My Democrat amigos MUST READ!

Remarks by Georgia Senator Zell Miller at Democrats for Bush Rollout
SENATOR MILLER: Thank you, Marc. I appreciate your kind introduction, and I appreciate even more your efforts to re-elect President Bush.
Like me, Marc was a governor and he understands the importance of strong leadership. He's doing important work over at the campaign, making sure that America has a strong and steady leader for another four years.
I am honored to stand squarely with President George W. Bush as he leads America at this defining moment in our history. The road that brought me here today is paved with a lot of frustration, but also a lot of hope.
I was born a Democrat and I expect I'll be a Democrat until the day I leave this earth. But I have grown mighty frustrated with the direction my party has taken over the last few years. National Democratic leaders today are moving further and further away from the principles that made our party great.
On tax cuts, on education reform, on adding a prescription drug benefit to Medicare, and most importantly on the war against terror – some national Democratic leaders are so eager to defeat George Bush that they don't realize he's acting on the ideals we have supported for years: promoting prosperity and equal opportunity; giving help to Americans who need it most; defending America's security and promoting freedom.
Frankly I've had it up to here with the politicians who claim to represent my party but really represent nothing but special interest groups and their own partisan agendas.
I'd like people to know that all Democrats are not like the people they see squawking on their TV attacking the President. There are a lot of good, honorable Democrats all across America – even some here in Washington, DC – who are doing the work that made this party great – fighting for opportunity and freedom for all men and women, here in America and around the world.
Luckily, Democrats like me have a courageous and honorable leader that we're proud to support. It just so happens that he has a little R' next to his name.
President George W. Bush is the leader America has needed over the last three years – and he is the leader America needs for the next four years.
President Bush has led America in a time of recession, terrorism, and war. But through it all he has never forgotten his charge to protect our nation's security and promote opportunity for every American. He is guided by the right principles – aided by his strong faith – and I know that my family and the people of my state are more secure with George W. Bush in the White House.
I have also known John Kerry for several years and I've considered him a friend. He served our country honorably in Vietnam, and he has served our party admirably through much of his tenure in the Senate.
But after listening to Senator Kerry over the last year or two – after hearing the agenda he's laid out for our country – I cannot support him in his race for the presidency. There are too many issues about which John Kerry and I disagree. And there are too few similarities between John Kerry and the great Democratic leaders I've known.
Consider one of our greatest Democratic Presidents: John Fitzgerald Kennedy.
Back in 1963 President Kennedy proposed a 13.6 billion dollar tax cut. At the time, it would have been the largest tax cut in history.
Part of President Kennedy's plan was to cut the top tax rate by 26 percentage points – and our party stood with him.
A few years ago, President Bush proposed cutting the top tax rate by 6 percentage points, and a lot of Democrats howled with outrage.
President Kennedy also proposed cutting the lowest tax rate to 14 percent. President Bush went even further and asked us to cut that bottom rate to 10 percent, so that the people who are working hard to make ends meet have a little more breathing room at the end of the month.
All told, President Kennedy's proposed tax cuts equaled more than 2 percent of the national economy. President Bush's proposed tax cuts – the tax cuts that some Democrats said would gut the federal government – they represented 1.2 percent of the economy.
John F. Kerry may have the same initials as John F. Kennedy, but he has a far different view of what the government should do to help families prosper.
Senator Kerry doesn't make any secret of the fact that he wants to bring more money into Washington so that he can decide how to spend it.
In his first one hundred days in office, John Kerry's massive health care plan would force him to raise taxes by as much as $900 billion. And the only way he's going to get that kind of money is if he reaches into the wallet of every man and woman in America.
His spending and tax plan would stifle our economy and stall our recovery.
I was proud to co-sponsor President Bush's tax relief plan in the Senate. That bill ultimately sent $1.3 trillion back to the hard-working men and women who earned it.
That tax relief has been flowing through the economy. People have been using it to pay the bills or get the kids some new clothes or start a little savings plan for themselves. Small businesses are investing in new equipment and expanding their operations. As a result, this economy is on the upswing.
We've had nine consecutive quarters of economic growth. And in the second half of last year the economy grew at its fastest rate in nearly 20 years.
Jobs are coming back, too. More than 350,000 jobs were created in the last six months, and more are on the way.
These are good signs, and I don't want John Kerry to roar into the White House raising taxes and rolling back the progress the American people have made.
John Kerry is also out of step with our party's greatest leaders on foreign policy.
I remember when most Democrats were in favor of projecting America's power abroad, because we believed that America was a great force for good over evil.
President Harry S. Truman recognized early on that Communism was a source of evil and a danger to our way of life – and he acted forcefully to meet the threat.
In 1946, even before the Soviet threat was clearly evident, President Truman forced a showdown with Stalin that pushed the Red Army out of occupied positions in Iran.
In 1947, when Communist insurgents threatened to overthrow the government of Greece, Truman rallied America and the world, announcing the new Truman Doctrine. He committed $400 million to protect 'free peoples' from 'totalitarian regimes.'
From 1948 to 1949 President Truman stood down the Soviet blockade of West Berlin – not by appeasement, but by flying in supplies and saving the city from Soviet encroachment. Thanks to his actions, West Berlin became a beacon of hope and liberty for people in the Eastern Bloc who were yearning for freedom.
And in 1950 President Truman committed U.S. troops to defend South Korea and drive the North Koreans back across the 38th parallel. While Harry Truman was on the watch, free people everywhere knew they had a friend in the United States of America.
For decades, the Democratic Party maintained peace through strength. We worked with Republicans to ensure that freedom and democracy would not falter in the face of any threat.
These days it seems like some people in my party are motivated more by partisan politics than by national interest.
John Kerry has the wrong idea about how our country should respond to the threat of terrorism. He says the war on terror should be mainly a law enforcement action.
Now I know that an army of lawyers can be scary sometimes, but it does not compare to the Army of the United States – not to mention the Marine Corps, the Navy, the Air Force, the Coast Guard, and all of our reservists and National Guardsmen who are fighting under the flag of the United States of America.
But you don't have to take my word for it. I'm an old history professor and I know that when history teaches you a lesson, you ought to listen.
We tried John Kerry's approach to fighting terror over the last decade.
I was disgusted when our government did nothing after terrorists bombed the World Trade Center in 1993.
I was amazed in 1996 when 19 U.S. servicemen were killed in the bombing of the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia – and still, we did nothing.
In 1998 our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania came under attack, killing 224 people, and our only response was to fire a few missiles into an empty tent.
Is it any wonder that after a decade of weak-willed responses to terror, the terrorists thought we would never fight back?
I hate that it took the awful tragedy of September 11, 2001, to wake us up to reality. But I'm sure glad we did wake up. And I'm grateful that George W. Bush was leading America exactly when we needed a steel spine and a clear head in the White House.
President Bush immediately took the fight to the terrorists – clearing out their base of operations in Afghanistan and toppling one of their biggest fans in Iraq. It's funny: The terrorists certainly realize that our efforts in Iraq are a major part of the war on terror, but some Democrats still don't get it.
John Kerry has said that the United States should have waited for United Nations diplomats to decide when we could take action in Iraq, rather than standing up for our own right to protect our security and promote democracy.

