvelous!
We could declare war on Hamas, Syria, Adul in Cairo but the significance of each declaration might be considered meaningless. Granted declaring war on Syria might be a politically appropriate action but maybe just assasinating that darn dentist might accomplish more!
Our military repsonses to against Jihad are unlike anything seen in over 1000 years. This not Saladin!
Senator "T. for Traitor" Kennedy
They've always wanted this to be another VN....I hate them all!
Like father, like son.
Chappaquiddick was Mary Jo's Vietnam.
Isn't that gross? His face is riddled like that due to years and years of alcohol abuse.
The face of the "New Democrats:"
All respect to Grotius, but . . . the concept of the state goes beyond what is recognized as a state by other states. In addition, a government is merely one institution of a state. It might be that war may be declared only against governments, although it used to be against very small entities such as cities and tribes where the government pretty well encompassed the entire city, which was the state. There is plenty of room to mold the Declaration any way that might seem appropriate, just as the articles of incorporation of a business entity are so flexible that they could state almost anything as the business. This is especially true for an individual institution such as the United States of America that is bound only by what it chooses to be bound by.
Right: He ought to do it in the State of Union speech
and look right down TKs's throat..with a smile..JK
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.