Yeah, I know most of you are focused on today’s Super Duper Tuesday contest, but with both the Times and the P-I ignoring Rep. Dave Reichert’s pathetic fundraising report (Really? It wasn’t worth a single mention?) it is apparently left to me to cover what could be the biggest local story of the election season: Reichert and the Republican’s slow-motion collapse in Washington’s 8th Congressional District. And while Seattle’s two dailies haven’t seemed to notice yet, the inside-Beltway media certainly has, with first The Hill placing Reichert amongst the most vulnerable GOP incumbents, and now The Politico warning that Reichert may not be able to count on the NRCC to pull his ass out of the fire this time around.
Six House Republicans holding seats that are being eyed by the Democratic majority are confronting the new, brutal reality of their party’s fundraising slump. They are limping into highly competitive reelection races with less cash than their Democratic challengers.
The latest fundraising reports are a gut punch for this six-pack of GOP incumbents: Reps. Christopher Shays (Conn.), Dave Reichert (Wash.), John R. Kuhl (N.Y.), Tim Walberg (Mich.), Jean Schmidt (Ohio) and Bill Sali (Idaho). With the exception of Sali, all represent swing districts.
But it’s also a blow to a House Republican conference that for years has prided itself on using aggressive fundraising tactics and mandates to make sure all of its incumbents held a significant money edge for their reelection.
A senior aide to a prominent House Republican requested anonymity to explain the significance of this fundraising downturn. “You’re going to see all these members in tough shape,” the aide said. “You have all these seats out there that are so expensive because of the money we’ve put in in the past. We might not be able to save some of these guys that we brought back last time.”
In the deft political hands of the late Rep. Jennifer Dunn, WA-08 was a cash cow for the national party, a safe seat in a wealthy suburban district that reliably pumped dollars directly into the NRCC and other campaigns. But over the past two cycles, Reichert has transformed his district into a congressional money pit, a political fixer-upper in constant need of expensive repair and maintenance. That “anonymous” comment from a “senior aide” to a “prominent” House Republican…? That was meant as a warning to Reichert and the others: either get your house in order and start paying your own bills, or prepare to find yourself out on the street, sleeping under bridges with our nation’s veterans.
Really.
It seems inconceivable that the GOP would abandon a district that has never elected a Democrat, but facing a structural disadvantage that makes 2006’s Big Blue Wave look like a swim at the beach, Republicans are going to have to resort to triage.
These latest fundraising numbers, combined with a raft of Republican retirements, explain why many top Republicans are bracing for the possibility of losses in November that could stretch into double digits.
At a time when the cash-strapped National Republican Congressional Committee needs incumbents to raise as much money as possible, members who fall behind financially cannot count on receiving assistance in the crunch.
The NRCC emerged in the black this month for the first time this election cycle and had $5.5 million at the end of the year. But the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, with over $35 million on hand, still has a sixfold cash advantage.
And the GOP committee, which traditionally spends money to protect its incumbents first, also will have to spend money in many of the 28 open seats where Republican incumbents have retired or resigned.
The first group of members who may not be able to count on NRCC support are the ones who posted weak fundraising numbers for the year. In the past, the committee has funded members with notoriously weak fundraising, such as former Indiana Republican John Hostettler. But given the party’s fundraising woes, that same support is unlikely to come this cycle.
In the final weeks of the 2006 campaign the NRCC focused its dwindling resources almost exclusively on “second tier” races like WA-08, winning most of them, but in the process losing almost every single first and third tier race. Unless Reichert reverses his fortunes and manages to keep pace with Darcy Burner, WA-08 could end up being one of those first tier races the GOP abandons. That is, if Reichert doesn’t abandon the race first.
UPDATE:
Fair is fair. The Times has apparently reproduced an excerpt from the longer AP story on Reichert’s fundraising woes. It hadn’t shown up in Google News at the time I wrote this post.
Bottom line: Dave’s not worth the money to the GOP.
