• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Dem's will talk to terroist nations president but not ours

aplusmnt

Well-known member
Funny how Dem's will go over and talk to Syria's president but not their own President.

They ridicule Bush because he would not talk to Iran, Syria or North Korea, but then when he invites them to come talk about the budget for the Iraq war they decline.

Bunch of Hypocrites!
 

Hanta Yo

Well-known member
aplusmnt said:
Funny how Dem's will go over and talk to Syria's president but not their own President.

They ridicule Bush because he would not talk to Iran, Syria or North Korea, but then when he invites them to come talk about the budget for the Iraq war they decline.

Bunch of Hypocrites!

Look what they're doing to America by going over there....making us look like a bunch of idiots, and definitely trying to make our president look bad. They don't get it, you cannot talk with Iran, Syria, etc etc. They are our enemies :!:

I agree, a bunch of Hypocrites :!:
 

Hanta Yo

Well-known member
katrina said:
They are cooking their own goose... We will see a republican president in the white house again.......

I sure hope so, Katrina. Only thing, it will only anger the Dems more and they will become more intolerable. We need a Republican controlled congress. Keep the lid on the dems before they totally destroy America!!!!
 

Econ101

Well-known member
We are not going to get a republican congress or pres. if they keep acting the same way. If you keep doing the same things, expect the same result.

As far as the dems not meeting with the president, the president wants to just tell the dems what to do instead of negotiating with them. I don't know that I would go into a situation like that and I would wait till the president has to sweat it out a little more also.

The pres. wants to keep with his same war policy until he gets out of office. Many members of Congress think they have given Bush too much time already and haven't seen the results they paid for. Their push also got the Maliki govt. to at least get on the ball in Iraq. Maliki was holding the US commanders back from Saddar's militias and now after the Iraqi govt. sees they may have to handle the country without the US, they have given the US commanders the go ahead to get in there and do what they need to do. You could say that the dem's threat of not continuing the same old thing has advanced the efforts of the Iraqi govt. to start governing.
 

P Joe

Well-known member
kolanuraven said:
Bush is just running out the clock.

He's already said that this war is going to be the problem of the next pres.

And as well it should be. How many of the past wars only lasted the term of 1 president?
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Bush sees this war as "the long war". I agree with him about the conflict being a long one just as the battle against crime is a long one. I don't believe it is a "war".

If we have to be in the kind of "war" we are in right now for a long period of time, we will destroy our military (which is already showing signs of weakening) and destroy our economy (we have already lost a lot of ground in regards to our children's future via deficits).

By the way, there was no declaration of war for this conflict and no national mobilization of the country behind it.

The President, regardless of what he thinks, does not have a blank check in fighting against those he perceives to be our enemies as the democrats are currently reminding him.
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
Econ101 said:
As far as the dems not meeting with the president, the president wants to just tell the dems what to do instead of negotiating with them. I don't know that I would go into a situation like that and I would wait till the president has to sweat it out a little more also.

The point of my post is the hypocrisy in it! How many times have we heard over North Korea, Iran or Syria from the Dem's that it can not hurt to talk with these countries? People on here have said the same thing.

Now our own Congress that has an obligation given to them from the American people say they will not meet to talk with the President because they think they know what the outcome of the talks would be? Seems like there is nothing wrong with following their own advice and at least meet and see if they can persuade him to give a little.

If Bush was not willing to to give some he would never invite them to talk, he would just use the words of Cheney and tell them to F*** off.

Just another sign of arrogance and hypocrisy from the Dem's. They will never get anything accomplished with their new leadership. But then I doubt they want to, they are staying the course that got them Congress, they want America to fail so they can get a stronger hold in Washington.

The Dem's whole platform is based on failure. Failure in Iraq, Failure in the Economy, Failure in the family (abortion), Failure in Nature (Gay marriage) and Failure in man (More Government control).
 

Econ101

Well-known member
I see your points. The dems will be talking to the pres. I think it will be a lot like the Alberto G. deal where it will be on the dem's time period, not the pres's.
 

Latest posts

Top