But I can't imagine the great Democratic Party leaders of past generations waiting with their hands in their pockets while a bunch of dithering diplomats decided the future of the world.
Remember it was President John F. Kennedy who told the world: 'We shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.'
I think John Kerry made the right decision when he voted to authorize the war in Iraq. But then he went out on the campaign trail and started spending too much time with Howard Dean. And he came back to Washington and voted against the $87 billion the troops need for protective armor, combat pay, and better health care. That's the worst kind of indecisiveness, and the wrong leadership at this critical moment in history.
Today, because George W. Bush took decisive action in Iraq and Afghanistan, liberty is thriving as never before. Fifty million more people are living in freedom, including 25 million women and girls who can leave their homes, go to school and to work, and participate in the political process. That is a legacy of promoting liberty that all Americans can be proud of.
Throughout his presidency, George W. Bush has acted with integrity and a clear sense of purpose. He goes to work everyday thinking about what he can do to keep Americans safe and lay the foundation for prosperity all across our country. And he's willing to work with anyone who will help him do it.
I've been proud to work with President Bush because he shares the same beliefs that support the foundation of my career in public service – and the same ideals that the greatest leaders of my party have held for decades.
I've got an old mantra that I pull out now and then: 'It's not whose team you're on, it's whose side you're on.'
In this election, I'm on George Bush's side because he's on the side of the American people. I'm grateful for his service to America, and I'm confident that he'll be re-elected in November.
May God bless our President, and may God bless America.
__________________

