General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhy on Earth should we nominate a presidential candidate who voted for war with Iraq?
It was a colossal disaster, and completely avoidable. Most elected Democrats voted against war, but not the ones who wanted to look "presidential" - Hillary, Biden, Kerry, Edwards, and the rest of that crowd.
Looking "presidential" in exchange for hundreds of thousands of deaths.
Why would we trust one of these people with our future?
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)time you people get over that some democrats voted for the Iraq war . It happened and would have happened even if they didn't vote for the war . I for one was dead against it but Kerry Clinton and any of the others would be better than any republican . You all voted for Obama against Clinton and that's was not the best choice as if you can't see Obama not done that great of a you still got the blinders on .
Koios
(154 posts)Voted to authorize military action, which put arrows in Bush 43's quiver, and was not a declaration of war.
HardTimes99
(2,049 posts)knew he or she was voting to go to war, all these protestations that the vote merely 'authorized' war notwithstanding.
QuestForSense
(653 posts)jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Look, I'm not the one who thinks there is going to be a presidential election this November, Blinky.
PCIntern
(25,477 posts)Odd-numbered year...
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)a war crime in my book. They all have the deaths of tens of thousands of children on their bloody hands. May they rot in hell.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)But yes, in the general.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)are not voting for her because of the war.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)What would you suggest that I do?
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)issues to fight now.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Felt it was justifiable and stuff?
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Instead she groveled before them and authorized them to murder and torture. In some ways she is worse than Bush. I knew Bush was a sociopath but those Democrats like Ms. Clinton were supposed to do what was right and not what was expedient for their careers.
I will never vote for anyone that kissed George Bush's feet. And I hope they have to explain to their maker how they could authorize the killing of innocent children. She had a responsibility to do what was right and she failed at the expense of tens of thousands of children. How you can forgive that is beyond me.
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)Yeah.... that's just what Clinton did. 
I know in your perfect, holier than thou fantasy world, things aren't complicated and no one can ever make a mistake or be forgiven, but those of us who live in the real world are not 1 issue voters. And EVERY election is about voting for who is BEST, not who is perfect.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)She will make a great president.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)and essential region, and bankrupting our own nation while diminishing our standing in the global community are nothing in comparison to kneeling before the anointed ruler we must pledge fealty to in less than four years.
I used to wonder how on earth the President ever got away with simply declaring that we "must look forward"...
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Vote for who you want.
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Arctic Dave
(13,812 posts)Yeah, tell that to the Iraqis.
To hell with Hillary.
cliffordu
(30,994 posts)
frylock
(34,825 posts)shame that your alert didn't bear any fruit.
cliffordu
(30,994 posts)I can live with both.
frylock
(34,825 posts)cliffordu
(30,994 posts)
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)Why do so many think Obama and Hillary are sacrosanct and above criticism? They could change their (D) to an (R) and neither one of them would have to change any of their policies.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)We are in a state of permanant war, just like in Orwell's 1984...and they all admit it to us...and we accept it.
George Orwell
Rockyj
(538 posts)I will not vote for Hillary, we do not need anymore corporate owned Dems. Just like we don't need anymore Bushes we don't need anymore Clintons, we are not monarchy!
tiredtoo
(2,949 posts)I had similar thoughts about Obama 5 or 6 years ago. OHH wait is that a drone i hear hovering overhead?
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)RC
(25,592 posts)
bvar22
(39,909 posts)GOOD!!!
We can stop the Drone Attacks,
rescind the Patriot Act and the NDAA,
bring EVERYBODY home from the Middle East, especially ALL Armed Private Contractors,
disassemble the Homeland Security Department,
STOP Spying on Everybody,
cut defense Spending to Pre-Afghanistan levels AT LEAST,
and give a BIG "Peace Dividend" to the Working Class!!!
(the War profiteers 1% already GOT their dividend).
HOORAY!!!
The WAR is OVER!!!!
(You would think that the government would make some kind of announcement!)
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)bvar22
(39,909 posts)is it?
