Saddam Offered Asylum to Osama bin Laden
Instupundit: "I don't know how much this matters now, except as a reminder that the revisionist nobody-could-imagine-Saddam-and-Al-Qaeda-in-alliance claim isn't exactly supported by the history."
Via CNN from 1999: "Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has offered asylum to bin Laden, who openly supports Iraq against the Western powers."
Reynolds ponders, "Funny that we haven't heard more about this." Funny indeed.
Via CNN from 1999: "Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has offered asylum to bin Laden, who openly supports Iraq against the Western powers."
Reynolds ponders, "Funny that we haven't heard more about this." Funny indeed.
posted by BohemianLikeYOU at 11/18/2005 01:23:00 AM
6 Comments:
News Item: Cheney calls 57% of Americans “Dishonest and Reprehensible”
An increasingly desperate Bush Administration this week continued to ratchet up its rhetoric against the 57% of Americans who disagree with Administration views on the use (or misuse) of pre-war intelligence to justify the invasion of Iraq and the 63% of Americans who disagree with the manner in which the Administration is conducting war operations in Iraq.
On Friday, and again on Monday as he fled for Asia, Bush called those who accused him of manipulating pre-war intelligence “deeply irresponsible.” On Thursday Vice President Cheney emerged from his bunker to label those who disagreed with his views as “dishonest and reprehensible” and further accused them of “cynical and pernicious falsehoods.”
Latest polls show Bush’s approval rating among Americans to be 34%. Cheney’s approval rating hovers at an abysmal 19%. More importantly, polls this week show that 57% of Americans believe that Bush and Cheney deliberately misused pre-war intelligence to justify the Iraq invasion, 63% think that Bush is mismanaging the war effort, and that these percentages are continuing to increase.
At this point it is not clear what effect Bush and Cheney calling 57% of Americans “irresponsible, reprehensible and dishonest” will have on their approval ratings.
White House sources have suggested that if lashing out against the clear majority of Americans who disagree with them on Iraq does not move public opinion back in their favor they may be open to bolder initiatives. They are said to be considering reacting to the 89% of Americans polled who consider Cheney the “human embodiment of evil” by having Cheney call them “witless troglodytes.” Karl Rove is rumored to have suggested an even stronger reaction to the 78% of Americans polled who consider Bush to be an “amiable dunce,” having Bush refer to them as “pustulent whores.”
In an increasingly bad sign for the Republicans, 67% of Americans polled responded that they viewed Pat Robertson as the “sole voice of reason” in the Republican Party, though those polling numbers were taken prior to Robertson calling for his close friend God to assassinate the President of Venezuela and for the destruction of the town of Dover, PA.
Asked to comment on these recent developments Bush, in South Korea for a photo op with a chicken, would not respond. Later Bush is set to give a policy speech on North Korea’s nuclear weapons capability, speaking under a banner reading “Fission Accomplished.” Bush will return to the US on Saturday.
Actually - pretty funny!
Here, Reagan would love this. I wrote it just for him!
Would true conservatives countenance the fiscal rape of their children and grandchildren?
One thing the Bush Administration clearly has been very good at is focusing the attention of the press (and by extension the American people) on issues that they want to highlight. This has had the effect of advancing the Bush agenda, but has had the added effect of deflecting focus away from things that the Administration does not want to highlight. One of those issues is clearly the rampant, runaway spending of your tax dollars by Bush and the Republican majority congress. At this point there can be no doubt that, as they try to focus your attention on issues like stem cells and Supreme Court nominations, Bush and the Republican Congress are spending us all into a hole from which it will take us, our children and our grandchildren years to recover.
You don’t need to take my word for this, nor the words of any democrat or Bush-hater. You need only to read what conservatives like George Will are saying, or the people at conservative think tanks like the Heritage Foundation and the Cato Institute. The Cato Institute recently completed a report on the spending habits of all US presidents during the last 40 years. If you’re interested in reading the report I’ve included a link at the end of this post.
