Cheney: Vote for Chicken George, or DIE!!!

dennis_t

CAGiversary!
And in the midst of everything else, Cheney tells the public that a vote for Kerry will end up killing people:
http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20040907_956.html

DES MOINES, Iowa Sept. 7, 2004 — Vice President Dick Cheney on Tuesday warned Americans about voting for Democratic Sen. John Kerry, saying that if the nation makes the wrong choice on Election Day it faces the threat of another terrorist attack.
The Kerry-Edwards campaign immediately rejected those comments as "scare tactics" that crossed the line.
"It's absolutely essential that eight weeks from today, on Nov. 2, we make the right choice, because if we make the wrong choice then the danger is that we'll get hit again and we'll be hit in a way that will be devastating from the standpoint of the United States," Cheney told about 350 supporters at a town-hall meeting in this Iowa city.


NYT's Maureen Dowd sums up this argument pretty well:

George W. Bush and Dick Cheney have always used the president's father as a reverse lodestar. In 1992, the senior Mr. Bush wooed the voters with "Message: I care.'' So this week, Mr. Cheney wooed the voters with, Message: You die.

The terrible beauty of its simplicity grows on you. It is a sign of the dark, macho, paranoid vice president's restraint that he didn't really take it to its emotionally satisfying conclusion: Message: Vote for us or we'll kill you.

Without Zell Miller around to out-crazy him, and unplugged after a convention that tried to "humanize'' him with grandchildren, horses and wifely anecdotes about his inability to dance the twist, Mr. Cheney is back as Terrifier in Chief.

He finally simply spit out what the Bush team has been more subtly trying to convey for months: A vote for John Kerry is a vote for the terrorists.

........

These guys figure, hey, these scare tactics worked in building support for the Iraq war, maybe they can work in tearing down support for John Kerry. They linked Saddam with terrorism and cowed the Democrats (including Mr. Kerry, who has never been able to make the case against the Bush administration's trompe l'oeil casus belli) and fooled the country into going along with their trumped-up war. So why not link Mr. Kerry with terrorism and cow the voters into sticking with the White House they've got?

It's like that fairy tale where vipers and toads jump out of the mouth of the accursed mean little girl when she tries to speak. Every time Mr. Cheney opens his mouth, vermin leap out.

The vice president and president did not even mention Osama at the convention because of the inconvenient fact that the fiend is still out there, plotting. Yet they denigrate Mr. Kerry as too weak to battle Osama, and treat him as a greater threat.

More: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/09/opinion/09dowd.html?hp
 
[quote name='sblymnlcrymnl']I think something is going to happen before the election.[/quote]

How could it happen, if Chicken George has been as successful in the war on terror as his supporters claim?
 
[quote name='dennis_t'][quote name='sblymnlcrymnl']I think something is going to happen before the election.[/quote]

How could it happen, if Chicken George has been as successful in the war on terror as his supporters claim?[/quote]

Well, maybe they would purposely allow something to happen, trying to get that post-9/11 style boost. Of course, I don't think it would work out in their favor unless Bush cancels the election after such an event.
 
[quote name='dennis_t'][quote name='sblymnlcrymnl']I think something is going to happen before the election.[/quote]

How could it happen, if Chicken George has been as successful in the war on terror as his supporters claim?[/quote]

Right because the war on terror is a zero sum game. Its either a success or a failure.

CTL
 
[quote name='CTLesq'][quote name='dennis_t'][quote name='sblymnlcrymnl']I think something is going to happen before the election.[/quote]

How could it happen, if Chicken George has been as successful in the war on terror as his supporters claim?[/quote]

Right because the war on terror is a zero sum game. Its either a success or a failure.

CTL[/quote]

So the Republican argument is:

(1) If a terror attack happens under Bush's watch, it's not his fault because these things happen.
(2) If you elect Kerry and a terror attack happens, it's your fault for voting for him.

I thought you people were all for personal responsibility. When did you start becoming apologists for failure?
 
