Thursday, February 15, 2007
Tim, I haven't a clue, Walberg
Tim Walberg had his five minutes to respond to the President's plan for a troop surge in Iraq. His words are posted on the Battle Creek Enquirer's web site. I give them to you in full.
“I rise today to honor America’s brave men and women currently serving in the name of freedom and oppose this resolution of retreat.
I love this, "but we must go forward with a new strategy in Iraq based on quantifiable goals and measurable results. We must not retreat." What goals and results is he talking about? I can't keep track, they change all the time. New strategy? Sending 20,000 more troops is not a new strategy it is the same failed strategy just on a larger scale.
"the American people long for true leadership and resolve." Yes, we do Congressman Walberg. Unfortunately we are not getting it from you or the President. We are getting it from the Democrats in the House and Senators like our own Carl Levin.
Congressman thank you very much for this weak simple minded statement. This may be all we need to send you back to Tipton.
Perfect responses, Doug. I just wish Tim were uttering these weak and vapid comments from a podium in the press room and you were sitting in Helen Thomas's seat. He'd be hieing it out of there as fast as he could because he'd have no answer to your "David Gregory" comebacks.
This guy just doesn't understand that this is not "our country's) war and never was -- It is the Bush/Chenny posse of self-appointed vigilantes who duped the people into believing they were on a mission of good, when all they were interested in were the treasures (read OIL) at the end of their own created rainbow. Recall is the only way to cure his blind stupidity.
As I posted earlier in the last Iraq thread, Walberg's comments were sent out in a press release yesterday morning. He didn't speak on the floor until the afternoon and his comments were differnet.
"As I posted earlier in the last Iraq thread, Walberg's comments were sent out in a press release yesterday morning. He didn't speak on the floor until the afternoon and his comments were differnet."
I checked the Congressional Record, and from the looks of it, what they have is the same as what the Battle Creek Enquirer and his own website have printed. (http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate.cgi?WAISdocID=6637881082+2+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve)
Did anyone YouTubed his speech on C-SPAN?
Maybe the lady/gent (who wishes to differ from our versions of what Tim said) would like to submit what they believe Tim said and how it differs from the official version (ahem!)
And to you, Doug, although I often dabble in tongue-in-cheek, I was trying to be complimentary.
Shucks. That's what I get for trying.
How ironic that he talks of supporting the troops in harm's way while today he totally dismissed their service to the country saying that the situation in Iraq is no worse than in Chicago or Detroit.Post a Comment
There's a piece about the story on my blog,www.thedeconstructionist.com.
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
August 2006 September 2006 October 2006 November 2006 December 2006 January 2007 February 2007 March 2007 April 2007 May 2007 June 2007 July 2007 August 2007 September 2007 October 2007 November 2007 December 2007 January 2008 February 2008 March 2008 April 2008 May 2008 June 2008 July 2008 August 2008 September 2008 October 2008 November 2008