Fri, Nov 28, 2014, 1:32 PM EST - U.S. Markets closed early today

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Amylin Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Message Board

  • surpluswar surpluswar Sep 9, 2004 7:58 AM Flag

    Un-Vice Presidential

    Cheney Spits Toads NYT 090904
    By MAUREEN DOWD

    WASHINGTON � George W. Bush and Dick Cheney have always used the president's father as a reverse lodestar. In 1992, the senior Mr. Bush wooed the voters with "Message: I care.'' So this week, Mr. Cheney wooed the voters with, Message: You die.

    The terrible beauty of its simplicity grows on you. It is a sign of the dark, macho, paranoid vice president's restraint that he didn't really take it to its emotionally satisfying conclusion: Message: Vote for us or we'll kill you.

    Without Zell Miller around to out-crazy him, and unplugged after a convention that tried to "humanize'' him with grandchildren, horses and wifely anecdotes about his inability to dance the twist, Mr. Cheney is back as Terrifier in Chief.

    He finally simply spit out what the Bush team has been more subtly trying to convey for months: A vote for John Kerry is a vote for the terrorists.

    "Because if we make the wrong choice,'' Mr. Cheney said in Des Moines in that calm baritone, "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.''

    These guys figure, hey, these scare tactics worked in building support for the Iraq war, maybe they can work in tearing down support for John Kerry. They linked Saddam with terrorism and cowed the Democrats (including Mr. Kerry, who has never been able to make the case against the Bush administration's trompe l'oeil casus belli) and fooled the country into going along with their trumped-up war. So why not link Mr. Kerry with terrorism and cow the voters into sticking with the White House they've got?

    It's like that fairy tale where vipers and toads jump out of the mouth of the accursed mean little girl when she tries to speak. Every time Mr. Cheney opens his mouth, vermin leap out.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • You convienently forgot to say what else Franks says about the President in his book. Waiting for Rather to unload more DNC fakes? hehehe

    • I am not going to argue with you over a dilemna Americans, democrat and republican should come together and work on. Bush and co. did very well imo with what they had to go on, and have kept up the fight against terrorism and the threat from what we thought(we did not find does not mean it was not there) was a big threat in Iraq, and we got Libya to lay down their arms, but I hate that Kaddafi got to go free.

      I received an email today showing our troops digging up(understatement) a Russian MIG fighter jet that the Iraqis were hiding in the desert, in violation of the UN terms, that could not have obtained during the time of the first Gulf War. It was very high tech and capable of flying at 2000 miles per hour, and I would bet they still had WMD as well, that now possibly somebody else now has...?....

      As for the shifting of resources from Afghan to Iraq, that could be due to not needing those resources over in Afghanistan, as major combat was over, and unlike Iraq, the insurgents were mostly hiding out and not fighting as hard and as much with so many arms that the Iraqis left all over the country. Our biggest mistake was not to secure those arms and let the people keep said arms to defend themselves after we let many of them go free after capture.

      And man, it don't any easier to view what happened 3 years ago to the Twin Trade towers in NYC and the Pentagon on the television rememberance highlights.

      Lest we never forget, God Bless those families and especially the children w/o a parent due to that tradegy!

    • "now you got to be kidding, so we just picked a fight with some innocent country's ruler"

      Yes I was kidding. I never saw anything so ludicrous as to suggest, as you did, that "Iraq is a much easier landscape to fight al queda"......that I just had to respond in kind.

      We did a half assed job in Afghanistan against the Taliban, and as early as February 2002, we were already maneuvering equipment and troops away from there and towards Iraq (as per Gen. Tommy Franks).

      The Taliban is re-grouping, Al Qaeda & Osama are still an oft-mentioned threat. Bush and his administration march into Iraq and try to justify it as part of our "War on Terror", which IMO demonstrates they wouldn't know real terrorism if it came up and bit them on their collective asses.

    • bUSH IS A DRAFT DODGING AWOL.

    • ".....instead of picking a fight with someone else and hoping they may eventually show up."

      >>>>now you got to be kidding, so we just picked a fight with some innocent country's ruler; you one of those lawyers trying to defend Saddam Hussein?

