Comments on: The Rockefeller Report

By: Jim C

Jim C — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 06:31:12 +0000

It absolutely amazes me that the left will try to prove that President Bush lied about the reasons for going to war in Iraq by… you know… actually lying.

They know President Bush didn’t lie. The Democrats believed Saddam had WMD’s and posed a threat themselves, but yet they insist that President Bush lied when he made the very same case that they were making. Furthermore, WMD’s were but one reaspn for going to war in Iraq… and not even the most compelling one. But, it’s the one that the media and the left latched onto.

The American Thinker has an interesting explanation for this. Let’s put it this way; the Democrats had to destroy President Bush and the war effort in order to regain the seat of power. They did it at the expense of the Nation’s security.

By: John B.

John B. — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 01:42:00 +0000

It’s probably a good thing for Senator Rockefeller that he was born into wealth. He would be in a world of hurt if he had to rely on his intelligence and integrity to make a living.
Something I learned in OCS, “no one can take your integrity, you have to give it away”.
I think ol’ Rocky missed that lesson.

John B.
RLTW

By: STEVEC

STEVEC — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 17:27:02 +0000

Yeah, folks of this stripe would be pleased to debate some minor point with their captors while all the time being walked to the gallows.

Seems to me that arguments over security should start and end with the idea that if we are to err about the seriousness of a severe threat, it’s preferable to err in a way that protects us and our interests. To err on the other side of the question would be ruinous – that’s quite a gamble. Our current President has so far held this view. Nonetheless, it is hard to believe that we have people in high government positions (Nancy and Harry et al.) who disagree with this.