Bush: Democrats Weak On Terror

(AP)  President Bush took a swat at his critics Tuesday, bluntly declaring that if Democrats take control of Congress, the nation's stance against terrorism will soften.

He scolded Democrats who voted against his warrantless wiretapping program to monitor the communications of suspected terrorists and legislation to detain, interrogate and question high-value terrorist suspects.

"On each of these programs, the Democrats have said they share our goals. But when it comes time to vote, they consistently oppose giving our personnel the tools they need to protect us," Bush said at a $400,000 breakfast fundraiser for Rep. Richard Pombo, held 60 miles east of the San Francisco Bay area.

"Time and time again, the Democrats want to have it both ways. They talk tough on terror, but when the votes are counted, their softer side comes out," he said.

In the home stretch of campaigning for the Nov. 7 elections, Bush is using his $2.3 million fundraising sprint through Nevada, California, Arizona and Colorado to try to portray distinct differences between Democrats and Republicans, especially on waging the war against terror.

Bush said the CIA program to interrogate high-target terrorist suspects has helped foil attacks, and he asked Democrats who voted against the detainee legislation to explain their opposition to voters.

"If they feel we are safer without this program, the Democrats in the United States Senate need to explain to the American people which of the attacks that the CIA program stopped would they have been willing to let go forward," Bush said.

He is trying to frame next month's elections around the economy and national security, but he has to talk loudly to be heard over the static caused by setbacks recently suffered by the Republican Party.

The White House has been seeking to rebut a recent intelligence report that suggests the Iraq war has helped recruit more terrorists and journalist Bob Woodward's new book, "State of Denial," that suggests Bush has not been completely upfront about the severity of the security situation in Iraq.

And on Capitol Hill, House Republican leaders are being asked about how long they knew about former Republican Rep. Mark Foley's inappropriate communications with teenage males who worked as pages. After the fundraiser, Bush visited a local school where he said he was "shocked and dismayed" by Foley's behavior and said he supports House Speaker Dennis Hastert's call for a full investigation.

Later, Bush was attending a $600,000 fundraiser in El Dorado Hills for Rep. John Doolittle and then raising $1.3 million at a Republican National Committee event in the Los Angeles area.

About 150 anti-Bush demonstrators protested across from the site of the Pombo fundraiser. Both Pombo and Doolittle easily survived primary challenges this year from opponents who criticized them for their connections to disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

One presidential action was tucked into Bush's Tuesday schedule, perhaps to help the various campaigns defray the cost of getting the president to the political events. Bush signed the Partners for Fish and Wildlife Act. Pombo sponsored the House version of the bill, which aims to help landowners restore and manage fish and wildlife habitats on private property.

[janemcgreeve]

Sorry, jh whatever that stands for - BUT THERE WERE.

You obviously don't know Jack about the Middle East, or how Islamic tribes in the past that were at each other's throats always rallied to confront the "Imperialists". Happened before, happened now.

Ever hear of Salman Pak? Better read up on that, kiddo.

And even your blessed Dems still can't figure out why Atta met with the Iraquis, or what they spoke about. Oh, all they can come up with is that there were NO Al Qaeda-Saddam ties. Without providing proof.

Believe everything your blessed Dems tell you, jh? I don't believe everything Bush or Cheney tell me, but I can tell you this, they mean to protect us much more than your hero(ines) will.

Read Jimmy Carter's new book when it comes out. This out-and-out coward is nowadays sucking up to Hamas and the PLO. I suppose in your world, they're nice guys too.

[janemcgreeve]

P.S. And of Iraq and Al Qaeda ties, Sorry, but I still don't subscribe to the Democratic fantasy that there were NO ties between Saddam and Al Qaeda before 9/11. Read Stephen Hayes "The Connection" never really refuted, or even Laurie Mylroie's - oh, but they're Zionist Neo-Con patsies the know-it-nots will say.

