Bush says Dems don't have a plan for Iraq or America

[Knotbad]

We beg to differ...
Plan
If there's one thing you can count on right along with death and taxes, it's that every day between now and November 7 -- and probably multiple times a day -- George W. Bush will grab a microphone before a large crowd and lie about the lack of ideas coming from Democrats on national security.
Here's Bush just today in Missouri: "If you listen carefully to what the Democrats say about Iraq, you think about what they're saying about their plan for success, there isn't one. This is a major political party that has no plan for success in Iraq."
But unlike some of the half-truths and distortions that come out of the White House and the Republican National Committee, where the sheer slipperiness of them makes getting the truth out kind of a dicey proposition, this one is as easy and clear-cut as it can be.
It was just two months ago that Democrats rolled out the Real Security Act of 2006, a plan whose legislative description left no doubt that Democrats had a plan, saying that it was designed "to provide real national security, restore United States leadership, and implement tough and smart policies to win the war on terror."
"The Real Security Act of 2006 marks a major change from status quo Bush Republican policies that have left America less safe than it must be," said Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) in introducing the plan. "Unveiled against the backdrop of a new White House media offensive, the legislation spells out the tough and smart path to make America more secure and to deal more effectively with threats that confront America at home and abroad."
These days, you would never know that such a plan exists for two reasons. The first it that it was killed by the Senate GOP leadership on September 13, 2006 on a roll-call vote that went almost straight down party lines. The same Republicans who killed the Democratic plan now walk around saying the Democrats have no plan.
The second reason that the Democratic strategy is so hard to find is that the corporate media continues to let the no-plan nonsense go unchallenged because, I suppose, it would be too much like real work to read the 528-page piece of security legislation that the Democrats tried to pass.
The key points of the Real Security Act of 2006 include the following:
* Begin a new era of sensibly dealing with the quagmire that is the U.S.'s occupation of Iraq. Democrats would begin redeployment of U.S. troops out of Iraq to face terrorist threats around the world, including the new countries hosting Al-Qaeda since the Iraq war began. It also provides for real Congressional oversight to avoid further big-money losses to crooked defense contractors, accustomed to no-bid contracts and a tolerance for fraud and abuse.
* Refocus America on the real war on terror by making sure the U.S. continues to pursue Osama bin Laden and bring him to justice and increase levels of Special Operations forces to kill and capture the terrorists where they are and to better protect Americans at home.
* Provide updated tools, consistent with true American values, so we can bring terrorists to justice, while also following the law and the Constitution and work to revise the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act as needed to ensure intelligence agencies have the tools needed to defeat the terrorists.
* Implement all 41 recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, including providing adequate resources for first responders, distributing homeland security funding based on risk, improving intelligence oversight, bolstering Congressional oversight of homeland security, strengthening public diplomacy and improving tracking of nuclear weapons material.
* Equip the intelligence community to fight against terrorists by passing the Intelligence authorization bill, giving the CIA the resources to conduct aggressive and effective intelligence gathering. For the first time in 28 years, the Republican-controlled Congress has failed to pass the bill providing these desperately-needed resources.
* Invest additional money to secure America's ports, rails, roads, airports, chemical and nuclear plants and mass transit systems by improving and increasing screenings and increasing security of containers and radiation screenings.
The first time you've heard about this stuff? I thought so. But the facts and the Congressional Record don't lie.
You can get the entire text of the Real Security Act of 2006 here -- but be warned, it's a 1.1 megabyte PDF file of ideas Democrats allegedly don’t have -- and you can see the video of Harry Reid describing the plan here.
So if you've always sensed that Bush, Cheney and the Republicans were lying about the Democratic stance on national security, here's your proof -- please spread it around.
posted by Bob Geiger at 11/03/2006 03:44:00 PM

[QuickJet]

You are so blind. Where in all of that does it give a plan for Iraq? All it says is re-deploy troops from Iraq to other areas around the world. So basically ditch the responsabilities in Iraq. They've been saying that all along. Nothing new.
The dems have no plan and never have. All they have are critisisms.
Where in that BS did it say anything about our boarders? How can one protect our homeland while at the same time professing allegiance to those who want open boarders. The dems are weak on all the issues. If the Dems had 1/2 the nuts they talk about, someone might actually believe the BS they spew. Funny how they have fooled you though. Typical