Elected President Gore sums up Cheney's disgusting comments:

"The claim by Bush and Cheney that the American people must give them four more years in office or else be 'hit hard' by another terrorist attack is a sleazy and despicable effort to blackmail voters with fear," Gore said.

"They are going back to the ugliest page in the Republican playbook: fear," he said. "They're not even trying to convince you to vote for George Bush. Their only hope is to try and make you too afraid to vote for John Kerry. It's the lowest sort of politics imaginable."


http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/elections/article.adp?id=20040909101409990004&cid=946
 
yeah I loved Cheney finally said flat out what they have been trying to say for a long time.

Vote for Bush or your F'ing DOOMED!!!
 
[quote name='dennis_t'][quote name='CTLesq'][quote name='dennis_t'][quote name='sblymnlcrymnl']I think something is going to happen before the election.[/quote]

How could it happen, if Chicken George has been as successful in the war on terror as his supporters claim?[/quote]

Right because the war on terror is a zero sum game. Its either a success or a failure.

CTL[/quote]

So the Republican argument is:

(1) If a terror attack happens under Bush's watch, it's not his fault because these things happen.
(2) If you elect Kerry and a terror attack happens, it's your fault for voting for him.

I thought you people were all for personal responsibility. When did you start becoming apologists for failure?[/quote]

I made no such claims. I pointed out the absuridty of your position.

CTL
 
[quote name='dennis_t'][quote name='CTLesq'][quote name='dennis_t'][quote name='sblymnlcrymnl']I think something is going to happen before the election.[/quote]

How could it happen, if Chicken George has been as successful in the war on terror as his supporters claim?[/quote]

Right because the war on terror is a zero sum game. Its either a success or a failure.

CTL[/quote]

So the Republican argument is:

(1) If a terror attack happens under Bush's watch, it's not his fault because these things happen.
(2) If you elect Kerry and a terror attack happens, it's your fault for voting for him.

I thought you people were all for personal responsibility. When did you start becoming apologists for failure?[/quote]

No, the republican argument is:

1. If a terror attack happens under anyone's watch after 9/11 it IS their fault.

2. If you elect Kerry a terror attack WILL DEFINITELY happen in the US because he will be too busy kissing the asses of countries who hate us and want to see us fail like France.

3. Kerry will most likely open the US's borders even more in true liberal fashion and invite terrorists to sneak in and kill us.

4. Kerry will definitely withdraw our troops from the terrorists backyard and invite them to come kill in ours.

5. Kerry will most likely follow through on all of his military cuts and weaken our military even more in an effort to spend more money trying to teach terrorists that we aren't all that bad.

6. Kerry will leave terrorist harboring countries like Iraq, Iran and Syria alone because France and Germany will say so.

7. Kerry will continue to meet with his "foreign leaders" and hand over the leadership of our country to them.
 
[quote name='Scrubking']No, the republican argument is:

1. If a terror attack happens under anyone's watch after 9/11 it IS their fault.

2. If you elect Kerry a terror attack WILL DEFINITELY happen in the US because he will be too busy kissing the asses of countries who hate us and want to see us fail like France.

3. Kerry will most likely open the US's borders even more in true liberal fashion and invite terrorists to sneak in and kill us.

4. Kerry will definitely withdraw our troops from the terrorists backyard and invite them to come kill in ours.

5. Kerry will most likely follow through on all of his military cuts and weaken our military even more in an effort to spend more money trying to teach terrorists that we aren't all that bad.

6. Kerry will leave terrorist harboring countries like Iraq, Iran and Syria alone because France and Germany will say so.

7. Kerry will continue to meet with his "foreign leaders" and hand over the leadership of our country to them.[/quote]

Yep, those sound dumb enough to be Republican arguments.
 
[quote name='MrBadExample'][quote name='Scrubking']No, the republican argument is:

1. If a terror attack happens under anyone's watch after 9/11 it IS their fault.

2. If you elect Kerry a terror attack WILL DEFINITELY happen in the US because he will be too busy kissing the asses of countries who hate us and want to see us fail like France.