      And we did go after them where they should be at, and are still looking for them; remember Pat Tillman? He gave up his luxurious lifestyle to go after them, not sure I could do that now, although I did serve my country in 2 branches of the armed services, just not as risky a time as these are to serve.

    • How about those FAKE papers Kerry and the DNC sent over to Rather. hehehe Who signed those purple heart papers? hehe Will Rather ask that? hehe

    • "And actually Iraq is a much easier landscape to fight al queda, than Afghanistan"

      And yet, Vatican City or maybe Monaco would have been a better place than Iraq to fight Al Qaeda, since they are such small places.

      Still, the best place to fight Al Qaeda, regardless of landscape, is to go fight them where they are.....instead of picking a fight with someone else and hoping they may eventually show up.

    • As One Who Has Served During War Time, I ask the following:
      Will You Volunteer To Be The Next To Die ?

      (Those Who Sit On The Side lines and cheer those "Who About To Die",,, SUCK)

    • Did you see Maureen on Charlie Rose a few night ago? You need to vett your source as she is admittedly a Democrat with an anti-Bush agenda and a book to sell.

      If you heard the Veep's Speech, I did, he did not say what she implies, but such is "silly season".

    • The vice president and president did not even mention Osama at the convention because of the inconvenient fact that the fiend is still out there, plotting. Yet they denigrate Mr. Kerry as too weak to battle Osama, and treat him as a greater threat.

      Mr. Cheney implies that John Kerry couldn't protect us from an attack like 9/11, blithely ignoring the fact that he and President Bush didn't protect us from the real 9/11. Think of what brass-knuckled Republicans could have made of a 9/11 tape of an uncertain Democratic president giving a shaky statement that looked like a hostage tape and flying randomly from air base to air base, as the veep ordered that planes be shot down.

      Mr. Cheney warns against falling back "into the pre-9/11 mind-set,'' when, in fact, the Bush team's pre-9/11 mind-set was all about being stuck in the cold war and reviving "Star Wars" - which doesn't work and is useless against terrorist tactics. The Bush crowd played down terrorism because Bill Clinton and Sandy Berger had told their successors that Osama was a priority, and the Bushies scorned all things Clinton. The president shrugged off intelligence briefings with such headlines as "Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States'' because there was brush to be cleared and unaffordable tax-cutting to be done.

      After the blue-ribbon graybeards declared the Bush administration's pumped-up W.M.D. claims and Saddam-9/11 links bogus, the White House went into a defensive crouch - especially the man in the undisclosed bunker, who had veered wildly between overly pessimistic predictions of Saddam's nukes and overly optimistic predictions of grateful Iraqis with flowers and chocolates.

      For a time, it seemed that Americans were realizing they'd been flimflammed by the Bushies. But at the convention, the swaggering Bush juggernaut brazenly went back to boasting about its pre-emption doctrine, tracing imaginary connections between 9/11 and Saddam, and calling all our foes terrorists.

      Why should the same group that managed to paint a flextime guardsman as a heroic commander - and a war hero as a war criminal - bother rebutting or engaging with critics?

      As the deaths of American men and women fighting in Iraq topped 1,000, and with insurgents controlling parts of central Iraq, the White House trotted out the same old discredited line, assuming it can wear - and scare - everyone down by November.

      http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/uclickcomics/20040909/cx_tt_uc/tt
      20040909

      • 2 Replies to surpluswar
      • "As the deaths of American men and women fighting in Iraq topped 1,000, and with insurgents controlling parts of central Iraq, the White House trotted out the same old discredited line, assuming it can wear - and scare - everyone down by November."

        ....just wondering how many deaths Leftenant Kerry was responsible for by speaking out so defiantly against the Vietnam War after his 4 months of duty after he returned to the states? Have heard that the the N. Vietnamese used Kerry's words to 'break down' prisoners that were caught and held (or killed) over there, can you tell me more about that please???

        And how many were killed total in Vietnam...at least 60,000 right? so would not be surprised to hear that Kerry killed at least 1000 of our men, alot of whom did not believe in that war then either, actually alot less believed in that war than the Iraq wars of late...imo.

        Thanks.

      • LOL !

 

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.