[3 daytona`s]

We beg to differ...
Plan
If there's one thing you can count on right along with death and taxes, it's that every day between now and November 7 -- and probably multiple times a day -- George W. Bush will grab a microphone before a large crowd and lie about the lack of ideas coming from Democrats on national security.
Here's Bush just today in Missouri: "If you listen carefully to what the Democrats say about Iraq, you think about what they're saying about their plan for success, there isn't one. This is a major political party that has no plan for success in Iraq."
But unlike some of the half-truths and distortions that come out of the White House and the Republican National Committee, where the sheer slipperiness of them makes getting the truth out kind of a dicey proposition, this one is as easy and clear-cut as it can be.
It was just two months ago that Democrats rolled out the Real Security Act of 2006, a plan whose legislative description left no doubt that Democrats had a plan, saying that it was designed "to provide real national security, restore United States leadership, and implement tough and smart policies to win the war on terror."
"The Real Security Act of 2006 marks a major change from status quo Bush Republican policies that have left America less safe than it must be," said Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) in introducing the plan. "Unveiled against the backdrop of a new White House media offensive, the legislation spells out the tough and smart path to make America more secure and to deal more effectively with threats that confront America at home and abroad."
These days, you would never know that such a plan exists for two reasons. The first it that it was killed by the Senate GOP leadership on September 13, 2006 on a roll-call vote that went almost straight down party lines. The same Republicans who killed the Democratic plan now walk around saying the Democrats have no plan.
The second reason that the Democratic strategy is so hard to find is that the corporate media continues to let the no-plan nonsense go unchallenged because, I suppose, it would be too much like real work to read the 528-page piece of security legislation that the Democrats tried to pass.
The key points of the Real Security Act of 2006 include the following:
* Begin a new era of sensibly dealing with the quagmire that is the U.S.'s occupation of Iraq. Democrats would begin redeployment of U.S. troops out of Iraq to face terrorist threats around the world, including the new countries hosting Al-Qaeda since the Iraq war began. It also provides for real Congressional oversight to avoid further big-money losses to crooked defense contractors, accustomed to no-bid contracts and a tolerance for fraud and abuse.
* Refocus America on the real war on terror by making sure the U.S. continues to pursue Osama bin Laden and bring him to justice and increase levels of Special Operations forces to kill and capture the terrorists where they are and to better protect Americans at home.
* Provide updated tools, consistent with true American values, so we can bring terrorists to justice, while also following the law and the Constitution and work to revise the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act as needed to ensure intelligence agencies have the tools needed to defeat the terrorists.
* Implement all 41 recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, including providing adequate resources for first responders, distributing homeland security funding based on risk, improving intelligence oversight, bolstering Congressional oversight of homeland security, strengthening public diplomacy and improving tracking of nuclear weapons material.
* Equip the intelligence community to fight against terrorists by passing the Intelligence authorization bill, giving the CIA the resources to conduct aggressive and effective intelligence gathering. For the first time in 28 years, the Republican-controlled Congress has failed to pass the bill providing these desperately-needed resources.
* Invest additional money to secure America's ports, rails, roads, airports, chemical and nuclear plants and mass transit systems by improving and increasing screenings and increasing security of containers and radiation screenings.
The first time you've heard about this stuff? I thought so. But the facts and the Congressional Record don't lie.
You can get the entire text of the Real Security Act of 2006 here -- but be warned, it's a 1.1 megabyte PDF file of ideas Democrats allegedly don’t have -- and you can see the video of Harry Reid describing the plan here.
So if you've always sensed that Bush, Cheney and the Republicans were lying about the Democratic stance on national security, here's your proof -- please spread it around.
posted by Bob Geiger at 11/03/2006 03:44:00 PM
You are going to get responses on this------- WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[QuickJet]

We beg to differ...
* Equip the intelligence community to fight against terrorists by passing the Intelligence authorization bill, giving the CIA the resources to conduct aggressive and effective intelligence gathering. For the first time in 28 years, the Republican-controlled Congress has failed to pass the bill providing these desperately-needed resources.
Ha ha ha, What resources????
Dems have been steadfast AGAINST intelligence gathering since the begining. They don't even want our CIA to listen in on phone calls (a major source of information gathering) What makes anyone think they really care what the hell is going on.

