« New Carnival of the Bush Bloggers | Home | Pictures Are Worth A Thousand Words… »
I’ve Lived 24 Years in Massachusetts And All I Got is Two Lousy Senators
By Matt Margolis | April 5, 2004
My other Senator Ted Kennedy, would do himself good to keep his mouth on the bottle of Chivas rather than open his fat trap:
“The administration’s only economic policy is more and more tax cuts for the wealthy. What [President Bush] doesn’t mention is larger and larger budget deficits, the largest in our history, mind-boggling budget deficits that make Democrats look like budget balancers,” Kennedy, D-Mass., told an audience at the Brookings Institution
You could laugh yourself off a bridge after hearing Kennedy mumble those words… His own brother cut taxes for “the wealthy,” - why don’t we hear him talk about that?
ocusing on an array of domestic issues that Kennedy said will add to the deficit, the senior senator from Massachusetts blasted the administration for misleading the public by cutting unemployment benefits and failing to pay for the No Child Left Behind education overhaul.
Blah, blah, blah… Every time I hear that NCLB was “underfunded” it just gets more and more ridiculous… Whomever started that meme must think they’re hot stuff today, because Ted Kennedy, who Bush reached out to when crafting NCLB has been drinking that myth down faster than his Chivas.
“This president has now created the largest credibility gap since Richard Nixon. He has broken the basic bond of trust with the American people. He’s the problem, not the solution. Iraq is George Bush’s Vietnam, and this country needs a new president,” he said.
Democrats plan to hammer away for the next seven months on the president’s so-called “credibility gap” but a new poll indicates that voters have more doubts about Kerry comments. [emphasis added]
Ha! So much for Bush’s credibility gap… Looks like Kerry has some issues to work out on his real credibility gap. Bush’s credibility is doing just fine. His tax cuts fixed the economy. He got NCLB passed, funded, and it’s working.
I have to say, between John Kerry and Ted Kennedy, I just have a couple of lousy Senators.
Topics: Liberal Idiots |
Related Posts:
April 5th, 2004 at 11:12 pm
http://www.kaicurry.com/gwbush/remindus.swf
April 5th, 2004 at 11:21 pm
wow, did you link to that all by yourself?
I guess all the democrats who were up into 2002 telling us saddam had WMD were all in the big lie too huh? oh yes, Mr. Kerry too. Oh yeah, Tom Daschle, Bill Clinton, Madeleine Albright, Ted Kennedy…
they were telling us about saddam’s WMDs and lack of disarmning well before Bush was elected President..
my oh my how things change because of partisam politics.
April 6th, 2004 at 1:05 am
NCLB is currently underfunded by about 10 million bucks. It’ll end up in your local property taxes eventually. But let’s just ignore the truth, Matty. It’s an awfully partisan thing.
April 6th, 2004 at 9:59 am
Dale, do you have a link to back up your assertion?
April 6th, 2004 at 11:55 am
unfortunately you’re lying. Here’s a poll you won’t like. http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/news/enhancedstory.jsp?floc=NW_1-T&oldflok=FF-APO-PLS&idq=/ff/story/0001/20040405/1647403989.htm&photoidbush200.jpg
“I guess all the democrats who were up into 2002 telling us saddam had WMD were all in the big lie too huh?”
If you weren’t so bias you’d realize that the reason those Democrats said Iraq had WMD was because Bush and Co. kept telling them so. Remeber Bush’s secret briefing to the House? The time when he said Iraq had drones (lmao) that could reach the shores of the US and use WMD on them? So whine and bitch about the Dems, but their thoughts were influenced by the guy they were silly to have trusted.
April 6th, 2004 at 2:46 pm
Todd, they were saying there was WMD during the 1990 up into 2002..
keep in mind, Bush took office in 2001.
April 6th, 2004 at 3:34 pm
http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/news/politics/8364427.htm
It was a mouthwatering menu. Not that you’d expect less for $2,000 a plate.
Seered beef tenderloins with golden tomatoes on an herb-encrusted baguette. Grilled garlic chicken with smoked gouda on a honey wheat wrap. Fruits and gourmet olives and crudite. A gourmet luncheon with only one thing missing: something to eat it with.
The explanation was at the bottom of the menus distributed at President Bush’s $1.5 million Charlotte fund-raiser Monday.
“At the request of the White House, silverware will not accompany the table settings,” it said in discreetly fine print.