Democrats Making 'Unforgivable Mistake'

Edward I. Koch
Wednesday, July 16, 2003
The Democratic candidates for president – and many in the media – are trying to make President Bush seem like a liar. In so doing, they are making an unforgivable mistake.



In his State of the Union Address to Congress on Jan. 28, 2003, President Bush said, "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

Britain's Prime Minister Tony Blair, defending himself before the House of Commons for making a similar representation, said last week that the representation was true and comes from a different source than the one that was recently discredited by the CIA.

For me, it comes down to this: If Bush actually did lie to the American public – intentionally stating as the truth that which he knew to be false – then he should be impeached and removed as president.

However, if Bush did not lie, and I do not believe that he did, then Americans of all political persuasions should defend our country's reputation for fair play by displaying their indignation at those who bear false witness.

They can do this by rejecting those candidates and political leaders who have perpetuated that charge and by turning to other TV and radio channels when the unfair and venomous attacks against the president are being aired.

I am a proud Democrat who generally supports Democratic candidates for office. I have never voted for anyone other than a Democrat for president. I believe that the Democratic Party's philosophy is overall far better for our country than the Republican Party's.

At the core of the Democratic ideology is a belief in helping the less fortunate among us. The Republican mantra, on the other hand, is "I made it on my own, and you will have to do the same."

Although I am a Democrat, I am no ideologue. In some local and state elections, I have proudly crossed party lines for candidates I thought were appreciably better. I believe that the most important issue facing the world is international terrorism, and it is my current intention to vote for George W. Bush for re-election.

I do not agree with him on many domestic issues, ranging from privatizing Social Security to tax reductions favoring the wealthy. However, because of his leadership and successes in the war against international terrorism, he is my current choice in 2004.

Whether intelligence reports about Iraq were accurate or not, the president had a right to rely on information from Blair, America's most steadfast ally, and his government. If either Bush or Blair knew the reports were false and either is now engaging in a cover-up, that individual should be removed from office.

I believe Democrats and their media allies will fail to bring Bush down, because taking on Saddam Hussein was the right course of action for America.

National Security Advisor Dr. Condoleezza Rice, on "Face the Nation" over the weekend, cleaned the clocks of her two media interrogators and critics, CBS' Bob Schieffer and Los Angeles Times Washington Bureau Chief Doyle McManus, with her brilliant responses to their questions. I quote her in part:

BOB SCHIEFFER: The question I have for you this morning: who put it into the speech?

DR.RICE: Well, let's start at the very beginning, as they say. And the president of the United States – the notion that the president of the United States took the country to war because he was concerned with one sentence about whether Saddam Hussein sought uranium in Africa is purely ludicrous. And this has gotten to that proportion, that people are saying this statement is why the president took the nation to war.

The president took the nation to war to depose a bloody tyrant who had defied the world for 12 years, who was building a weapons of mass destruction program and had weapons of mass destruction, which he had used in the past, who was a threat to American interest in the Middle East and who, now that he is removed, is giving us an opportunity for [the] Middle East that might finally be at peace and that will not create an atmosphere in which you have ideologies of hatred spawning people who slam airplanes into the World Trade Center. So we do have to put this in perspective.

The president's State of the Union said something that was accurate: This is what the British government said in its reporting. The British, I might note, still stand by that statement. It was not based, they say, on a single source, but on other sources. [End of excerpt]

The lines have been drawn. Let's find out the truth. Congress should hold public hearings on this issue.