If you want to continue to believe that Bush and Congressional Republicans are “on your side” or if you care only about saving stem cells and banning gay marriage perhaps you should read no further. But if you’re interested in the truth and are concerned about your financial well-being and that of your children, perhaps you should read on. Here’s some of what the Cato Institute report had to say about presidential spending over the last 40 years:
All presidents presided over net increases in spending. As it turns out George W. Bush is one of the biggest spenders of them all. In fact he is an even bigger spender than Lyndon B. Johnson in terms of discretionary spending.
The increase in discretionary spending in Bush’s first term was 48.5% in nominal terms. That’s more than twice as large as the increase in discretionary spending during Clinton’s entire 2 terms (21.6%) and higher than Lyndon B. Johnson’s entire discretionary spending spree (48.3%).
Adjusting the budget trends for inflation Bush looks even worse; his spending rate is much higher then Lyndon Johnson’s. In other words, Bush expanded federal non-entitlement programs in his first term almost twice as fast each year as Lyndon Johnson did during his entire presidency.
George W. Bush is the biggest spending president of the last 40 years in both the defense and discretionary spending categories by a long shot. He beats Johnson by almost 4% in defense spending growth and more than 3% in domestic discretionary spending growth.
And conservative columnist George Will points out that federal spending has grown twice as fast under President Bush and congressional Republicans as under President Clinton. And with respect to the argument that this profligacy is related to 9/11 and homeland security, Will and the conservative think tanks have noted that over 65 percent of the spending increase is unrelated to national security.
Will further reports that Congressional Republicans (who achieved their majority by promising fiscal discipline) have presided over an orgy of pork spending with your tax dollars the likes of which have never been seen before. In 1991, the 546 pork projects in the 13 appropriation bills cost $3.1 billion. In 2005, the 13,997 pork projects cost $27.3 billion. Does that sound like fiscal discipline to you?
You may support Bush and the congressional Republicans because of some vague promise of “progress” on social issues with which you and the Republicans agree. In that case perhaps you are entitled to refer to yourself as a “social conservative.” But nobody who calls themselves a fiscal conservative could support Bush and the Republican Congress who are spending your tax dollars in an orgy of profligacy the likes of which has not been experienced in our lifetimes. You can continue to deny yourself this truth, but be assured that true conservatives know the truth. Bush and the Republican Congress are asking you to mortgage your future and the futures of your children and grandchildren in exchange for soft “promises” on social issues. You are justifying the fiscal rape of your children and grandchildren perpetrated by your “moral leaders” in exchange for a vague promise of gains on social issues.
Do yourself and your kids a favor; look them in the eye and explain to them why you have chosen to saddle them with these financial burdens, explain to them your reasoning. Then look in the mirror and explain to yourself how you can continue to support the people who you know in your heart are screwing you and to your kids. Is that morality? Is that conservatism?
Read the whole Cato article here:
http://www.cato.org/pubs/tbb/tbb-0510-26.pdf
Read the Will column here:
http://www.suntimes.com/output/will/cst-edt-geo17.html
I quote your quote:
"Do yourself and your kids a favor; look them in the eye and explain to them why you have chosen to saddle them with these financial burdens, explain to them your reasoning."
I tell my kid that principles mean that you will not always be popular and that it takes courage to withstand the attacks of men who understand nothing but expediency.
Bush has been wrong this year for sure. But, he understands the sacrifice principled leadership demands.
If I had to choose "approve" or "disapprove" for Bush, I'd have to say the latter.
But not over war issues. Everyone in a position of authority (read: every elected official in Washington) had the same data, and agreed Iraq could not be ignored in a post-9/11 world.
I have a problem with his wide open wallet, and I think that has something to do with his need for love from the Left -- something he will never get. Mr. President, let them yell and cry, we don't need their approval!
its not surprising at all that we havent heard about it. interesting.
Post a Comment
<< Home