No silver. No plastic.
The lack of utensils might have been why many plates went virtually untouched.
The reason: So the tinkle of silver wouldn’t disrupt the president’s speech.
-Bush/Cheney in Two Thousand Fork
April 6th, 2004 at 4:26 pm
sure they said Iraq had WMD. They could say that because it was known the US gave Iraq their WMD. But it wasn’t until Mr. Bush took office that the idea of Iraq using banned weapons against them took root. Clinton/Democrats were never saying Iraq had drones and were poised to strike from off American shores. It’ was the Bush Admin. that sais all that. That’s undeniable.
April 6th, 2004 at 10:26 pm
All I Got is Two Lousy Senators
My condolences, Matt.
I heard Aaron and your interview on the audio clip- you don’t sound like you have Massachusetts accent. (unlike Chappaquidick Ted)
April 7th, 2004 at 8:20 am
Sorry Todd, you’re wrong. Clinton and Co. back in the 90’s insisted that Saddam had WMDs also. As far as the U.S. giving Iraq WMDs, please provide proof. Meanwhile, have some more Kool-Aid.
Cole, you’re right! I mean Clinton committing perjury and violating his oath of office was one thing, but Bush not providing silverware at a fundraiser? My Gaia! Now that’s a scandal! I demand impeachment hearings! Let no baguette go unturned! NO SILVERWARE FOR BEEF TENDERLOIN!
April 7th, 2004 at 11:17 am
umm matt? are you serious? you didn’t know the US gave Iraq the WMD during the war against Iran? Man I hope you’re not homeschooling your kids. They’ll never learn anything real. my little guy says “america” is a bad word.
April 7th, 2004 at 12:09 pm
I love it..
“There were no WMD in Iraq… But the United States gave them WMD.”
you people never cease to amaze me.
April 7th, 2004 at 1:07 pm
“you don’t sound like you have Massachusetts accent.”
It’s because they grew up in an all white affluent New England town. Of course that has nothing to do with them being republican though.
April 7th, 2004 at 4:18 pm
>>There were no WMD in Iraq… But the United States gave them WMD.” ..you people never cease to amaze me.
Matt, you are being intellectually dishonest here. You know that Saddam did have WMDs in the 80’s. 1) The U.S. provided the ingredients, and 2) you guys have said about a kajillion times “he used them on his own people.” Never mind the fact it happened during the first Bush administration and nobody did a damn thing.
Secondly, there are no WMD’s. You’re main man David Kay has said it. In fact, he’s on record now saying that he knew they didn’t have WMD’s shortly after he started his work but was pressed to keep looking for fear that “it would look like we didn’t know what we we’re doing.”
And furthermore, we now know that between inspections and Clinton air strikes Saddam’s WMDs were destroyed.
So yes Virgina, the United States gave Saddam WMDs, but in 2003 there weren’t any WMDs in Iraq. It’s not that complicated.
And by the way, if you disagree with that sentiment and still think that we will find some weapons, you are more foolish than I thought.
April 7th, 2004 at 10:41 pm
my little guy says “america” is a bad word
Wow! It sounds like you’re really happy he’s been inculcated with that. What a turd.
April 8th, 2004 at 8:55 am
Cole makes lots of assertions but never provides links to back them up. Of course, he being a rabid Bush-hater, we should just take “his word” for it. Never mind that his “facts” are twisted like pretzels to make them fit his “world view”.
Note that everyone thought there was WMDs of some kind, somewhere in Iraq before the war. It wasn’t until after the war that the democrats changed their tune to make political hay. Why else would Saddam play his games? He chose to be invaded and overthrown rather than provide proof of, or even admit to, the destruction of his WMDs. Yep, that makes sense. I guess he was tired of ruling Iraq and wanted a vacation.
April 8th, 2004 at 12:19 pm
Ok jackass- what facts do you disagree with?
And another thing…citations are not required for information that is COMMON KNOWLEDGE. (never mind that this is the comments section on a blog.)
“Cole says that at night it gets dark outside. OOOHHHH, where are his citations. That’s a broad assertion!!”
And where are YOUR citations, Bubba? Typical right winger… attack the messenger instead of the message.
April 8th, 2004 at 12:30 pm
Cole has been exhausting the “attack the messenger instead of the message” cliche sicne he’s been visiting here. Nevertheless he fails to back up his claims and merely suggests they are “common knowledge”
Yeah, like that’s going to take him far.
