2006-11-02 03:21:24 · 13 answers · asked by buffman316 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Of course and here's why
Against the NSA international spying program
Against the SWIFT program
Want Geneva Convention protection for non uniformed terrorists
Give terrorists Constitutional rights
Against a fence on theMexico and the United States boarder
Want amnesty for illegals (ask Ted Kennedy)
List goes on. Those are off the top of my head
2006-11-02 03:28:07 · answer #1 · answered by John 3 · 5⤊ 2⤋
To answer that in the Bush definition of weak: indecisive, diplomatic, commital and unsure.
Democrats are too deliberative for his tastes... make a decision, stick with it beyond reason, and promise nothing.
The problem is that democrats are AFRAID of taking on security because of the matador-politics Bush has created that his party clings to so readily when challenged on a better solution.
"We have a plan? Where's yours?"
And the two replies once a democrat offers a solution: "Too weak." or when they revise it, "Your plan changed from last week. You don't know what you're doing." God forbid a thought process becomes a part of your planning schematic.
2006-11-02 12:04:14 · answer #2 · answered by Intentionality 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No in fact it was democrats that forced a screeching halt to the ports deal remember when the bush idiots wanted to outsource our port security to a Dubai company . They a contuniuosly calling for congress to implement the recommendations of the 9/11/01 commision but strange that the Repugnant Controled house and senate won't even let it get to the floor for debate nevermind a vote.
2006-11-02 11:34:15 · answer #3 · answered by older_fat_male 3 · 0⤊ 3⤋
It depends on what you mean by security. In general, no. But, if you are talking about taking extremely unneccessary measures to violate peoples' security with wire taps to look for a nonexistent threat, then yes, we feel that that particular thing does not need to be maintained.
2006-11-02 11:27:29 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yes. And they're weak on Truth, Morality, Ethics, Patriotism, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and America in general.
Other than that, they're a good party!
2006-11-02 11:28:34 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
The Democrats, as a whole, are very weak on security, and as individuals they encourage the communist countries to try to take over America because their ignorance prevents them from winning an election.
2006-11-02 11:25:57 · answer #6 · answered by daydoom 5 · 4⤊ 4⤋
Jimmy Carter.
The leadership during the 90's.
2006-11-02 11:27:25 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
No-- its just another ploy/tactic of spin and lies that the republicans spew.
Just becuase you don't jump unprepared and wrongly into a war doesn't make you weak on security
Just becuase you're not willing to rip up the constituion or torture people, it doesn't make you weak on security.
and, hmmm let's see-- 9/11 happened on Bush's watch
2006-11-02 11:24:53 · answer #8 · answered by dapixelator 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Yes, but they are stronger on security than Republicans.
2006-11-02 11:28:37 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
yes they are
2006-11-02 11:48:41 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