Buh-bye Dave.
Goldy
Has DB chosen her “team” in the Prexy race?
It will be a pleasure watching the S.S. Jean Schmidt sink as well.
2
My guess would be the Darcy Burner would be more of an Edwards/Oabama supporter, but she should feel no need to take a side. She’ll support the eventual candidate, as will we all.
The Tacoma paper ran a piece on Hairspray today. I didn’t bother to read it.
I will be caucusing on the 9th, but my brother, another Edwards supporter, will be sitting it (the caucus, that is) out this time. I will caucus for Barack Obama.
[Deleted — Darryl, see HA Comment Policy]
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/.....donations/
[Deleted — Darryl, see HA Comment Policy]
http://www.thecarpetbaggerrepo.....14476.html
[Deleted — Darryl, see HA Comment Policy]
http://www.thecarpetbaggerrepo.....more-14473
Americans have lost $4 trillion in housing wealth has been wiped out (National Association of Realtors) during Dave’s watch. What are his ideas? Does he have one?
The Republicans are totally f’ing screwed:
Glenn Greenwald’s latest is a must read.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/g.....index.html
Like I said to a certain insane right winger here:
“That right wing bullshit whiskey don’t work anymore”
I’m gonna bring back an “oldie but a goody”:
The Bush Administration…when it absolutely, POSITIVELY has to be fucked up overnight!
Daddy Love – Did you really mean to compare The Darcy to Abraham Lincoln yesterday? Tell me that just came across the wrong way. Surely you didn’t intend it that way.
In fairness to The Seattle Times, whose readers, incidentally, don’t pay state sales tax on their newspaper purchases, The Seattle Times devoted a couple of column-inches to this story in the local section of today’s or yesterday’s paper.
Forget fund raising for a minute. Are they any polls which indicate Reichert is in trouble against Darcy Burner? Or is this just speculation?
If the Obama wave continues to grwo (big if) I wonder whether the survival strategy for moderates like Reichert may be to declare themselves “New Republicans” in the same fashion as the DLC Dems of the 90s?
Imagine this scenario:
McCain Whitman vs. Obama Clark
Snegger gives the keynote at the Reprican party and announces the creation of the New Republican Party .. themes, fiscal responsibility, traditional family, America as a n immigrant society, national defence, judeo-christian charity.
Opening lines:
“I am an American. Our country was built by those who chose to commit themselves to this new way of life, a way of life rooted in the concept of opportunity.
That conflict with the old world, the fight led by General Washington, has always brought us together, native born and the immigrants who chose this way of life.
I am an American who can not be President , but I can support the candidates who stand for that tradition of choice .. John McCain and his running mate, the next vice President of the Umited States, a woman who has shown the courage to stand against our own party when it was wrong, Christie Todd Whitman.
I am an American. who knows that our New Republican Movement has deep routes in the very first moments of this country when another immigrant stood beside General Washington to bring order to this new nation. General Alexander Hamilton! Like Mr. McCain, Hamilton was a war hero. Like Governor Whitman, Alexander Hamilton served in the cabinet in difficult times. This war hero founded our system of currency and antional banks, setting the country on the course of over 200 years of opportunity for all.
Yet, this great man, could never have been president for the same reason that many new Americans, Americans by choice, can never serve in that office. Secretary Hamilton, Washington’s closest aide, was a Caribbean, born where many of todays’ new Americans were born. Like my predecessor Alexander Hamilton and many other great immigrants Einstein, Fermi, Chavez, Gompers, ,,,, I am an American, an American by choice.
I am an American by choice. Those of us who choose to be Americans, make a commitment that is almost religious. Abe Lincoln, though born an American, made the same decision by joining the then new Republican party. Hamilton, and Lincoln gave their lives for the cause they joined. They would understand all to well the commitment of our candidate, John McCain as he sat in a damp prison cell committed to his dreams for our country. Christie Whitman, faced with the refusal of her own party to understand the science of global warming, made her own choice as well.