Read Bodansky. All of these groups - ALL OF THEM, Hizbullah, Hamas, the Baath, Al Qaeda - may have hated each other, but they hated America and Israel more. Atta did meet with Iraqui intelligence - NEVER REFUTED. The increase of Palestinian violence towards Israel before the 2000 elections occurred right after the Cole Bombing - and as Al Qaeda began planning 9/11. Coincidence? The kidnappings and killings in Gaza and along the Lebanon border took place as Iran prepared to defy UN sanctions. Coincidence? You hatemongers out there and appease-worts can tell me. I'm listening, unlike you.

[janemcgreeve]

Goodwin,

I've seen your blah-blah stuff, and for the most part, it is pretty juvenile. However, you, of most of the sorry dems and Bush-bashers here, made the most sense. Unfortunately your hero Clinton was not of that timbre. He sent a few score tomahawks WITHOUT nuke warheads on them to hit a couple of virtually empty camps AFTER he had given the Pakis a half-day warning so that elements in Musharraf's government could alert their roach pals.

Contrast that with the day-to-day bombing of civilian targets in Belgrade by the Clinton-Albright-Burglar-Clark team that resulted in the death of over 2000 Serbs, mostly civilians. And yet you have the temercity to urge us to vote Democratic.

Who should we vote for? A John Kerry who dissed his fellow servicemen and DID Give aid and comfort to the enemy? A Hillary Clinton who couldn't keep order or decency in her own household? A Jimmy Carter whom in his cowardice helped sow the seeds of Islamoextremism 27 years ago. A Howard Dean or a Ned Lamont? Who, sir? Wes Clark - Maybe, if he hadn't subscribed to the Dem Doctrine of Appeasement. Joe Lieberman, sure, but not only has he been knocked out of your party but is insulted by those who don't remember what a true Democrat - a Humphrey, a Scoop Jackson, were.

Show a Democrat with guts, and a long-term strategy who won't play into the hands of the majority of the Democratic Party and maybe, just maybe, he'd get my vote. But not the sorry losers and slime that are out there now.

[drgoodwin12]

To bellaL,I am a democrat and first off I would have nuked every training camp in Afghanistan.Is that soft?Second I would not have invaded a country that had nothing do with 9/11 and posed no threat to the U.S..I would have concentrated on a campaign of deterrment of individuals from becoming terrorist,I would have shut down every terrorist web site.I also would have seized every known asset that the terror network has.In addition I would have invaded Pakistan and strategically bomb it.Is that soft on terror?

[janemcgreeve]

previous commentator - weak on brains. or common sense.

[janemcgreeve]

Again, offer solutions instead of hot air, cowardice and lies, Bush-bashers and Dem clowns.

[janemcgreeve]

Looks like the "If I Only Had A Brain" folks are out in force this afternoon. Always blame and rant, but heavens forbid that they offer solutions.

Lewinsky a "right wing plant"...tee hee. If that were only true, it just shows how Billy Pervert would fall for anything, just as long as it wasn't his own (Hillary).

[janemcgreeve]

speaking of garbage, that is all that you seem to be spewing jh.

What's with the alphabet soup? if you can't answer, then go back to reading your Koran.

[janemcgreeve]

A true centerist would have supported and voted for Joe Lieberman. Instead of casting lies about the man and pulling him down so that you could elect another, yes, CUT AND RUNNER.

With your rants, so empty of substance but full of nonsense, you are about as centered as water, weak little sister.

[janemcgreeve]

I want to see the Democrats offer robust solutions to fighting the greatest threat since Hitler.

For our own and our childrens' sake.

Instead of prattling about Bush and talking appeasement, let's hear real solutions, not the hand-wringing of a pompous *** like Jimmy Carter or the BS of Clinton and Kerry.

Hate this President, but he chose ro strike back against Bin Laden after 9/11. His predecessor did NOTHING for eight years except demean the office of the Presidency and wag fingers at cameras. While the Khobar Towers, the Embassies in Africa, and the USS Cole blew up.

Offer solutions instead of hot air and cowardice, please.