Dem candidates should be saying "Now where's Osama??"

funkyflathead

(723 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Dec-14-03 03:31 PM
Original message

Dem candidates should be saying "Now where's Osama??"

I know there are some that think Osama was framed but I don't.

He hates the US and IS a threat, unlike Saddam.

Bush doesn't care about finding Osama. He had a grudge against Saddam.

Now the Dems oughtta be saying "Where's Osama? I would find him if I were prez."

Osama's the threat (not just to the US either) NOT Saddam

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

citizen snips

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Dec-14-03 03:34 PM
Response to Original message

1. We will say that.

The Democrats should start asking now wait where is the guy we needed to get first.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

citizen snips

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Dec-14-03 03:34 PM
Response to Original message

2. We will say that.

The Democrats should start asking now wait where is the guy we needed to get first.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

shindig

(187 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Dec-14-03 04:47 PM
Response to Reply #2

9. Well, we have to be careful about saying that

because what happens then, after Osama is caught or confirmed dead.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Apollo

(49 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Dec-14-03 04:04 PM
Response to Original message

3. I disagree

Saddam was a threat. He was also a extreme madman who needed to be removed. Osama ALSO needs to be found and I believe he will be eventually. But don't take this victory away from the military, this is a great thing that happened. Now maybe more attention can be put on finding Osama.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

LuminousX

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Dec-14-03 04:08 PM
Response to Original message

4. But we shouldn't make it a campaign point... because Osama

may be on ice for October.

Getting Osama should be a goal and will be a good thing. The Republicans are waiting for us to say it is a political thing.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

wuushew

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Dec-14-03 04:09 PM
Response to Original message

5. No I disagree

Edited on Sun Dec-14-03 04:10 PM by wuushew

potential for huge egg on face. Both Saddam and Osama for many months have been powerless figure heads. Realize what they were, an excuse to humilate and hurt Bush's popularity by showing his inability to accomplish his goals. If by some miracle he was captured in quick succession BFEE would be batting 2 for 2.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

neebob

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Dec-14-03 04:16 PM
Response to Original message

6. I'm sure they will

but today is not the right day. And it wouldn't be wise for a presidential candidate to add that Saddam wasn't a threat. He or she would be branded a Saddam lover and endlessly thrashed. It's wise to affirm the capture of Saddam, without affirming Bush.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Bombtrack

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Dec-14-03 04:25 PM
Response to Original message

7. That's what you think the democratic party should stand for? Whining?

Our candidates need to adress why they can be better at performing tasks which this administration is bad at.

Not just complaining ad nausium

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Name removed

(0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Dec-14-03 04:37 PM
Response to Reply #7

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

K-W

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Dec-14-03 04:49 PM
Response to Original message

10. No, what if osama is found

we cant run a presidential election based on hoping that someone remains at large until after the election.

Democrats should be saying we will bring jobs, healthcare, and education rather than wasting all of our nations wealth hunting down 3rd rate dictators around the world who pose no threat whatsoever to the US's security.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

robbedvoter

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Dec-14-03 04:52 PM
Response to Original message

11. Clark did. A summary of his interview with Wodruff:

(#94) (No�rating)

by EllenG on 12/14/2003 04:30:34 PM EST

Rate this: - 1 2 3 4 5 + | Parent | Reply
Judy asks why W speech so serious. Could be it's a serious matter?
Dean: Congrats military, Iraqi and US people; opty for US to turn occup into int'l reconstruction effort; pres should reach out, day for admin to celebrate
Lieb: if Dean had his way, Hussein would be in power
Kerry: Dean not have experience'
Clark: Right venue first - int'l crimes; warrant most extreme punishment.
Were you wrong to say not go in w/o broad int'l support? Support always preferable; no imminent threat; well known position.
Judy:Does this take Iraq off table?
Clark: My concerns go back to war on terror, nothing to do with Iraq. Cost to US, not off table. Americans happy with success, doesn't change fact began unnecessary war.
Judy: do you stand by statements last week that W wreckless, incompetent? At at time like this? On foreign soil, don't want to discuss domestic matters at this time, Judy

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Tue Apr 30th 2024, 06:21 PM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.