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)bvar22
(39,909 posts)The War on a the word "Terror" is every bit as BOGUS as the War on Drugs.
ceonupe
(597 posts)And private police forces and private military and security firms the us is paying and will pay for for the next 5 plus years min.
There are 1000s of men and women from my home town still there. Don't believe the war is over just major direct us military operations.
Yes I said that right our government is paying 100s of millions to maintain these shadow forces there
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)of children. Tens of millions of children. Why pick her?
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)7962
(11,841 posts)I fully supported going into Afghanistan, but Iraq made me scream as loud as I could. What a stupid waste. Of everything. And for nothing. Hell, we're not even getting the oil everyone thought it was all about.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)going to spend on a message board.
Bottom line is that she's foul and, should she get the nomination, will win or lose based on whom the republicans nominate.
HardTimes99
(2,049 posts)chokehold over the emerging economies of India and China and their seemingly insatiable thirst for it.
That said, you rightly delineate the general contours of what used to be called a "Pyrrhic Victory." Except in our case, it was more like a Pyrrhic Defeat. (A rag-tag body of irregulars fought us to a stalemate and prevented us from achieving any of our strategic objectives.)
7962
(11,841 posts)As has been the case for so many years now, we would not do what needed to be done to completely destroy the enemy. They hid among civilians and we left them alone. But when in battle, they never defeated our forces. We just chose not to continue to go out and find them. This all started in Korea, got worse in Vietnam and I guess will be that way from now on. We're too afraid of the pictures the world will see. Remember the "highway of death" from Kuwait. They do the same with the Israelis; shoot at them and then wait for retaliation among supposed innocents, hoping some of them get taken out so they can parade their bodies through the streets as victims of the evil aggressors.
Your first point is very interesting though; I never looked at it that way. China NEEDS oil to satisfy their huge population, as does India. We are actually getting more economical and if we start using more NG it will get even better. In that respect, we would have a lot of sway over the price of oil that would affect them more than us. IMO, anyway......
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)have other issues to fight for.
Either we get a sane progressive who fights for us, or I don't give a shit.
Those who voted for the war murdered your cousin. If you want to vote for them, it's your right, but I find it appalling. I could never vote for anyone who killed my kin, no matter what.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)magical thyme
(14,881 posts)whichever mideast country is next on PNAC's list, going after the banksters, etc.
So I do *not* favor a known warhawk, corporatist candidate.
I will vote for whoever ultimately gets the nod. I will fight against "inevitable Hillary" to the end. And I will not trust any candidate from the Chicago machine. Actually, now that I'm on high-speed internet and may still have some spare time for things other than base survival, I will be looking a lot more closely at whoever runs in the primaries.
They suckered us good with our first black President. I expect they're planning more of the same with our first female President. Personally, I'm tired of playing Charlie Brown to their Lucy. If I get tired enough of it, I may choose not to give a flying fuck and not to play at all. In that situ, I will vote downticket only. 
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)
Auntie Bush
(17,528 posts)that attitude will help get a more progressive Supreme Court? Or don't you care about women's rights? You 6think the world is bad now...just wait til the ReThugs take over.
I was hoping that all those Dems who didn't vote in 2010...learned a lesson. From the sounds of DU...I guess we didn't.
BainsBane
(53,012 posts)No one has voted for Clinton. You're blaming hrmjustin for NOT voting for someone who voted for the war when you yourself have already voted for multiple people who supported the war. You voted for Kerry and twice for Biden. Your senators and representative may have voted for the war or at least to fund it. Attacking hrmjustin seems hypocritical to me.
What is the point of stirring up shit about a presidential election three years from now when we don't even know who will be running? What about the midterms? Are people so determined to allow the Republicans to continue to control state government and the US House by focusing exclusively on Presidential elections? This is all empty distraction. It's the Kardashians of American politics.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)KharmaTrain
(31,706 posts)...around here these days. Sadly. Oxen must be gored and agendas served...
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)if the disgruntled around here tried to do something productive with their energy?
The author of the OP is a Warren fan. Yet the majority of his posts tend to be attacks on Obama ... and now apparently, the outrage target will be shifting to Hillary.
