An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right
Another GOPer Suggests Democrats Are Terrorist Enablers
The Salt Lake City Tribune reports:
Sen. Orrin Hatch, who continuously decries the bitter partisanship in Washington, implied this week that Democratic success in November’s election could result in terrorist attacks on America.Hatch was quoted in Tuesday’s Tooele Transcript Bulletin as saying Middle East terrorists are “waiting for the Democrats here to take control, let things cool off and then strike again.”
Of course the Democrats — who Republicans insist they want to work with in the spirit of bipartisanship (read any story about GOPers explaining why they are supporting Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman) — are upset. And apparently Hatch is backing away from the comment:
While Hatch now says he does not recall making the reported statement to the Tooele newspaper, it would not be the first time he tied terrorist action to Democrats seeking office.
The “I don’t recall” defense doesn’t work too well with politicians in this age of the Internet and super-quick news cycles. Read more details in the linked story.
We thank Raw Story for the tip.
10 Responses to “Another GOPer Suggests Democrats Are Terrorist Enablers”
Well the if the Republicans allowed Hamas, Hezbollah and the Muslim Brotherhood to win seats in free and fair elections in the ME, they shouldn’t object to a few Democrats winning seats over here!
Glad to see Hatch’s new “bi-partisan” spirit expressed so profoundly. I guess cut and run is taking a backseat in the next election to “a vote for a Democrat is a vote for the next 9/11″!
What all these Rebuplican thugs are really trying to say is that if the Democrats win in November we will be forced to have congressional oversight and by all that holy we can’t have that!
We must protect at all cost the American people from ever knowing what has really been going on in this country for the past six years.
…the government had this hyperlink stuff decades before we did…..
…it’s pretty fookin cool in my book..
Ha! Kim that was a good one!
Tell me again, which party was in control of both the White House and the Congress when the 9/11 attacks occurred? I’m afraid I might have turned 72 on March 22 and now I am getting feeble in the brain and can’t remember what I say to reporters or who was in charge when the WTC fell.
If the democrats indeed did, or stopped doing, everything they bitch about then we would have trouble. Anyone who believes that will happen is nut’s and should get their medication adjusted.
Its a rather ingenious way of avoiding responsibility for the last six years. Just claim-we were trying to fight the war on terror, but the Democrats undermined us at every step. The enemy has become enboldened by their opposition to our policies that protect this country. Many conservatives already believe this-especially Rush and Hannity listeners, and you’ll pick up the votes of some of the people who just have time to listen to soundbites.
Kim,
You don’t think that the vocal oposition to the stance of the current administation empowers some of the “opponents” of our govt in the ME? I’m not talking about the right and wrong of anything, just the fact that many of these groups are very politicly aware and factor our domestic situation into their decisions. While I’m sure you are right that a lot of the howling from the right is blantant political bulshit, but somehow you believe that the left is somehow more honest? We pick side due to issues and who better represents our feelings on the first, second amendments. Civil rights, or govt assistace, health care or the economy. That’s just makes sense. That people believe that one side is more “honest” is filping Crazy!!! Both sides lie about what they did and what they will do. Grow up
Eric- They may factor it in-but unless you want to live in an autocratic state, there will always be political opposition. There was plenty of opposition to Roosevelt involving us in WWII, but we came out of it just fine.
I feel the Republicans know they’ve screwed up, and can’t blame it all on Clinton anymore, so they’ve got to use scare tactics. By your logic we should have stayed in Viet Nam, instead of allowing public opinion to pressure the government into withdrawl.
What exactly was gained by that venture? More than 50,000 Americans lost their lives, and North Viet Nam took over the South. Just as it would have if we had never gone in.
To be honest we could of come out of Viet Nam in much better shape and saved a million lives if not for bowing to pressure. That’s not to say we should of been there or that it was the right thing, but in my mind once your there it no longer matters. Cronkite told the American people the Vietnam war was unwinnable and so begane the “revolution”, but without the protests and unrest in the US South Viet Nam would never have fallen, and it’s doubtful that Pol Pot would of succeded without all the aid given to him by VN and China. You say 50000 US troops dead for nothing. I say 50000 troops died to stop 3 million deaths that we stopped caring about.
Hell we didn’t need to stay in Nam. We just needed to help and support the govt and they could of survived. This was about press, couterculture, and ignorance, not reality. Abondoning of Viet Nam should show that that is the last thing we should do today. But what the hell if it helps you get elected.