[Old Texan]

I'm beginning to get the feeling we have found where John Kerry is hiding from the press. Upstairs in MaMa Knotheads attic pounding on his keyboard. This guy sounds just like Purple Heart John.
By the way did Kerry get another purple heart for shooting himself in the foot this past week?

[bigq]

The key points of the Real Security Act of 2006 include the following:
* Begin a new era of sensibly dealing with the quagmire that is the U.S.'s occupation of Iraq. Democrats would begin redeployment of U.S. troops out of Iraq to face terrorist threats around the world, including the new countries hosting Al-Qaeda since the Iraq war began. It also provides for real Congressional oversight to avoid further big-money losses to crooked defense contractors, accustomed to no-bid contracts and a tolerance for fraud and abuse.
You mean like they did all through the 90's with the failures then ?
* Refocus America on the real war on terror by making sure the U.S. continues to pursue Osama bin Laden and bring him to justice and increase levels of Special Operations forces to kill and capture the terrorists where they are and to better protect Americans at home.
Yea I am sure we are not looking for him now

* Provide updated tools, consistent with true American values, so we can bring terrorists to justice, while also following the law and the Constitution and work to revise the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act as needed to ensure intelligence agencies have the tools needed to defeat the terrorists.
hahaha
* Implement all 41 recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, including providing adequate resources for first responders, distributing homeland security funding based on risk, improving intelligence oversight, bolstering Congressional oversight of homeland security, strengthening public diplomacy and improving tracking of nuclear weapons material.
Ok I'll give them that one. IF! it really is based on risk. the money they pass out now is just another handout, it's a joke and does not go to the cities at risk.
* Equip the intelligence community to fight against terrorists by passing the Intelligence authorization bill, giving the CIA the resources to conduct aggressive and effective intelligence gathering. For the first time in 28 years, the Republican-controlled Congress has failed to pass the bill providing these desperately-needed resources.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
* Invest additional money to secure America's ports, rails, roads, airports, chemical and nuclear plants and mass transit systems by improving and increasing screenings and increasing security of containers and radiation screenings.
hmmm, no boarder control at all, just like Bush! Maybe worse if we can not put pressure them which is the only reason Bush sighned the boarder fence bill, not that he wanted to

[OGShocker]

