Oct 14 2006

Reminder To The Voters: Democrat Senate Took On Iraq

Published by at 9:01 am under All General Discussions,Iraq

Someone posted an interesting reminder for America to ponder this year. And that is the Iraq war was authorized under the auspices of a Democrat controlled Congress. The Democrat party was leading all the committees and held the gavel, and are the ones who actually authorized the Iraqi invasion.

In a major victory for the White House, the Senate early Friday voted 77-23 to authorize President Bush to attack Iraq if Saddam Hussein refuses to give up weapons of mass destruction as required by U.N. resolutions.

Hours earlier, the House approved an identical resolution, 296-133.


That was on October 11th, 2002. Before the elections and a clear signal to America (because it was before the elections) of where the Democrats stood on the issue. In fact, the Democrats were more ready to go to war with Iraq in 2002 than they were to free Kuwait and drive Saddam away from Saudi Arabia in the first golf war!

The measure passed the Senate and House by wider margins than the 1991 resolution that empowered the current president’s father to go to war to expel Iraq from Kuwait. That measure passed 250-183 in the House and 52-47 in the Senate.

So the party that wants to run away and leave Iraq to Al Qaeda to exploit and begin building up forces to attack Europe and America is the one that also got us into Iraq, by massive margins? President Bush believes in what he is doing and a lot progress has been made to reach his goals. And every election year the terrorists try to spook us with increased attacks, so the violence is all about what is happening here, not in Iraq. But while the President is firm and confident, the Democrats are confused and regretting their mistakes. Maybe it is just a mistake to put confidence in a party that votes to maximize their election chances as opposed to considering what they are voting on?

26 responses so far

26 Responses to “Reminder To The Voters: Democrat Senate Took On Iraq”

  1. Snapple says:

    Clarification–Wolf, McKinney, Churchill, etc are giving fabricated information to the UN. not http://www.pirateballerina.com
    They pointed all of these connections out.

  2. Ken says:

    Strata , if you’re going to encourage all the pseudo-revisionist
    kookery on the WMDs which Snapple and Limerick love but which their dear leader hasn’t gone –and wouldn’t go –near, you might as well spring an invite to the 9/11 conspiracy kooks who say Bush planned it . They’re of equal respectability.

    AIM? Besides being a miniscule group with no hope of growth,
    which constituted less threat to America than a Latino prison
    gang, bygones were bygones as afterward the US helped Saddam against Iran, even providing him anthrax samples. And most on
    this site tactily approved of US Mideast intervention against Iran at the time.

    Not we America Firsters.

    Terrye , Chalmers Johnson blamed 9/11 on blowback, the name of his first book, on US broad intervention in the Middle East for the
    previous several decades. Your comment about Clinton and
    Daschle doesn’t apply to me-I have already denounced what I called, accurately the “Democratic Party hierarchy” for selling out its base
    on giving Bush permission to attack Iraq.

    For Enforcement-YOU should be sqealing at all the US losses in
    a no-win war which you support to this day. And there is no
    “surprise” at all that as long as America is equated with Israeli aggression, as in Lebanon recently and oppression of the Palestinians,
    there will be continued financing from all corners of the Moslem world of militant actions to punish it.

    Limerick, you tacitly sanction pre-emptive attacks as a proper
    reaction to 9/11. You got a big one and a morass from which
    America will extricate itself only after significant chastening.

  3. For Enforcement says:

    Ken, I know you are a stickler for details, therefore you well know that I have never said I support the war.
    Progressives, formerly known as flower children and love generation, and prior to that, communists. People like Ken, who even now claim to be America firsters. The only thing Ken puts America first in is his hateful thoughts. The love generation fell apart because of their “lack” of love for America, in fact their hatred of America.
    No real American feels as if America has to be ‘chastened’ contrary to Ken hateful diatribes, America is a force for good in the world. No country has ever been the cause of people being able to live free as much as America. We have nothing to apologize for. Stay in France Ken. They are surrenderers, just your type.

  4. Limerick says:

    Ken it warms my heart to think that when the west wakes up, and the war does come, it will be people like you who will be the target of BOTH sides. You can dream your little dream that America is finished. The west is weak, for now. The west is confused, for now. But if you think that you can’t wake the giant you are more delusional then I think. Even your precious France will wake up Ken. Maybe not tomorrow, maybe not next year, but sooner or later even a Frenchman will figure out which way to point a gun.

  5. Ken says:

    America is not the West, Limerick. French destiny is not American destiny, they do not have to follow our policy regards even mutual threats. This is why the anti-immigrant leader LePen also opposes
    US policy toward Iraq, and the Middle East in general.

    For Enforcement, if you do not support the Iraq War, you are even more superciliously out of line than if you do support it. Your “viable” beef with France is its refusal to support the US invasion of Iraq. If you don’t support it either, you are merely gratutiously attacking France to mostly utter foolish things
    using a red herring.

  6. Limerick says:

    Hey Enforcement!…….Do you smell fish?