The courage of McCain and Whitman does not diminish the heroism and good intent of President Bush or of the young American heroes fighting to defend us all in the Middle East. Rather, the special courage of our new leaders, illuminates us all and strengthens the core commitments of the GOP to a USA devoted to opportunity for all tis citizens. John’s life and amazing courage teach us all the need for straight talk and recognition of hard edged realities that must be our policy.
Our opponents are good men, but they offer fantasies rather than realities. The Iraq war was necessary, all true Americans know that. It is still necessary that we win. How do we do that? Our opponents offer only the promise of change and the vague hope that our enemies will treat out defeat gently. President McCain has seen the agony of defeat and will bring us and our allies together to prevent that fate from overshadowing America or other good people inthe future.
We, the New Republicans, say to the cowards of el Qaeda, “Warch out, America is Back!”
Our opponents talk a lot about equality, yet their candidate, Mr. Obama, is not the descendent of slaves. Where are the succesful African Americans whose ancestors were slaves? Is there a Democratic equivalent of Colin Powell, Condi Rice, Justice Thomas, or JC Watts?
We, the New Republicans, ask all working Americans to join us in creating a society of unparalleled opportunity.
“America, however, is the land of immigrants.” Look at the Democrats confusing stands on immigration. Rather than addressing the urgent need to control the border, our opponents wring their hands over how to award “Amnesty.” Look at us, I am an immigrant, Bobby Jindal of Louisiana is an immigrant, Why are WE Republicans? The answer is opportunity. The New Republicans stand not for amnesty but for closing the border now, creating a national identity card. This card will deny shady employers access to immigrants who have broken laws to get here. Shame is not a strong enough word for these employers. Under John McCain’s leadership these modern day slave masters will be shut down.
The tent of the New Republican Party is a broad one. Let me introduce my coChaor of the NRP Council, Mike Huckabee. ……….
He is joined in this effort by Dick Armey, Oly Snow, Newt Gingrich, Colin Powell, Condi Rice, Warren Buffet, Steve Balmer, ????. Lieberman, of course, declares himself a Hamiltonian. Others soon declare allegiance: JC Watts, Al Sharpton, Eddie Murphy, ………
Daddy Love @ 10
What in the hell is “housing wealth”? You could twist around your statement, and say that Dave Reichert has made housing more affordable.
Okay, I know what “housing wealth” is. But somehow I don’t feel so terribly disappointed that my house is maybe 10% less valuable than it was last year. It is still basically the same house it was 12 months ago. And basically the same value in relation to other houses, who have also depreciated.
The only people who are really upset over this are real estate agents (lower prices = lower commissions), mortgage brokers, and other non-producers.
Upton @15,
As to polling, none public. But the Burner folks seem awfully cheerful about the numbers they have.
Goldy,
My fantasies aside, a lot depends on what the Res look like next summer.
If DB is lucky, there will be chaos with Limbaugh and his Reprobate Party holding their noses while the Colorardo Springs Vatican will support McCain ONLY if Jesus makes a personal appearance if McC chooses one of them as veep.
I am very skeptical that JMcC can run his own party. There is no evidence of that sort of skill in his many years as a pol.
The ONLY way I can see the party supporting DR, is if they use this as an excuse for Clinton-like reform.
@ 16:
Seattle Jew – ain’t no republican gonna give that speech ever – so why bother postulating it?
Have you listened to the republican debates? Have they ever said anything remotely like that? Why should we believe anything the republicans say when:
1. compassionate conservatism was a lie
2. the Iraq war was based on a lie and supported by almost all republicans
3. the budget and trade deficits and the energy policy are killing our jobs and economy – and all that stuff about jobs is a lie – the republicans are solely for the corporations.
4. Even Medicare plan b was written and supported by the drug companies – a lie that it is for the seniors.
5. And the case against Iran is based on lies.
6. Abramoff was republican corruption – pure and simple – so they lied about what they would do with power.
why concoct a republican speech that goes against everything the republicans stand for (ineptness and corruption)? so what if bobby jindalis a republican – John McCain is in favor of more war and budget deficits.
what are they going to say – we lied in the past but trust us now to do the right thing?
Reichert has tied himself to bush – look to Bush’s numbers to see how Reichert will do.
RP @ 17: I’d generally agree that “housing wealth” is just a number, most of the time. People who count it as an “assett” should remember that they still need a place to live, and if they sell their house they still will have to buy or rent elsewhere. Often, that results in no net gain.
Like Bill Gates once said, the articles about him being the “richest man in the world” didn’t impress him, because its mostly just paper. If he announced he was going to sell all his shares tomorrow, the share price would drop to almost negligible numbers, not only because of the large numbers of shares he would be dumping on the market, but also because of investor’s concerns about what it might mean about the future of the company.
But that being said, it cannot be ignored that there are still winners and losers in this recent run-up of property values. The winners will be the mortgage companies, real estate agents, mortgage brokers, and flippers who got in during the run-up, and managed to get out before the crash.
The losers will be flippers who got stuck with property they cannot sale and cannot hold, the banks who financed them, some borrowers who took sub-prime loans with balloons or ARMs which will require them to refinance above the property value. Also losing will be people who need to move for unrelated reasons (job changes, etc.), but can’t sell their property for more than the underlying mortgage, neighbors who face problems caused by abandoned/foreclosed properties in their neighborhoods, and cities who will see their tax base diminished (and their ability to provide services lessened) as real estate values fall and the number of taxpayers leave.
Of those losing, I suspect the banks and other financial institutions will make out the best. Despite some recent turmoil with Countrywide, Merrill Lynch, etc., when the industry gets into real problem, they will get some relief from the federal government, when they threaten that a general collapse of the financial system will plunge the country into a deep depression. It worked in the 1980’s with the Savings & Loan crises, it’ll probably work now, too. But don’t expect the average homeowner to get much help from the federal government.
Go Doc Dobson!
Quote: “I will never support McCain.”
http://preview.tinyurl.com/3d82op
I’m lovin’ it!
goldy…wouldn’t it have been interesting if you could actually write something with some substance to it for a change instead of gloating over other people’s loses or perceived losses?
what would it have been like for you if everyone had done that when you lost your job? you spend way too much time gloating over other’s failures.and yet, aren’t you the king of failures?
how about some ideas? monday morning quarterbacking is easy to do………
Like I’ve said before, campaign money means nothing. Simply put, Dave is experienced and qualified, and Darcy whats-her-name is still the ditzy blonde in an empty suit running against George Bush in her own delusional little mind. I do know she is curious and bewildered by shiny things….
@25
Um… You must be the only person on the planet that didn’t notice Burner came within a couple of % of Knocking Hair Spray off last time.
17 RP
Or you could look up the statement from the National Association of Realtors. I didn’t make it up.
@26:
Irrelevant. She lost, and so shall she again. Totally unqualified for this seat. End of story.
25.26
Yeah, “campaign money means nothing” unless you’re only in office due to a 1.5% swing. Alternatively, “campaign money means nothing” only if you have less of it than your opponent. If the numbers were reversed, I kinda think Mark1 might have a different opinion.
28
“Qualfied”-shmalified. If she gets more votes, and she will, Dave is history, no matter what your opinion on her qualifications.
Correctnotright@16: As always you taint your commentary.
1. compassionate conservatism was a lie
[PuddyStudy] – I guess you skipped my http://www.horsesass.org/?p=4233#comment-738036 as you regurgitate that which has been previously discredited.
2. the Iraq war was based on a lie and supported by almost all republicans
[PuddyStudy] – What lie? You keep saying it makes it true? Why do you continue to use this discredited comment? We placed Heilary’s comments here in 2002. I told you about IRAN, Russia, Germany, France, Great Britian, Italy, Czech Republic, etc. who also concurred Saddam had WMD. Did you miss 60 Minutes last week with Saddam investigator FBI Agent George Piro?
3. the budget and trade deficits and the energy policy are killing our jobs and economy – and all that stuff about jobs is a lie – the republicans are solely for the corporations.
[PuddyStudy] – Oh really? I already commented on ANWR and biofuels http://www.horsesass.org/?p=4231#comment-737745. So I guess Clinton was for giving missile tracking technology to the Chinese through Bernie Schwartz and Loral Corp.? Wait a minute that really did happen… Now Chinese missles are way more accurate today. That’ll be killing us and our jobs and our economy… Who else received our missile technology from Loral? North Korea? Iran?
4. Even Medicare plan b was written and supported by the drug companies – a lie that it is for the seniors.
[PuddyStudy] – The plan costs more than $60BM a year. How are you going to pay for this senior handout by increasing it? You going to pay more from your pocket? Here’s what my AARP bulletin says http://www.aarp.org/bulletin/prescription/. R U old enough to join yet?
5. And the case against Iran is based on lies.
[PuddyStudy] – Really? The Israeli Mossad says Iran will have nuke weapon w/in three years. How about those weapons into Iraq? http://blog.wired.com/defense/.....anian.html
6. Abramoff was republican corruption – pure and simple – so they lied about what they would do with power.
[PuddyStudy] – This point is granted. I wrote so before.
@20 correctnotright says:
Seattle Jew – ain’t no republican gonna give that speech ever – so why bother postulating it?
Have you listened to the republican debates? Have they ever said anything remotely like that? Why should we believe anything the republicans say when:
You need to read some history. Bill Clinton’s great achievment was the dissection off from the body of the Dems of its left. Ron Dellums, Jane Fonda, George McGovern, etc.
were cut free by the DLC. (I supported this). John MCCain’s relationship to his party is if anything, more dramatic than Clinton’s.
Where you and I may come closer to agreeing is in the problem how the Repricans deal withe the Bush era, not all opf your points, however, ring true with me.
1. compassionate conservatism was a lie
Maybe not a lie but a delusion? More importantly BHO’s central message is very much like that of GWB. Barack preaches opportunity and reponsibility. Of course, Barack and his team are brighter and more committed to reality. Still, I think many Americans like the idea of tieing responsibility to opportunity.
Here are some divisive issues on our side:
School reform. The NEA and AFT so far have opposed Obama, his stance on teacher pay is very republican.
Merit scholarships rather than ethnic scholarships. This has been a Republican mantra. They did not mean it, but McC could stand on that.
Rational Immigration Reform. The left has let this ball fall by taking the side of 12 million illegals vs. unemployed Americans. Witht hthe primaries done, there is a real oportuniyt here for some innovative approaches that may not work for our side.
2. the Iraq war was based on a lie and supported by almost all republicans
So? A very large number of Americans still equate Hussein with bin Ladin and would b=vote for a victory over a withdrawal. I suspect that we will see bith sides offer meaty and distinct plans for the next stage of Iraq but would not bet right now that either one will wnat to look like Vietnam.
3. the budget and trade deficits and the energy policy are killing our jobs and economy – and all that stuff about jobs is a lie – the republicans are solely for the corporations.
First, a lot of the criticisms go (unfairly IMHO) toward Clinton and his push for global markets. We do need a plan, but I doubt that BHO or HRC are marxists and they will propose things that are very traditional. Big differences may we ll be in our subsidy systems.. McC has an unusually good record in opposing corporate subsidies.
Second, protectionism has never worked. What is needed is a rah rah gipper speach, we all need to sacrifice together, etc. The unions do not like such speeches.
4. Even Medicare plan b was written and supported by the drug companies – a lie that it is for the seniors.
Good talking points BUT, whoever we run, the Reps and the Dems are bioth going to come up with plans. The public will be sold by whichever plan looks best. Looks best, unfortunately, is likely to translate into media. Fortunately BHO has an unlimited funding mechanism but I suspect McC will too.
5. And the case against Iran is based on lies.
Sorry, you are wrong. The facts are these. Iran now has the capacity to build a bomb and a usable delivery system. They have not yet made the fuel for a bomb, but they have the technology to do so.
BTW .. are you aware that the Chinese Navy has opened a port on the Indian Ocean???
I suspect that the major difference between foreign policy stands of HRC/BHO vs JMcC will be on the level of bluster. BUT. JmcC has some pretty impressive cards .. including his successful negotiations with the North Vietnamese. I hear echoes of Teddy R.
6. Abramoff was republican corruption – pure and simple – so they lied about what they would do with power.
Yep. BUT Newtie showed how corruption can be twisted against the good guys too. Moreover, McC and Whitman have great records as anti-corruption folks.
If HRC is the candydate, what will she do abouit Bill’s assorted sordid business ties? He has said he will not relinquish any of them. (Another rason I am an Obama fan),
why concoct a republican speech that goes against everything the republicans stand for (ineptness and corruption)? so what if bobby jindalis a republican – John McCain is in favor of more war and budget deficits.
My purpose was to show what the dems need to do if they/we are to win. I will not vote for Rossi after his inept handling of the Clark County Fascist. BUT, like many I wait to eb conviced to vote for CG.
This was the lesson Barack was giving when he tried to teach Bill Clinton abut the importnace of leadership. Imagine someone with Reagan’s acting skills and a realsitic record, imagine that person opposing the shared betes noirs of both parties (pun intended). This election may require a lot more substance than simply blaming all Repricans for the elephant’s shit.
what are they going to say – we lied in the past but trust us now to do the right thing?
02/05/2008 at 12:05 pm
The fundraising numbers are encouraging, but I’m a bit of a worrier, at my base. Maybe it’s because of my training or my profession which causes me to anticipate and plan for things going wrong, but I spend a lot of time looking for where the other shoe will fall.
In this case, I wonder if there isn’t a move afront to keep the really big money in reserve, held by the Republican donars, to be ultimately contributed to private groups in order to fund some last-minute attack ads. Perhaps somebody with a lot more time than I have could go through the FEC filings and look for big-money contributors from the 2006 campaign, and see who hasn’t contributed yet show this year.
So far all I have found is the original quote I had read. Ezra Klein blogged this: “New data out of the National Association of Realtors suggests that, over the course of 2007, a full $4 trillion in housing wealth was wiped out.”
Still looking for original source from the assoc.
Mark1: “Simply put, Dave is experienced and qualified, and Darcy whats-her-name is still the ditzy blonde in an empty suit running against George Bush in her own delusional little mind.”
I guess by the standards of the GOP, DimDavey is “experienced and qualified.” The bar is pretty low when a guy like Davey gets to Congress. With regard to your claim that Darcy is a ditzy blonde, we see the mysogyny that lies at the heart of your party coming out. Darcy has something to offer her constuents. Davey just needs a job.
@25
If you think Reichert is qualified and Burner is ditzy, then you clearly didn’t bother to watch the debate in 2006. There was no question that Darcy kicked Reichert’s ass, except for the parts where he kicked his own ass by refusing to answer debate questions and admitting that he didn’t know anything about the topics. It was almost painful to watch. And as it’s been said of Rudy 9iui11iani, that everything he says is a noun, a verb, and “9/11” — with Reichert, he really doesn’t seem to be able to put a sentence together without a noun, a verb, and “have I told you I was a sheriff?”. You could have made a great drinking game with that during the last debate.
And @28,
I know this is a lot for you to take in all at once, but try spending just a few minutes a day learning to accept the fact that your boy Dave Reichert has to go become a lobbyist now. It’s okay. He’ll make tons of money. He’ll like that.
