President Bush Is Not the Enemy

Discussion in 'Middle East - General' started by Adam's Apple, Dec 23, 2005.

  1. Adam's Apple
    Offline

    Adam's Apple Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,092
    Thanks Received:
    445
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +447
    President Bush Is Not the Enemy
    By Edward I. Koch
    December 21, 2005

    I wish The Times and members of Congress were not so eager to demean the president of the U.S. and his advisers, holding them up to scathing denunciation when we are at war. They should realize that the president feels very strongly his obligation to protect us from terrorists overseas and their supporters in this country–-in World War II, such supporters were called "Quislings".

    The critics have short memories. In the 1993 and 9/11 (2001) attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the U.S. suffered nearly 3,000 deaths and more than 1,000 injured.

    The Times has every right to disagree with the president's action in dispensing with the court set up for this purpose. But it harms the country when it treats the president unfairly with the language and contemptuous tone it now regularly employs.

    The president is not a dictator, which, in effect, Congressman Charles Rangel called him when comparing him with disgraced Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos. Nor is he a criminal intentionally violating the U.S. Constitution and the civil liberties of our citizens, subjecting himself to impeachment for "high crimes and misdemeanors."

    The president no doubt arrived at his position after being advised by career government lawyers that he is acting within the law. We are at war with millions of adherents of a fundamentalist Islamic creed who believe they have a duty to kill us-–Christians, Jews, Hindus and others who do not accept the supremacy of Islam over their own religions.

    For several years Republican and Democratic leaders have been briefed on what the president was doing and declined to protest or bring the disputed procedures to the attention of the House and Senate. They could have done so using closed sessions so as not to alert the enemy. Instead, they allowed the president to continue the surveillance.

    Now the press and some of those members of Congress by their public revelations have alerted the enemy to the surveillance program. And the media and some members of Congress have forgotten or don't care that we are at war and their disclosures may have prevented the administration from obtaining information otherwise available that would help military and law enforcement authorities to deter acts of terrorism here and abroad.

    We are at war. There is a balance to be struck between protecting the security of the country and the personal privacy of individuals. During World War II all kinds of restrictions were placed on American civil liberties. Most horrendously, Japanese-Americans, and some Italian-Americans and German-Americans, were sent to detention camps with the approval of the Supreme Court. But when the war ended, the restrictions ended, and the Congress acknowledged we had gone too far. We returned to our core values.

    The lesson is this: The survival of our country is paramount, but that survival must be achieved without destroying our core values as a society. Our Founding Fathers started a revolution in order to achieve "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." These are not just words. They are our fundamental beliefs and must be protected.

    To see on the other hand the president as the enemy – which the savage and unfair attacks upon him convey to the world – is harmful to the security of our country and, therefore, injures us all.

    for full article:
    http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/12/20/204518/shtml
     
  2. SpidermanTuba
    Offline

    SpidermanTuba BANNED

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Messages:
    6,101
    Thanks Received:
    258
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    New Orleans, Louisiana
    Ratings:
    +258
    I've always been amused at the fact that righties are always accusing lefties of not having original thoughts - yet righties are the ones who usually start threads which consist of absolutely nothing but a ver batim copy of another person's ideas.
     
  3. Working Man
    Offline

    Working Man Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2004
    Messages:
    627
    Thanks Received:
    47
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +47
    Here is an original idea. Most democrats suck. Palozi, Kenndey, Kerry, Clinton (both of those hose bags), Schmuker,,, oh yeah, we are so lucky to have these parasites in the Congress..

    George W??? OK, so we didn't get a gold ring this time around, but it beats anything the otherside had to offer.
     
  4. Adam's Apple
    Offline

    Adam's Apple Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,092
    Thanks Received:
    445
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +447
    The purpose of a discussion board is to enable people to post anything they want for discussion, information, amusement, etc. You are not required to bring an original thought to the table. When libs reply to what has been posted with "talking points" obtained from the DNC or the MSM, I would not call that posting "original thoughts" either, so get "amused" and take a good look at yourself. We have been trying for five years now to make you libs understand that "President Bush Is Not the Enemy". Ed Koch, a real Democrat, just put together the message for you in a nice article, Spiderman.
     
  5. LuvRPgrl
    Offline

    LuvRPgrl Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Messages:
    3,163
    Thanks Received:
    206
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +206
    and YOUR ORIGINAL IDEA was?????????
     
  6. LuvRPgrl
    Offline

    LuvRPgrl Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Messages:
    3,163
    Thanks Received:
    206
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +206
    Fact is, the thread wasnt started as a proposal for an original idea. Considering Kathiane does that more than anyone, I would consider TUBBY's post a direct personal attack on her!

    But the purpose of the thread starter was to inform and create discussion.

    But, as usual, when the lefties are wrong and have no retort to strong accusations against them, they try to change the topic to "posting original ideas"

    But that wont work.

    DISCUSSION ON TOPIC.

    The hatred for PRESIDENT BUSH is deeper than anything I have ever seen.

    One reason is because many do TRULY believe he stole both elections. As deluded as that thinking is, it is what drives them, and with the credo "the end justifies the means" it permits them, within their own limited minds to believe they are morally right to do ANYTHING to oppose Bush.

    In their minds, the terrorists are less of an enemy of Bush, and if we have to temporarily allow terrorists powers to grow in order to weaken PRESIDENT Bush and the repbulicans so they can regain power, then it is morally proper.

    Untill they gain control and impose their elitist superior will over the farmers and workers of America, they will not be happy.

    RonK
     
  7. LuvRPgrl
    Offline

    LuvRPgrl Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Messages:
    3,163
    Thanks Received:
    206
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +206
    I disagree. I think PRESIDENT Bush is more than a gold ring.

    He was the perfect man for the perfect time.

    It takes a man with his determination to see this thing through. A smarter man, like Carter would whimp out. Carter would have boycotted the olympics, and saddam would still be in drive mode.

    A president more concerned with public polls and sex would be getting a BJ while reading polls and tell his Iraqi advisors to have a seat and wait.

    Reagan would have defeated Saddam, but hey, he already defeated the Commies, if he gets toooo much credit under his belt, well, he will become greater than George Washington himself, and we just cant have that!
     
  8. OCA
    Offline

    OCA Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2004
    Messages:
    7,014
    Thanks Received:
    223
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Washington D.C.
    Ratings:
    +223
    Yeah well he certainly hasn't been a friend to conservatives either what with Bush outspending Clinton, I REPEAT CLINTON, domestically. When will we hold Republicans responsible who run as conservatives and govern from the center-left once elected? When will we hold Republicans responsible who run a war from the Oval Office and tie the hands of generals on the ground? What will it take for conservatives to finally quit acting like sheep and back or form a party that will truely adhere to conservative values and positions?

    And saying that he has to govern from the center and abandon principle for whatever reason is like saying well "I hadn't had any for a while so even though the sex was bad, i'll take it".
     
  9. OCA
    Offline

    OCA Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2004
    Messages:
    7,014
    Thanks Received:
    223
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Washington D.C.
    Ratings:
    +223
    Oh but Bush does look at polls, why do you think the caving in on torture(humiliation) and his reluctance to wage proper war in Iraq?
     
  10. rtwngAvngr
    Offline

    rtwngAvngr Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    15,755
    Thanks Received:
    511
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +511

    Our political reality is only one of the two major parties have a shot at winning. Bush is not the enemy. The terrorists are. Trashing him only assists democrats, that's the truth of the matter.
     

Share This Page