Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

There are so damned many instances where * has screwed

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
fishface Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-04 07:13 PM
Original message
There are so damned many instances where * has screwed
the pooch on homeland security that if the Kerry people were to put it together into some hard hitting commercials they could do real damage to the Texas Turd .

Like the time they tried to cut back on Sky Marshals on flights requiring an overnight stay to "save money" and instructed the Marshals to not only NOT tell the airlines they were supposed to be protecting but were also told to keep it a secret from the media.
Tim Russert busted them on it and yet we never hear a peep about shit like this as * goes merrily along telling everyone how great a job he's doing "protecting the homeland".

And all the times Bush and the repugs voted against Democratic attempts to increase money for homeland security.Christ..this is meat and potato stuff they should be hammering the Texas Turd over and yet..nothing!!

There's so much shit they could use against the Turd..it befuddles the shit out of me why it isn't being used.:wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
benddem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-04 07:18 PM
Response to Original message
1. How about
making the sky guys dress up in suits, ties, and have military hair cuts? Why didn't they just put signs or nametags on them?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fishface Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-04 07:22 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. It'd be hard to stick that on President Stupid
but there's so many cases where they've cut back (airport screeners less than a year after being hired) because of 'budget constraints'.

Budget constraints?? WTF..You fuking moron Bush.. you had plenty of money for tax cuts but protecting us is a budget consideration when tax cuts aren't??

Hit this bastard Goddammit!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rageneau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-04 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
3. From Your Mouth to Kerry's Ear
You are exactly right (IMHO) as to the tack the Kerry Campaign should take.

Bush has taken Kerry's one unassailable advantage -- his war record -- and made it into a liability. Kerry needs to do precisely the same thing. Rove and the RNC are banking on what they think is Smirk's one unassailable advantage -- his 'leadership' on the WOT. Kerry should attack that image and turn it against him.

Which would be as easy as pie to do -- and truthful, too.

The Dems ought to point out the fact that Bush ignored NSA warnings before 9/11, that he sat in that Florida classroom on 9/11, that he disappeared for three days after 9/11, that he farted around and let Osama get away, that he took us to war under false pretenses, that he took us to the WRONG war, that his crappy leadership directly led to the Abu Gharib abuses, that he has alientated our allies, made a pariah of the US, set our foreign policy back years and made me actually ashamed, at times, to be an American.

THAT'S the message Kerry ought to carry -- not more mealy-mouthed pie-in-the-sky platitudes about 'vision' and dull issues like credit-card debt.

When, oh, when will the Democrats learn to do what the Pubs have been doing successfully for decades now -- run against the CANDIDATE, not on the issues.

That's what Bush and Rove are doing today. And anybody who can't see how well that's working must either be blind or a senior strategist of the Kerry Campaign.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fishface Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-04 07:33 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. And the Hart - Rudman Commission's report they shuttled off
into the corner?

By Jake Tapper
- - - - - - - - - -


September 12, 2001 | WASHINGTON -- They went to great pains not to sound as though they were telling the president "We told you so."

But on Wednesday, two former senators, the bipartisan co-chairs of a Defense Department-chartered commission on national security, spoke with something between frustration and regret about how White House officials failed to embrace any of the recommendations to prevent acts of domestic terrorism delivered earlier this year.


Bush administration officials told former Sens. Gary Hart, D-Colo., and Warren Rudman, R-N.H., that they preferred instead to put aside the recommendations issued in the January report by the U.S. Commission on National Security/21st Century. Instead, the White House announced in May that it would have Vice President Dick Cheney study the potential problem of domestic terrorism -- which the bipartisan group had already spent two and a half years studying -- while assigning responsibility for dealing with the issue to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, headed by former Bush campaign manager Joe Allbaugh.

The Hart-Rudman Commission had specifically recommended that the issue of terrorism was such a threat it needed far more than FEMA's attention.

http://dir.salon.com/politics/feature/2001/09/12/bush/index.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 08:48 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC