The old Democrats really really need to be run out of Washington on a rail. This attitude/pose is a big reason why we're in the current crisis. Just pathetic. The Vichy Democrats.
Chuck Schumer with a Rallying Cry for Democrats!
- Thread starter pjhawk
- Start date
Did he announce that he's retiring immediately and taking Pelosi with him?
Pelosi and Schumer, haunted since Reagan
Haunted by the Reagan era
No paywall
Haunted by the Reagan era
No paywall
Yes, the Jewish minority leader in the Senate wants to work with Nazis.
At some point, any point, do you realize they were selling you bullshit when they said Trump was Hitler?
It was just propaganda, but some of you swallowed it so hard you can't let go.
LOL. The #resistance has worked so well so far.
At no time in 2002-2003 did I think our country wouldn't survive to see another election. Right now there is a non-zero chance of that happening.
Tagging along?
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
-Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
-- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999
"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by:
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001
"I mean, we have three different countries that, while they all present serious problems for the United States -- they're dictatorships, they're involved in the development and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction -- you know, the most imminent, clear and present threat to our country is not the same from those three countries. I think Iraq is the most serious and imminent threat to our country."
-- Sen. John Edwards (D, NC) Feb. 24, 2002
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
-- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power. We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed. We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Edward Kennedy (D, MA) Sep. 27, 2002
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
-- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002
"My position is very clear: The time has come for decisive action to eliminate the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction."
-- Senator John Edwards (D, NC), Oct. 7, 2002
"We stopped the fighting [in 1991] on an agreement that Iraq would take steps to assure the world that it would not engage in further aggression and that it would destroy its weapons of mass destruction. It has refused to take those steps. That refusal constitutes a breach of the armistice which renders it void and justifies resumption of the armed conflict."
-- Sen. Harry Reid (D. NV) Oct. 9, 2002
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
-- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002
"I come to this debate, Mr. Speaker, as one at the end of 10 years in office on the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, where stopping the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction was one of my top priorities. I applaud the President on focusing on this issue and on taking the lead to disarm Saddam Hussein. ... Others have talked about this threat that is posed by Saddam Hussein. Yes, he has chemical weapons, he has biological weapons, he is trying to get nuclear weapons."
-- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D. CA) Oct. 10, 2002
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
-- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
"People can quarrel with whether we should have more troops in Afghanistan or internationalize Iraq or whatever, but it is incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and chemical weapons."
-- Ex President Bill Clinton, Jul. 22, 2003 (Interview with CNN Larry King)
I asked very direct questions of the top people in the CIA and people who'd served in the Clinton administration. And they said they believed that Saddam Hussein either had weapons or had the components of weapons or the ability to quickly make weapons of mass destruction. What we're worried about is an A-bomb in a Ryder truck in New York, in Washington and St. Louis. It cannot happen. We have to prevent it from happening.
-- Rep. Richard Gephardt (D, MO) Nov. 2, 2003
First, dude, did you just spend an hour looking all this shit up?
Second, this was after being shown manipulated and tainted evidence that significant portions of was not true and the Bush administration knew it but did this anyway to get their war. That said, I knew the story the Bush administration was selling was bullshit, they should have known better too. So if you are trying to say these folks were at the front of the line getting us into war, no, not really, but they were there.
No, I've had that on google speed dial for years: "democrats wmd quotes" puts it at the top of my results.
Bring it up every time a Democrat forgets how the uniparty loved the idea of going to war with Iraq.
Our last President was instrumental from his chairmanship in the Senate in selling that war to the public.
Bullshit.
You know how I know you didn't read them, because of the last two that expose the lie you're regurgitating now:
"People can quarrel with whether we should have more troops in Afghanistan or internationalize Iraq or whatever, but it is incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and chemical weapons."
-- Ex President Bill Clinton, Jul. 22, 2003 (Interview with CNN Larry King)
I asked very direct questions of the top people in the CIA and people who'd served in the Clinton administration. And they said they believed that Saddam Hussein either had weapons or had the components of weapons or the ability to quickly make weapons of mass destruction. What we're worried about is an A-bomb in a Ryder truck in New York, in Washington and St. Louis. It cannot happen. We have to prevent it from happening.
-- Rep. Richard Gephardt (D, MT) Nov. 2, 2003
I must have thrown up the Putin signal.
Most of those quotes are examples of the "tagging along" that's being talked about. President Gore, Clinton, Kerry would have never ever done what the Bush II administration did in deliberately setting up a scenario where they could invade a medium size country like Iraq for spurious reasons.
The Democrats of the last 30 years have been timid and conservative and scared of their own shadow. Wouldn't have had the imagination, the ideology, or the sheer crazy to do anything like that, but they're willing to let themselves get pulled along into the flow for go along get along reasons.
They have not been the opposition party that the country needed to offset the now completely deranged and insane Republican party.
Musk is going to be a national pariah possibly within days, at the latest in a year or two. So you better hurry it up with getting your yucks in.
Last edited:
If Amy had been in the Congress in the 02-03 period she for sure's would have made Seminole's bulletin board. Kind of the idealized 2025 version of the type:
The Excuse Train is up and running with BioHawk at the throttle.
I have a feeling half this country and anyone who despises corruption will simply be cheering him on.
Musk must be on drugs, these people can't be this colossally stupid, can they?
Yes, the last four years really have been that bad. It is unbelievable how shit our government has been, I’ll grant you that.
Elon Musk it the modern-day equivalent to Eliot Ness, when Ness went into Chicago and cleaned house.
Hah! Yeah sure, with the spineless weanies we have running the party?
I'm confused. Are you making the argument that Democrats were justified in voting for the Iraq war II?
I’m saying they weren’t duped participants, the fairy tale they started trying to sell the public after the invasion.
Please square that observation with these two quotes:
"People can quarrel with whether we should have more troops in Afghanistan or internationalize Iraq or whatever, but it is incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and chemical weapons."
-- Ex President Bill Clinton, Jul. 22, 2003 (Interview with CNN Larry King)
I asked very direct questions of the top people in the CIA and people who'd served in the Clinton administration. And they said they believed that Saddam Hussein either had weapons or had the components of weapons or the ability to quickly make weapons of mass destruction. What we're worried about is an A-bomb in a Ryder truck in New York, in Washington and St. Louis. It cannot happen. We have to prevent it from happening.
-- Rep. Richard Gephardt (D, MT) Nov. 2, 2003
Yeah, I can't explain why the CIA gave the answers they did. What I do know is just because they "served in the Clinton Administration" didn't mean anything and when the statements they were giving were contrary to the way Iraq had been behaving for the previous decade it made no sense either.
The reality is, the answers they gave those Senators were wrong. There is evidence to show that the Bush administration took steps to hide evidence that questioned the reliability of the evidence they were basing these decisions on. The Senators never heard that evidence. So they were basing their decisions off of incomplete information which is why I don't hold them responsible for the war. If they had seen the contrary evidence and still gone with it, then you would have a case, but they didn't.
Bush's Claims About Iraq's Nuclear Program | Arms Control Association
www.armscontrol.org
They believed it because the song and dance about Saddam and WMD never changed from 1992 to 2002.
It was a uniparty issue until the invasion became unpopular (the insurgency kept going on).
Well, Gore would have never gone into Iraq. He would have kept his eye on the ball in Afghanistan.