We beg to differ...
Plan
If there's one thing you can count on right along with death and taxes, it's that every day between now and November 7 -- and probably multiple times a day -- George W. Bush will grab a microphone before a large crowd and lie about the lack of ideas coming from Democrats on national security.
I did not hear the lies you were hoping for.
Here's Bush just today in Missouri: "If you listen carefully to what the Democrats say about Iraq, you think about what they're saying about their plan for success, there isn't one. This is a major political party that has no plan for success in Iraq."
I do not believe they have a "success" plan. We shall see over the coming months.
But unlike some of the half-truths and distortions that come out of the White House and the Republican National Committee, where the sheer slipperiness of them makes getting the truth out kind of a dicey proposition, this one is as easy and clear-cut as it can be.
"hmmm, easy?"
It was just two months ago that Democrats rolled out the Real Security Act of 2006, a plan whose legislative description left no doubt that Democrats had a plan, saying that it was designed "to provide real national security, restore United States leadership, and implement tough and smart policies to win the war on terror."
"The Real Security Act of 2006 marks a major change from status quo Bush Republican policies that have left America less safe than it must be," said Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) in introducing the plan. "Unveiled against the backdrop of a new White House media offensive, the legislation spells out the tough and smart path to make America more secure and to deal more effectively with threats that confront America at home and abroad."
Harry's plan is a simple C&R plan. If the government of Iraq does not perform to the time line laid out by Harry and his party, they will start pulling troops out of the region. This threat is flawed! We need to tell the Iraqi leaders if they do not stop the bloodshed and push to end the violence by the first quarter of 2007, we will. We need to inform the leaders a sizable percentage of the Shia population would be in danger from the carnage we would unleash upon those people bent on killing U.S. soldiers. We should show them that WAR is hell. We do not need to leave the region at a time of instability
These days, you would never know that such a plan exists for two reasons. The first it that it was killed by the Senate GOP leadership on September 13, 2006 on a roll-call vote that went almost straight down party lines. The same Republicans who killed the Democratic plan now walk around saying the Democrats have no plan.
The Republicans "killed" a flawed bill put up by the other party to point out perceived differences between the two parties.
The second reason that the Democratic strategy is so hard to find is that the corporate media continues to let the no-plan nonsense go unchallenged because, I suppose, it would be too much like real work to read the 528-page piece of security legislation that the Democrats tried to pass.
corporate media???
The key points of the Real Security Act of 2006 include the following:
* Begin a new era of sensibly dealing with the quagmire that is the U.S.'s occupation of Iraq. Democrats would begin redeployment of U.S. troops out of Iraq to face terrorist threats around the world, including the new countries hosting Al-Qaeda since the Iraq war began. **It also provides for real Congressional oversight to avoid further big-money losses to crooked defense contractors, accustomed to no-bid contracts and a tolerance for fraud and abuse.
Cut and RUN!
**KBR/Halliburton hearings will be a great way to start an era of the bipartisanship Rep. Nancy Pelosi spoke of last night. No one can hold a candle to US politicians when it comes to being "crooked" regardless of party.
* Refocus America on the real war on terror by making sure the U.S. continues to pursue Osama bin Laden and bring him to justice and increase levels of Special Operations forces to kill and capture the terrorists where they are and to better protect Americans at home.
Should we invade a sovereign nation to hunt down UBL and his buddies regardless of which Nation? It was the Democrat party who gutted our intelligence and Spec Ops communities, under then President Clinton. It was he who took a "law and order" approach to terrorists worldwide.
* Provide updated tools, consistent with true American values, so we can bring terrorists to justice, while also following the law and the Constitution and work to revise the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act as needed to ensure intelligence agencies have the tools needed to defeat the terrorists.
It was the Democrat party which fought the Patriot Act, Gitmo, wire taps and so many of the tools which have kept us safe at home. You now tell us Sen. Harry Reid (D) who bragged how HE killed the Patriot Act, wants to give the "tools" to stop terror?
* Implement all 41 recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, including providing adequate resources for first responders, distributing homeland security funding based on risk, improving intelligence oversight, bolstering Congressional oversight of homeland security, strengthening public diplomacy and improving tracking of nuclear weapons material.
Are these the same recommendations they fought tooth and nail? eg. the formation of The Department of Homeland Security?
* Equip the intelligence community to fight against terrorists by passing the Intelligence authorization bill, giving the CIA the resources to conduct aggressive and effective intelligence gathering. For the first time in 28 years, the Republican-controlled Congress has failed to pass the bill providing these desperately-needed resources.
I think I addressed this above.
* Invest additional money to secure America's ports, rails, roads, airports, chemical and nuclear plants and mass transit systems by improving and increasing screenings and increasing security of containers and radiation screenings.
This nation move freely and our economy is strong. Placing more security on system which are, by most standards, already quite secure would be window dressing at best.
The first time you've heard about this stuff? I thought so. But the facts and the Congressional Record don't lie.
You can get the entire text of the Real Security Act of 2006 here -- but be warned, it's a 1.1 megabyte PDF file of ideas Democrats allegedly don’t have -- and you can see the video of Harry Reid describing the plan here.
So if you've always sensed that Bush, Cheney and the Republicans were lying about the Democratic stance on national security, here's your proof -- please spread it around.
Civil discourse is tough at times but, I think you could at least address your President and Vice-President by their titles
posted by Bob Geiger at 11/03/2006 03:44:00 PM
The ball is now in the "court" of the Democrat party. We will see how well they play with it and others.
Good luck and may God bless our great Nation.

