If we have reason to believe someone is preparing an attack against the U.S., has developed that capability, harbours those aspirations, then I think the U.S. is justified in dealing with that, if necessary, by military force.

Cheney, Cheney, you can’t hide, we charge you with genocide.

When George Bush asked me to sign on, it obviously wasn’t because he was worried about carrying Wyoming. We got 70 percent of the vote in Wyoming, although those three electoral votes turned out to be pretty important last time around.

Direct threats require decisive action.

I think Barack Obama is a one-term President.

Senator Kerry says he sees two Americas. It makes the whole thing mutual – America sees two John Kerrys.

I think the record speaks for itself. These are two individuals who have been for the war when the headlines were good and against it when their poll ratings were bad.

The plan was criticized by some retired military officers embedded in TV studios. But with every advance by our coalition forces, the wisdom of that plan becomes more apparent.

There comes a time when deceit and defiance must be seen for what they are. At that point, a gathering danger must be directly confronted. At that point, we must show that beyond our resolutions is actual resolve.

A little tough talk in the midst of a campaign or as part of a presidential debate cannot obscure a record of 30 years of being on the wrong side of defense issues.

We will, in fact, be greeted as liberators.

We must be prepared to face our responsibilities and be willing to use force if necessary.

From kindergarten to graduation, I went to public schools, and I know that they are a key to being sure that every child has a chance to succeed and to rise in the world.

The Iraqi forces are conducting the Mother of all Retreats.

We have to make America the best place in the world to do business.

It is easy to take liberty for granted, when you have never had it taken from you.

I’m absolutely convinced that the threat we face now, the idea of a terrorist in the middle of one of our cities with a nuclear weapon, is very real and that we have to use extraordinary measures to deal with it.

In his years in Washington, Senator Kerry has been one vote of a hundred in the United States Senate – and fortunately on matters of national security he was very often in the minority.

The Columbia is lost, but the dreams that inspired its crew remain with us.

The Senator from Massachusetts has given us ample grounds to doubt the judgment and the attitude he brings to bear on vital issues of national security.

You got to have people at the top who respond to and are selected by presidents.

Had the decision belonged to Senator Kerry, Saddam hussein would still be in power today in Iraq. In fact, Saddam Hussein would almost certainly still be in control of Kuwait.

If we have reason to believe someone is preparing an attack against the U.S., has developed that capability, harbours those aspirations, then I think the U.S. is justified in dealing with that, if necessary, by military force.

Except for the occasional heart attack, I never felt better.

We urge all democratic nations and the United Nations to answer the Iraqi Governing Council’s call for support for the people of Iraq in making the transition to democracy.

I can think of a lot of words to describe Senator Kerry’s position on Iraq; “consistent” is not one of them.

I’ve worked for four presidents and watched two others up close, and I know that there’s no such thing as a routine day in the Oval Office.