April 8th, 2004 at 1:17 pm
What facts do you disagree with Mr. Secretary? Its a simple question… yet both you and elephant have taken a pass. Sort of like Condi.
It is COMMON KNOWLEDGE that Iraq had WMD’s that we gave them in the 80’s.
It is COMMON KNOWLEDGE that Iraq does not have them today.
April 8th, 2004 at 5:55 pm
http://www.beaconschool.org/~clehmann/MT/archives/001766.php
Go read it. I dare you. Then start criticizing Kos some more.
April 8th, 2004 at 6:33 pm
Amazing “There were no WMDS! They didn’t have them… BUT… We gave them to them!”
So sad. pick one Cole “John Kerry” Whitaker.
April 8th, 2004 at 6:43 pm
Look at Matt obfuscate. He can’t bring himself to admit what everone knows, thanks to his main man David Kay. Saddam had WMDs that we gave him in the 80’s. UN INSPECTIONS AND AIR STRIKES DURING THE CLINTON ADMINSTRATION DESTROYED THEM ALL. Therefore in 2003, Saddam did not have any more WMDs.
Matt W. Bush - not the sharpest tool in the shed, but capable of non-sensical repetition.
April 8th, 2004 at 8:10 pm
Yeah Cole, they were all destroyed… that’s why Saddam wouldn’t give the inspectors the access they required. That’s why mulitiple intelligence sources from different countries said they had them. That’s why the Kay report showed that programs were in place during inspections..
You have too much faith in clinton’s blind bombings. even democrats didn’t have faith in them, that’s why up until 2002, they were all saying Saddam had WMDs.
take a seat Cole.
April 8th, 2004 at 8:41 pm
BWAHAHAHAHA! Looks like I got Cole to throw a temper tantrum. What’s the matter little boy, did the mean ol’ Elephant Man hurt your feelings? Does the little boy want a lollipop?
It’s common knowledge that Cole will make dubious claims and not provide proof.
It’s common knowledge that if Cole does manage to post a link, it either has nothing to do with the subject, or it shoots down his own arguement.
and he calls me “jackass”
April 8th, 2004 at 10:27 pm
Matt- if they weren’t destroyed where are they, buddy? Its a simple question. No answer? Nothing? Why don’t you keep that seat warm for me.
Elephantitus- you don’t like jackass, huh? How about “lap dog?” Simple question that you are having trouble grasping. What have I said that is dubious? Just one thing, smart guy.
We’re all waiting.
April 8th, 2004 at 11:16 pm
Cole, why do you keep prodding me for an answer in a single comment of yours as if I’ve refused to answer your question before you’ve even hit the ‘Rant’ button for me to see?
Nevertheless, in a country the size of california, and a stockpile of weapons that could easy fit in a truck or two, and consider saddam’s intense paranoia and desire for secrecy, and the possibility that they were moved to syria at the zero hour — just to give a few explanations.
and just to give your theory the benefit of the doubt, assuming they were destroy, saddam certainly acted as if he had someting to hide, and various intel agencies came to the conclusion saddam had WMD our prez has the duty to respond to such threats. if evidence suggests that, i would demand our CiC to take care of it.
April 9th, 2004 at 12:40 am
Matt, Cole not into reasonable debate. He’s just here to troll and call you a bunch of lovely names. Much like a dreg on society-what does he contribute?
I say ban him.
Get your own damn blog Cole, and spew your Bush hating noxious fumes over there. I’m getting a rash just trying to get through your posts.
April 9th, 2004 at 12:24 pm
But you still think that we are going to find WMDs? I understand. We all have to hope for something. I think the Cubs are going to win the world series this year. Dare to dream, I guess.
But I should point out that the whole reason this thread has gone on so long is that you claimed that there was something inconsistent about saying Saddam had WMDs in the 80s that we gave him, but that he did not have them anymore.
This is exactly what David Kay, Bush’s handpicked weapons inspector has stated.
April 11th, 2004 at 9:46 am
I see Cole is using the same old moonbat tactics.
His assertions are such blatant crap that no refutation is necessary.
Like a typical Kool-Aid drinking asshat, he follows the typical donk meme: If you repeat a lie often enough, it will become truth.
November 4th, 2006 at 1:28 pm
Buon luogo, congratulazioni, il mio amico!