[eliminatedsprinter]

We beg to differ...
Plan
If there's one thing you can count on right along with death and taxes, it's that every day between now and November 7 -- and probably multiple times a day -- George W. Bush will grab a microphone before a large crowd and lie about the lack of ideas coming from Democrats on national security.
Here's Bush just today in Missouri: "If you listen carefully to what the Democrats say about Iraq, you think about what they're saying about their plan for success, there isn't one. This is a major political party that has no plan for success in Iraq."
But unlike some of the half-truths and distortions that come out of the White House and the Republican National Committee, where the sheer slipperiness of them makes getting the truth out kind of a dicey proposition, this one is as easy and clear-cut as it can be.
It was just two months ago that Democrats rolled out the Real Security Act of 2006, a plan whose legislative description left no doubt that Democrats had a plan, saying that it was designed "to provide real national security, restore United States leadership, and implement tough and smart policies to win the war on terror."
"The Real Security Act of 2006 marks a major change from status quo Bush Republican policies that have left America less safe than it must be," said Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) in introducing the plan. "Unveiled against the backdrop of a new White House media offensive, the legislation spells out the tough and smart path to make America more secure and to deal more effectively with threats that confront America at home and abroad."
These days, you would never know that such a plan exists for two reasons. The first it that it was killed by the Senate GOP leadership on September 13, 2006 on a roll-call vote that went almost straight down party lines. The same Republicans who killed the Democratic plan now walk around saying the Democrats have no plan.
The second reason that the Democratic strategy is so hard to find is that the corporate media continues to let the no-plan nonsense go unchallenged because, I suppose, it would be too much like real work to read the 528-page piece of security legislation that the Democrats tried to pass.
The key points of the Real Security Act of 2006 include the following:
* Begin a new era of sensibly dealing with the quagmire that is the U.S.'s occupation of Iraq. Democrats would begin redeployment of U.S. troops out of Iraq to face terrorist threats around the world, including the new countries hosting Al-Qaeda since the Iraq war began. It also provides for real Congressional oversight to avoid further big-money losses to crooked defense contractors, accustomed to no-bid contracts and a tolerance for fraud and abuse.
* Refocus America on the real war on terror by making sure the U.S. continues to pursue Osama bin Laden and bring him to justice and increase levels of Special Operations forces to kill and capture the terrorists where they are and to better protect Americans at home.
* Provide updated tools, consistent with true American values, so we can bring terrorists to justice, while also following the law and the Constitution and work to revise the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act as needed to ensure intelligence agencies have the tools needed to defeat the terrorists.
* Implement all 41 recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, including providing adequate resources for first responders, distributing homeland security funding based on risk, improving intelligence oversight, bolstering Congressional oversight of homeland security, strengthening public diplomacy and improving tracking of nuclear weapons material.
* Equip the intelligence community to fight against terrorists by passing the Intelligence authorization bill, giving the CIA the resources to conduct aggressive and effective intelligence gathering. For the first time in 28 years, the Republican-controlled Congress has failed to pass the bill providing these desperately-needed resources.
* Invest additional money to secure America's ports, rails, roads, airports, chemical and nuclear plants and mass transit systems by improving and increasing screenings and increasing security of containers and radiation screenings.
The first time you've heard about this stuff? I thought so. But the facts and the Congressional Record don't lie.
You can get the entire text of the Real Security Act of 2006 here -- but be warned, it's a 1.1 megabyte PDF file of ideas Democrats allegedly don’t have -- and you can see the video of Harry Reid describing the plan here.
So if you've always sensed that Bush, Cheney and the Republicans were lying about the Democratic stance on national security, here's your proof -- please spread it around.
posted by Bob Geiger at 11/03/2006 03:44:00 PM
This "plan" is nothing but a bunch of empty reitoric. It's like a Senator Joe Biden speech, in that it uses way too many words to say nothing of any substance.

[centerhill condor]

This "plan" is nothing but a bunch of empty reitoric. It's like a Senator Joe Biden speech, in that it uses way too many words to say nothing of any substance.
and the voters love it! what to do?
Best news is now that the dems are in charge we'll never do anything wrong!

[SmokinLowriderSS]

Well, I guess we get to see their plan in action now, hold on to your arse, and don't expect them to bring the vaseline.
Hey Knotbad, who are you going to blame when the next tax increase trenches the economy in again?