I also am in favor of public hearings conducted by an independent commission on the performance of the FBI, CIA and all other national security agencies pre- and post-9/11.

Let the chips fall where they may, and hold accountable those who were negligent in failing to prevent the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

Edward I. Koch is the former mayor of New York City. His commentary for Bloomberg radio is republished here.

What, too much truth to handle?

Or better yet, 2 democrats who are against Kerry!!!
Should give ya food for thought!

Well Patrish, as you may know, Zel Miller is the most conservative Democrat in office. In fact why he's a Democrat is unknown. He's voted conservatively on almost every issue. So this is no surprise.

Ed Koch, who cares!!!!

Want to hear a real shocker. I have a friend who works in the elections department in one of the more conservative CA counties. He inputs voter registrations everyday. Take a guess how many Republicans have switched to other parties. 33 % are now listed as former Repubs. Good luck to you and your flock.

Democrats Making 'Unforgivable Mistake'

quote:

---

The Democratic candidates for president – and many in the media – are trying to make President Bush seem like a liar. In so doing, they are making an unforgivable mistake.

---

He is a Liar, what to hell are you talking about.
That's a fact, not a fiction.

quote:

---

Throughout his presidency, George W. Bush has acted with integrity and a clear sense of purpose.

---

He is (was) party to decieving the (people) nation that has been proven.

quote:

---

For me, it comes down to this: If Bush actually did lie to the American public – intentionally stating as the truth that which he knew to be false – then he should be impeached and removed as president.

---

I agree wholehearttedly, I mean it wouldn't be the first time.

quote:

---

May God bless our President, and may God bless America.
__________________

---

I was in the photo processing store when as I turned to leave, I noted a picture of the towers prior to 911. the caption beneigth it says 'America remembers'.
Thanks for the reminder, so I prayed
'ya, I remember too, so I reminded GOD of His Promise'
'God's curse upon the Lie that the people should get up out of it,
GOD's wrath upon the Abmination that put that Lie before the Christ, Your Way.'

Bush lied and/or acted upon insufficient evidence.
In any case, he forced the issue too strongly. He wanted to eliminate any WMD threat while other countries in the region didn't seem to display much worry.

Teen is it that innocent? Was it they needed an enemy to focus (nation) peoples attention upon in order to promote
"The War on Terrorism", after all they don't have the cold war to justify their secreacy & spending on?
What would they have to do down size military (spending) & what of the CIA & all those other government agencies?
Let alone all those government contracts to supply the neccessary nuts, bolts & screws?
What else could they possibly do?

quote:

---

He is (was) party to decieving the (people) nation that has been proven.

---

Never met a liberal who didnt put a spin on something. LOL...seriously, he was never 'caught' nor prooven to lie.

You have this all wrapped up already, and the others out there trying to decipher what happened, maybe you should call them with your info. That and a box of cracker jacks, are gr8 evidence.

Here is a shocker, caveman, I grew up democrat, and voted democrat until I BEGAN listening, and reading and THINKING FOR MYSELF, & also half of my city switched to republican. Clinton was an eye opener. (Understatement) (Also a big county..incidently) So what evidence did you show me..some CA opionions.
In fact, hon, most of CA is liberal minded, and frankly I dont even consider them shining examples.

Now, CA is predominantly wealthy, and who do they vote for??
Just goes to show, democrats are the ones who serve the wealthy...and not the repulicans.

quote:

---

'God's curse upon the Lie that the people should get up out of it,
GOD's wrath upon the Abmination that put that Lie before the Christ, Your Way.

---

No offense CT, half the time I do not follow you.
When Revelations says...'Get out of her...' (Babylon was a city of pagans, and sin..and in no way does it represent Catholics.
However, I am only guessing where you went with that.....

Oh my god! Pat...hon...you're an idiot.

You know nothing about CA so please don't embarrass yourself. The folks in Orange County, San Diego Co. and Eastern CA would proclaim your ignorance as well.

So former Democrat, do you think spending 50 million on the whitewater investigation was a proper use of taxpayer funds? Do you think the Congress was right in pursuing an impeachment against Clinton, rather than focusing on getting OBL?