Darcy Burner came dangerously close to beating him in 2006, as a relative unknown with low name recognition, while the Republicans had a significant cash advantage. The money they pumped into this district to beat Darcy probably cost them 3-5 seats in other places. The national party isn’t going to make that same mistake twice. As a third-term incumbent, he’s supposed to be bringing money into the system, not sucking at the teat of the national party. They’ve even seen that bringing George Bush here made more money for Darcy than it did for Reichert. If he can’t win without pumping money into this district every two years, it wouldn’t be good fiscally conservative policy to keep giving him money every two years for the rest of his career. Now would it?
Your comments would seem to indicate that you’re in a state of denial, the first stage of the grief process. That’s natural. Unfortunately, from there you’ll need to go through anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance, but you might already be well on your way into stage two. Keep working at it, and you’ll have plenty of time to get through the whole process and be at acceptance by the time November comes around.
Bottom line, 2006 was a very close race, and this time around, Darcy’s better positioned than she was, Reichert’s weaker, and there are all sorts of external factors that work to Darcy’s advantage. Anything could happen, but we’re the ones who are excited, confident, and optimistic, while you and most Reichert supporters are the nervous ones. And if you’re not, you’re not paying attention. End of story.
I’ve been saying it since the summer of 2006; the modern day conservative movement is dead. The elections in 2006 were the final blow. The elections in 2008 will be the funeral.
May Ronald Reagan and the rest of the unpatriotic, Republicans be forever tormented in Hell.
Reichert will not retain his seat. The conservative vote will not turn out this year and independents WILL swing to the Democrats for changing course back to where President Bill Clinton was taking us. A place far, far better and more patriotic than the Bush crime family has taken us.
Grow up you pathetic conservatives. Better yet; why don’t you join your brothers in the caves of Pakistan and Afghanistan.
re 31: “…Saddam had WMD.” The operative word here is ‘had’. Saddam ‘had’ WMD’s, but they had been destroyed by weapons inspectors BEFORE Bush attacked them.
And Bush knew it. Mr. Pubbybud, you are a willing dupe. You are so full of it, you use Q-tips to wipe yourself.
Reichert favors Bush’s absurd budget, which gives nanny-state welfare to worthless defense industry corporations who can’t compete in the free market.
#20 correctnotright says:
And the leading democrats supported the war.
http://www.freedomagenda.com/iraq/wmd_quotes.html
Just because you refuse to acknowledge the truth doesn’t make it go away.
So tell us, why did the democrats lie?
re 40 ; They didn’t lie. They went along with a lie that was being propounded by the Bush administration. The Democrats were victims of the lie, and Republicans were the perpetrators.
re 40: You always challenge Democrats to come up with a better solution.
The solution is to kick your sorry Republican asses out of office and forever crush and discredit your party.
re 40: I don’t try to reason with rattlesnakes, Marvin. I exterminate them.
@41 Then perhaps those particular dims are too stupid and/or gullible to be in office, eh?
Creighton Headless Lucy Baril: What part of my WMD discussion don’t you understand? These countries did their own DD on WMD.
But for your simple mind, even Russia was fooled and they were best buds headless.
Bush lied, soldiers died.
WE like to believe that the Commander in Chief doesn’t lie or cherry pick intel when our represenatives are about to vote on wheter we should be sending our soldiers overseas to die for a just cause. When the C in C lies it makes it an unjust cause. .
Based on BUSH’s words, like YELLOW CAKE URANIUM crap. The Dem’s believed his words and voted to authorize the use of force.
It’s a shame that so many people died because Bush lied.
PS: read his words in 1999 when he said if he were elected president he’d use the invasion of Iraq to push through his domestic polices like changing Social Security.
Mad Lib: Did you read the 9/11 Commission Report? They have a different take on the Yellow Cake that Saddam was trying to get some.
Puddy covered this on this site before.