A place to exchange ideas supported by facts. Independents and Liberals are invited to submit their comments, provided they support their opinion with facts and references. Spinning is discouraged.
And Liberals Cried Foul
Published on September 9, 2004 By aconservative In Democrat
Yesterday in Iowa, Vice President Cheney said “It's absolutely essential that eight weeks from today, on Nov. 2, we make the right choice, because if we make the wrong choice then the danger is that we'll get hit again and we'll be hit in a way that will be devastating from the standpoint of the United States,"

Here’s why his statement is true.

(1) Capture of the American Embassy in Tehran, Iran. Carter, a liberal did nothing. In accordance with International Law such an act is considered a declaration of war.

(2) First bombing of the World Trade Center – Clinton did nothing. It’s a criminal act. Has nothing to do with the defense of our country.

(3) Blackhawk was down in Somalia – Ditto

(4) Bombing of the American Embassies in Africa – Ditto

(5) Bombing of the USS Cole – Ditto

(6) Attack on the World Trade Center (09-11-01) – Bush did respond. Bin Laden ran so fast he is now living in a desert hole with rats and scorpions. Saddam Hussein, who ignored the UN so many times, is in jail. The US hasn’t been attacked since then. That’s a fact that liberals seem to forget.

Contrast this to the positions of Kerry, another liberal, who would like to be President.

(1) In Iraq, he wants to bring the military home, after 6 months, then

(2) He said that if we are ever attack again, he will go to the United Nations, organized a coalition, and let the coalition decide the defense of our country. Russia, who was being counted into Kerry’s coalition, elected and accepted Bush’s doctrine of “pre-emption”. They will seek the terrorists wherever they are. Unlike Kerry’s vision, they are not going to the UN.

(3) Kerry was criticizing Bush for his approach to keep the country safe. He said, "Two hundred billion for Iraq, but they tell us we can't afford after school programs for our children. Two hundred billion for Iraq, but they tell us we can't afford health care for our veterans. Two hundred billion dollars for Iraq, but they tell us we can't afford to keep the 100,000 police officers we put on the streets during the 1990's. We're here today to tell them they're wrong."

(4) Edwards also echoed, – "So many things that are important in the lives of the American people are not taking place, but (the United States is spending) $200 billion and counting in Iraq. These things are completely connected.

The new Kerry position echoes exactly what Clinton’s position. Terrorism is a police matter. It’s just a criminal action that can be fixed by policemen and lawyers (all unionized) – even if 3000 Americans die.

America is not at war.

If one reads the US Constitution, the President’s main job – is to defend the United States. That’s why he is called the “Commander-in-Chief”. The funding of schools, the funding of policemen, the funding of welfare (things that are important in the lives of the American people) are minor jobs. Yet Kerry is putting these minor jobs in front of the main job, which is the defense our country.

Americans know better. They listen to Cheney – he spoke the truth!

aConservative





Comments
on Sep 20, 2004
If one reads the US Constitution, the President’s main job – is to defend the United States. That’s why he is called the “Commander-in-Chief”. The funding of schools, the funding of policemen, the funding of welfare ... Kerry is putting these minor jobs in front of the main job, which is the defense our country.


Defense is the only constitutional jursidiction of the executive branch. Schools and police are local issues, not federal and a focus on that fact would serve our nation well. Welfare.... is not constitutional. Neither is income tax for that matter. There is no right to money or the things it buys. To believe that charitable giving must be mandated by government muscle is a moral bankruptcy that continues to weaken our nation in so many ways... There was poverty and charity before welfare but could there be sufficient charity after welfare? I don't know. Because people have gotten so comfortable with the Nanny State that they virtually reject caring for their neighbors because they think that is what they pay taxes for. It shouldn't be.
on Sep 20, 2004
Neither is income tax for that matter.


Actually, with the creation of the 16th ammendment, income taxes became constitutional. You might feel that it goes against what the founders and framers wanted, but because it is part of the constitution, it is, therefore, constitutional. You can't say "the constitution is unconstitutional."

16th Amendment
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States and without regard to any census or enumeration.

on Sep 20, 2004
Yesterday in Iowa, Vice President Cheney said “It's absolutely essential that eight weeks from today, on Nov. 2, we make the right choice, because if we make the wrong choice then the danger is that we'll get hit again and we'll be hit in a way that will be devastating from the standpoint of the United States,"


Only thing that might conflict with people is that you need to use his entire statement not the piecemeal version, because when you see the entrie statement it makes a difference. You can thank Draginol for finding the complete quote, I had posted another time the same exact quote like yours.

Reply By: Draginol Posted: Saturday, September 11, 2004
Big problem with that quote - it's incomplete. There should be no period after "Standpoint of the United States"

Here is the actual quote:
"Because if we make the wrong choice, then the danger is that we’ll get hit again, that we’ll be hit in a way that will be devastating from the standpoint of the United States, and that we’ll fall back into the pre-9/11 mind set if you will, that in fact these terrorist attacks are just criminal acts, and that we’re not really at war. I think that would be a terrible mistake for us. "

Changes the meaning quite a bit doesn't it? Notice that the sound bites cut him off as to make it sound like Cheney is saying that the "wrong choice" would mean an attack.

But that's not what he said. He said that if we make the wrong choice and we get attacked that we might go back and treat terrorism like a law enforcement issue like the Clinton administration did.



So if you combine the first part with the rest as given by Draginol, Cheney talks about the mindset that terrorist acts such as those are treated as criminal acts is wrong, and a terrible choice.

Just an FYI

-Shozan