3. Kerry will most likely open the US's borders even more in true liberal fashion and invite terrorists to sneak in and kill us.

4. Kerry will definitely withdraw our troops from the terrorists backyard and invite them to come kill in ours.

5. Kerry will most likely follow through on all of his military cuts and weaken our military even more in an effort to spend more money trying to teach terrorists that we aren't all that bad.

6. Kerry will leave terrorist harboring countries like Iraq, Iran and Syria alone because France and Germany will say so.

7. Kerry will continue to meet with his "foreign leaders" and hand over the leadership of our country to them.[/quote]

Yep, those sound dumb enough to be Republican arguments.[/quote]

You can't deny the probability of these actions by Kerry, though their consequences may be exagerated.
 
[quote name='sblymnlcrymnl'][quote name='MrBadExample'][quote name='Scrubking']No, the republican argument is:

1. If a terror attack happens under anyone's watch after 9/11 it IS their fault.

2. If you elect Kerry a terror attack WILL DEFINITELY happen in the US because he will be too busy kissing the asses of countries who hate us and want to see us fail like France.

3. Kerry will most likely open the US's borders even more in true liberal fashion and invite terrorists to sneak in and kill us.

4. Kerry will definitely withdraw our troops from the terrorists backyard and invite them to come kill in ours.

5. Kerry will most likely follow through on all of his military cuts and weaken our military even more in an effort to spend more money trying to teach terrorists that we aren't all that bad.

6. Kerry will leave terrorist harboring countries like Iraq, Iran and Syria alone because France and Germany will say so.

7. Kerry will continue to meet with his "foreign leaders" and hand over the leadership of our country to them.[/quote]

Yep, those sound dumb enough to be Republican arguments.[/quote]

You can't deny the probability of these actions by Kerry, though their consequences may be exagerated.[/quote]

I can and do deny them all.

1. Terrorists will always try to exploit weaknesses in our defense. Without locking down the whole country, we can't be 100% safe. So it won't always be the president's fault unless he does something wreckless.

2. I would argue that an attack is more likely because of Bush's actions in the Middle East.

3. Simply dumb. Has Kerry said anything about opening the borders up?

4. & 5. I recall Kerry advocating more troops in Iraq to clean up the mess Bush created. Less mess = less resentment = fewer terrorists.

6. Kerry has already stated how we need to clean up Iraq. And we'll see how he deals with nations that harbor terrorists like Saudi Arabia.

7. Again really, really dumb. Meeting with foreign heads of state and forming allies is what real leaders and statesmen do. They don't play cowboy.
 
[quote name='MrBadExample'][quote name='sblymnlcrymnl'][quote name='MrBadExample'][quote name='Scrubking']No, the republican argument is:

1. If a terror attack happens under anyone's watch after 9/11 it IS their fault.

2. If you elect Kerry a terror attack WILL DEFINITELY happen in the US because he will be too busy kissing the asses of countries who hate us and want to see us fail like France.

3. Kerry will most likely open the US's borders even more in true liberal fashion and invite terrorists to sneak in and kill us.

4. Kerry will definitely withdraw our troops from the terrorists backyard and invite them to come kill in ours.

5. Kerry will most likely follow through on all of his military cuts and weaken our military even more in an effort to spend more money trying to teach terrorists that we aren't all that bad.

6. Kerry will leave terrorist harboring countries like Iraq, Iran and Syria alone because France and Germany will say so.

7. Kerry will continue to meet with his "foreign leaders" and hand over the leadership of our country to them.[/quote]

Yep, those sound dumb enough to be Republican arguments.[/quote]

You can't deny the probability of these actions by Kerry, though their consequences may be exagerated.[/quote]

I can and do deny them all.

1. Terrorists will always try to exploit weaknesses in our defense. Without locking down the whole country, we can't be 100% safe. So it won't always be the president's fault unless he does something wreckless.

2. I would argue that an attack is more likely because of Bush's actions in the Middle East.

3. Simply dumb. Has Kerry said anything about opening the borders up?

4. & 5. I recall Kerry advocating more troops in Iraq to clean up the mess Bush created. Less mess = less resentment = fewer terrorists.

