Impeach Bush/Re-instate Saddam

[Maximus Newbeius III]

Isn't Impeach Bush and Re-instate Saddam the democrat party's official campaign slogan for the '06 mid-term elections?

if not:

When will the democrat party stand up and fight for what they really believe in?

One has to wonder about a party that can so easily authorize a war based on lies, and yet refuses to do anything to right their terrible wrong inflicted upon the innocent former president of Iraq and his people

The first order of business for gullable democrat senators should be to immediatly demand that Saddam be re-instated as president of Iraq. Since it is democrats who claim that it was all based on a lie and that Iraq is worse off with Saddam gone.

So after re-instating Saddam as president of Iraq, which according to dems will stabilize the middle east and bring a new found love and respect for America, democrats can then begin impeachment proceedings against Bush for lying about the Iraq war and spying on terrorist who are communicating inside America

C'mon dems, fight for your what you believe in...we know you wont do it.

[Bwaho]

I heard a democrat say: "we should pull out of iraq right away and keep a small militia in kuwait"

Yeah great, you're just going to let iraq fall into complete chaos? how thoughtful of you...

[General4Hire]

I heard a democrat say: "we should pull out of iraq right away and keep a small militia in kuwait"

Yeah great, you're just going to let iraq fall into complete chaos? how thoughtful of you...

yes...keep in mind, this is the so called "liberatarians" saying this too

they're nothing but brainwashed hypocritical ants in society.

[Elu Barcino]

C'mon dems, fight for your what you believe in...we know you wont do it.

Must all your posts be about slagging off the Democrats? Seriously, every topic I have ever seen started by you is just an excuse to repeatedly insult them. If you hate them that much, you would be better off ignoring them.

[Maximus Newbeius III]

Must all your posts be about slagging off the Democrats? Seriously, every topic I have ever seen started by you is just an excuse to repeatedly insult them. If you hate them that much, you would be better off ignoring them.

Funny, I didnt see any outrage from you on the "Is Bush a Homosexual Satanist?" thread.

[Elu Barcino]

That's because Kanaric didn't feel the need to start several threads, over the space of a few months, stating the same thing.

[Sétanta]

How about...No

[Farnan]

Closed, duplicate thread.

There is already an active thread on Iraq, right here http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=46153

[Søren]

Re-opened, as per request.

Please keep this to a thread concerning the truth in the statement of "the Democrat's hypocrisy regarding the war in Iraq"; not a general Iraq discussion, which can be debated elsewhere.

Thanks

[David Deas]

Sounds like a Republican strawman.

Is there anybody besides Saddam that thinks we should put Saddam back in Iraq? Somebody name the Democrat that proposed that, please?

[danzig]

Sounds like a Republican strawman.

Is there anybody besides Saddam that thinks we should put Saddam back in Iraq? Somebody name the Democrat that proposed that, please?

Ramsey Clark.

Former Att General under LBJ and ironically one of advisors of Saddam defense team, but then Clark supports every dictator. Love the outrage of people who are mad that the thread is attacking democrats considering all the ones attacking Bush. Fact is Democrats have no plan, they have no alternative to what Bush is doing and we can argue all mistakes, misquoes, blunders and foul ups by the Bush admin all we want but until the Democrats put forth something real there is no alternative.

[Legio XX Valeria Victrix]

Fact is Democrats have no plan, they have no alternative to what Bush is doing and we can argue all mistakes, misquoes, blunders and foul ups by the Bush admin all we want but until the Democrats put forth something real there is no alternative.

And if he had put it the way you put it, I would have reluctantly had to agree, but he put it in the most inflammatory and challenging way he could, as is his custom.

My reply was more directed at how he said what he said, not the actual content of his message. Although the bit about wanting Saddam back in power is total :wub: as anyone with two brain cells can figure out.

[danzig]

And if he had put it the way you put it, I would have reluctantly had to agree, but he put it in the most inflammatory and challenging way he could, as is his custom.

My reply was more directed at how he said what he said, not the actual content of his message. Although the bit about wanting Saddam back in power is total :wub: as anyone with two brain cells can figure out.

I could point you to tons of posts attacking Republicans/Bush in the very same tone you object to, its the way these forums are and if your gonna let stuff like that bother you then wrong forum! Ill agree with you the tone was inflammatory but maybe because of my political beliefs Im use to it at TWC so doesnt phase me much

[Removed_user_012521]

Easy for you to say, when you aren't one of those 2,000 dead (casualties are MUCH higher than that, try over 10,000, and that's just US, if you include wounded). Take a walk down the streets of Baghdad and then tell me that. I trust you wouldn't be so cavalier were the life in jeopardy yours.

Or the half dozen friends of mine who are in Iraq or my parent who - coincidentaly - served a tour of duty in the ME (and yes I lived in the ME too). Look don't try to tell me to put myself in the other persons shoes cause I have and I have also decided that as soon as I am out of High School (or College depending on whether I want to be an officer) I am going to join up in the Marines.

[Farnan]

Thread reclosed. It has turned, as I predicted, into another Iraq thread. Also, the arguments are getting too personal. If you do complain about this, don't say its because of liberal bias...

[Legio XX Valeria Victrix]

Isn't Impeach Bush and Re-instate Saddam the democrat party's official campaign slogan for the '06 mid-term elections?

The first order of business for gullable democrat senators should be to immediatly demand that Saddam be re-instated as president of Iraq. Since it is democrats who claim that it was all based on a lie and that Iraq is worse off with Saddam gone.