So exactly when did you open your eyes? Also, its nice to know that you actually read my posts......I said 33% dumbs**t.

quote:

---

Oh my god! Pat...hon...you're an idiot.

---

I can surely return that sentiment, hon. You show your colors everytime you open your rude mouth, but I am no shrinking violet sweetums.

And since I am able to tear you limb to limb, in manner of verbal abuse, I refrain. I could go way over your head.

AS for your 33%, I said half...in my county.

BTW, I have friends in Orange county, San Diego...etc

The mix is like anywhere else, but OMGosh, your point got lost....because frankly I didnt ask how many people switched parties, as you did not ask me about where I live. BUT I interjected because you brought it up.

The money spent on A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION....IS AND WAS IMPORTANT!!

Just because YOU do not feel it was worthwhile, doesnt mean the Clinton's should be excused to commit crimes.
How outrageously ignorant that comment is.

What are you telling us now...? That criminals should be left alone just because they have the money and power?
PAH~LEASE!

I opened my eyes when Bubba made his first CHARISMATIC speech.

I don't like lying sweet talkers, and he was a smoothie.
Duped most of the nation. BUT all his filthy dirt came to head...oops, did I mention sucha thing? in the same sentence as Billy Boy Bubba...didnt mean too. LMAO

I prefer to uncover the real stuff behind the false facades, and looking with an impartial scrutiny, into the life of Clinton was like unearthing the mother of all fossils....ONE HUGE MOUNTAIN OF CRAP...INDEED.

He should have been fully impeached....and his criminal wife should never have been outside a jail cell to be in an election.

Hey, OJ Simpson got off, so that's where our society is...power and money and prestige makes one infallible.

quote:

---

No offense CT, half the time I do not follow you.
When Revelations says...'Get out of her...' (Babylon was a city of pagans, and sin..and in no way does it represent Catholics.

---

Gee patri, I was offering a prayer just as you had at the end of Your Comments.
What is with all those various Saints that they (catholics pray too . . . I seem to have pointed out how neither Jesus nor any of His Disciples (Apostles) allowed the people to bow down to them? In fact, they were rather adamant on the subject, weren't they?

quote:

---

Never met a liberal who didnt put a spin on something. LOL...seriously, he was never 'caught' nor prooven to lie.

---

Ya, He probably won't be either as long as people accept "National Security"
as a CoverAll's for LIES & Deceitfulness of those
who run the government for their personal agenda.
Democracy serves the people, Capitalism serves the wealthy.

quote:

---

Ya, He probably won't be either as long as people accept "National Security"
as a CoverAll's for LIES & Deceitfulness of those
who run the government for their personal agenda.
Democracy serves the people, Capitalism serves the wealthy.

---

You suggesting we nix national security?
O man, I didnt just see that.....lordy!

Kerry is filthy rich...who shall he serve then?

So are you voting your party or for the best candidate?Not much of a choice I know but then who chooses what candidates sre going to run? the ppl?
You have a choice to live free or live the lie; you have a choice to seek peace or live at war? Do as you will? Me, I am going to live my life with as much peace & love that I can.
which is not easy in this world, some people think they have the right to make life a living hell. Wonder if god has a guarentee or maybe I can get a rebate or may be I can get a new life by default?

[your point got lost....because frankly I didnt ask how many people switched parties]

Your thread was based on the story of 2 Dems who plan to support Bush. I relayed information about a friend of mine who gave stats on the amount of Reps who have changed parties. Is this not relevant to your thread? Are you able to read chapter books, or do you prefer pictures?

[The money spent on A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION]

Point taken. But if you can jog your memory, the Senator from NY, after learning that nothing criminal took place, advised Congressman Dan Burton to stop. I believe it went on for 3 more years. The Reps continued to investigate one thing after another with no success. Finally got Linda Tripp, a Republican, to set him up where they knew they could get him. SEX!!!

Whats worse, Clinton screwing (ok it was oral) an intern or Bush screwing the country?

By the way, I apologize for the name calling. It's uncharacteristic of me to stoop to that level.