6. Kerry has already stated how we need to clean up Iraq. And we'll see how he deals with nations that harbor terrorists like Saudi Arabia.

7. Again really, really dumb. Meeting with foreign heads of state and forming allies is what real leaders and statesmen do. They don't play cowboy.[/quote]

But you forgot the most important one:

With a Kerry Presidency, France will like us again.

CTL
 
[quote name='CTLesq']But you forgot the most important one:

With a Kerry Presidency, France will like us again.

CTL[/quote]

Because the last thing we would want is another ally. [/sarcasm]
 
[quote name='MrBadExample'][quote name='CTLesq']But you forgot the most important one:

With a Kerry Presidency, France will like us again.

CTL[/quote]

Because the last thing we would want is another ally. [/sarcasm][/quote]

The first thing we would like is an ally that won't stab us in the back.

CTL
 
[quote name='CTLesq'][quote name='MrBadExample'][quote name='CTLesq']But you forgot the most important one:

With a Kerry Presidency, France will like us again.

CTL[/quote]

Because the last thing we would want is another ally. [/sarcasm][/quote]

The first thing we would like is an ally that won't stab us in the back.

CTL[/quote]

You mean one that will roll over and not question anything we do no matter how ill-advised it may be.
 
4. & 5. I recall Kerry advocating more troops in Iraq to clean up the mess Bush created. Less mess = less resentment = fewer terrorists.

so when Kerry makes all these speeches about "getting our troops home", he really means he wants to send more troops over there?


yea and once we get out of Iraq, the terrorists will stop hating us, because thats why they attacked us in the first place right?... no
 
[quote name='Cracka']yea and once we get out of Iraq, the terrorists will stop hating us, because thats why they attacked us in the first place right?... no[/quote]

Our troops stationed in Saudi Arabia was one of the main reasons bin Laden wanted to attack us. But I'm sure you bought that line about him hating our freedom.
 
Don't forget about the fact that we support the Jews, the other infidel group occupying Islamic holy ground. There's another reason we should all die.
 
[quote name='MrBadExample']You mean one that will roll over and not question anything we do no matter how ill-advised it may be.[/quote]

Like one who votes for 17 UN Resolutions against Iraq until their financial interests in the regime are threatened?

Yeah, thats real wisdom.

But, the French like Kerry are all about the money - as Kerry's most recent reason for opposing the war is financial.

So maybe he could bring the French around.

Brillant.

CTL
 
[quote name='CTLesq']But, the French like Kerry are all about the money - as Kerry's most recent reason for opposing the war is financial.[/quote]

IRONIC QUOTE o' THE DAY

A Bush supporter saying someone else is all about the money. Brilliant!
 
NOT IRONIC YOU DIPSHIT!

HYPOCRYTICAL!

PEOPLE MISUSE IRONIC WAY TOO MUCH.

GET IT RIGHT, THE BUSH SUPPORTERS ACTIONS ARE HYPOCRITICAL NOT IRONIC.

Jerks.
 
[quote name='Quackzilla']NOT IRONIC YOU DIPSHIT!

HYPOCRYTICAL!

PEOPLE MISUSE IRONIC WAY TOO MUCH.

GET IT RIGHT, THE BUSH SUPPORTERS ACTIONS ARE HYPOCRITICAL NOT IRONIC.

Jerks.[/quote]

IRONIC - 3. poignantly contrary to what was expected or intended
 
[quote name='MrBadExample'][quote name='Quackzilla']NOT IRONIC YOU DIPSHIT!

HYPOCRYTICAL!

PEOPLE MISUSE IRONIC WAY TOO MUCH.

GET IT RIGHT, THE BUSH SUPPORTERS ACTIONS ARE HYPOCRITICAL NOT IRONIC.

Jerks.[/quote]

IRONIC - 3. poignantly contrary to what was expected or intended[/quote]

That's only become an accepted definition because of misuse by idiots.
 
bread's done
Back
Top