So after re-instating Saddam as president of Iraq, which according to dems will stabilize the middle east and bring a new found love and respect for America, democrats can then begin impeachment proceedings against Bush for lying about the Iraq war and spying on terrorist who are communicating inside America

C'mon dems, fight for your what you believe in...we know you wont do it.

WOW!

Your ill-informed posts never cease to amaze!

Can I give you a little advice on where to get news regarding the Democratic Party?

You should probably stop getting your information on them from here, and maybe try getting it from here.

[the Black Prince]

don't start bashing this guy.... what he says is quite true...

i'm left wing, and i'm saying this... the US democratic party has no platform, no policy, its writhing like a snake who's heads been cut off and doesn't seem to know which way its going...

its making the same mistake the UKs conservative party made before the last election, its playing an opposition party stance and nothing else. opposing the republican party, tyaking up opposite stances on all their key issues, but not actuall putting forward a policy direction of its own. that won;t win them any elections...

to take an except from a BBC report i read...
President Bush's popularity ratings have plummeted, but why, asks Justin Webb, is it that the opposition, the Democrats, are not surfing the opinion polls, capitalising on the Republicans' misfortunes and preparing to take over Congress when the election comes in the autumn?

In any list of America's greatest contributions to world culture - the kazoo, the electric guitar, drive-in fast food etc - space should be found, in my view, for an invention deeply ingrained in the life of this nation. An invention on show to almost all Americans, every day. That invention is the car bumper sticker. And, in case you think you have seen them elsewhere in the world, let me just tell you that you have not. At least not on the scale, and not of the sophistication of the American model. Bumper stickers are a treasure trove of American free speech, expressing pinions of every stripe, on every subject. You can find entire religious credos summed up on the back of a Honda. My favourite is:
"Don't pray in my school and I won't think in your church."
And then, of course, there is politics.
"Work harder - millions on welfare need your money,"
I saw the other day on a pick-up truck in the Nevada desert.

But where I live, in the suburbs of Washington DC - and I am getting to the point now - the political messages tend to be the ranting of the disappointed American left.
"Somewhere in Texas there's a village missing an idiot,"
is a pithy example.
"It'll be a great day when our schools get all the money they need and the air force has to hold a bake sale to buy a bomber"
is a more plaintive, and frankly more difficult to read example.
Some are just plain weird. A perfectly normal looking Chrysler in front of me the other day had "cops smell funny" emblazoned on the boot.
But the stickers which have caught my attention and which I think are part of a noteworthy political phenomenon here are those that say, in bold letters, "Re-defeat George Bush". These, of course, refer to the election of 2000 in which more Americans voted for Al Gore, but which was awarded to Mr Bush by the Supreme Court after that voting snafu in Florida.

The stickers were part of the campaign of 2004, but were answered, it seems to me, by the result of that election. The nation plainly elected Mr Bush - he won more than 50% of the vote - something Bill Clinton never managed. So why is it that Democrats can't move on? The answer is that they don't know where to go. On the Iraq war, for instance. Are they for it or against it? When it goes badly they are against it, but in the few months last year when elections were first held in Iraq they were rather for it.

The schizophrenia is epitomised by the choice of an anti-war Iraq veteran to run for a winnable senate seat in Ohio who has now been forced to pull out of the race because the party bigwigs got cold feet.

Democrats do not have a message on the key issues of our time. Or, more precisely, they have several mutually exclusive messages. Why is this? Of course the American left has always had its fissiparous tendencies. The old joke goes: I am not a member of any organised political party, I'm a Democrat. But actually its bedrock was always pretty solid. From World War II until the Reagan revolution the establishment in the US was socially progressive. There was a belief that there was such a thing as society, and its ills could and should be tackled.

Now, there are plenty of Americans who still hold those views, but the arteries which once fed them into the nation's vital organs, have been clogged or cut. The universities do not have the power they did, professorial authority is less respected.

Most importantly, the worlds of entertainment and news (which used to pipe a vaguely left-wing message into the nation's homes) have been blown to bits by technological changes which render them powerless.
There are 600 channels on my television. I never watch any of them.
But if I did the chances that my neighbour has watched the same thing (particularly when you add the broadband internet options now available) have shrunk to virtually nil in the past few years. The Democrats need a message and a new way of communicating that message to a mass audience. They have neither.

And do not be fooled by those who say this malaise is structural, at this stage of the electoral cycle there isn't a presidential candidate etc. No, it is more than that. The American left has faded away. Only their bumper stickers remain, like cockroaches after a nuclear holocaust.

"Re-defeat George Bush," they whine. Not knowing, not caring that the world has changed.



from a report by BBC Correspondant Justin Webb


the democratic party need to come out with a strong message of their own, and a strong set of public figureheads, simply denouncing bush, or the iraq war won't get them anywhere...

the left in britain did it... they did from 1994 onward... and look where it got them, a massive landslide victory in 1997 and 3 consequtive terms in office so far...

[David Deas]

The Republican party has no plan either. At no point in time did they have what qualifies as a plan, which is exactly why we're in this mess to begin with. So it's not like the Democrats are so much worse here.

[danzig]

The Republican party has no plan either. At no point in time did they have what qualifies as a plan, which is exactly why we're in this mess to begin with.

A poorly planned one or one that didnt take many things into account but the republicans very much did have a plan.

[Removed_user_012521]

I do not see in any comprehensible logic how liberals can be opposed to the Iraq war nor how human rights activist can either. Even if Bush did bend the truth a little we got an evil dictator out of power and are biulding a democracy. That is almost the very essence of liberalism.

Also 2-3,000 causualties in three years of war is not exactly that bad. This aint Vietnam ppl. Get over it, except the sacrafices, and get the job done.