Could spend that time posting information that would increase awareness for Warren's broader policy positions. Build her up.
But naaaa. I guess including a Warren 2016 graphic in the outrage posts serves the same purpose.
KharmaTrain
(31,706 posts)...be out there beating the bushes to get the millions needed for his anointed candidate (who surely doesn't know it) to be competitive in primaries that really start after next year's election.
They'd also be working to build up candidates to run for the House & Senate to push through all this pie-in-the-sky we will all be so grateful someday for. Usually I snicker at the naivete in these threads.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)And they'll blame the scary "TPTB" for there not being any sufficiently liberal candidates out there.
While doing little to develop and promote such alternatives.
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)It's not for scared CTers.
brooklynite
(94,330 posts)...how much more effort can you demand?
KharmaTrain
(31,706 posts)Nah...I kinda think it's cute. Reminds me of the kids who ran around school with the "Alfred E. Newmann" or "Archie Bunker" for President stickers on their notebooks in school.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)It probably still kills him that nobody would even know who Warren was if it weren't for Obama and his nomination of her to the CFPB.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Does that count for anything?
Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)First, I assume Manny is talking about the Primaries.
Second, it's not about Iraq. It's about the mentality that would lead one to vote for that war, and what that mindset might bode for the future.
I dunno--I guess if Hill gets the nom, I'll hold my nose one more time…
But, like many others, I'll fight for a better alternative during the Primaries.
Then we'll see.
2016 is still 3 years in the future; a lot can happen between now & then.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Response to hrmjustin (Reply #16)
pipoman This message was self-deleted by its author.
blm
(113,008 posts)and publicly spoke against the decision to invade. Clinton stayed sided with Bush's military decisions.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)blm
(113,008 posts)Details that are significant and accurate.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)is best friends of the Bush Crime family.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)
progressoid
(49,943 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)
Samantha
(9,314 posts)I have been here since 2001, and that is one of the moments in DU time I will not forget.
Sam
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)I imagine it must have been interesting! Was it very controversial?
Generic Other
(28,979 posts)watching helplessly as even the Democrats beat the war drum. The first of many disappointments and shocks.
warrant46
(2,205 posts)
KoKo
(84,711 posts)Can't remember exact;u how many signatures they got...but it was huge...They had boxes of them with a truck to deliver. Never heard what happened to them. And the Protests to stop the Invasion before the vote were huge all over the US and even in the smaller cities. It's all over there archived in DU-2.
It was a terrible time...that vote. Then candlelight vigils and protests that even went on all over North Carolina. People standing every weekend on street corners and public places being given either High Fives with a Honk or "Get A Job You Losers!"
Went on for a long time...even the Marches on DC...but then folks started to say they were useless because it was just those "United for Peace and A.N.S.W.E.R Folks" and all they are about is Anarchy and Socialism. There was push back here on DU. Cyndie Sheehan got a lot of support here...but, then the war faded and she was "Under the Bus."
It's been long years of this...
Generic Other
(28,979 posts)I tried to keep track of all the protest pics from DU. Lost all my bookmarks after DU3 though. I recall the Bush years left me feeling beaten and battered but not defeated like I do now. I hate feeling that way too.
Samantha
(9,314 posts)Last edited Thu Aug 8, 2013, 01:24 AM - Edit history (1)
I hate to open up this can of worms at this moment, because ... well, because. However, I was among those who were outraged that people who are supposed to be more politically knowledgeable and sophisticated than we had the audacity to think they could sign on to give Bush* the authority to go to war and justify that decision in words that made no sense.
Several pledges were taken that politically speaking those thinking of running for POTUS in the future signing on to the agreement would be executing a fatal maneuver for which they would be perceived politically dead in the water. Many of us read this move as simply a self-serving move to prove they would not be weak in the area of national security. And that is exactly why some of these Dems remain unforgiven for those votes and always will be.
But a lot of people who had followed George W. Bush* intently for years could not get past the question if I, a mere nobody knows he is lying, why is it that you, an elected public servant supposedly knowledgeable about these things, do not. And for some the answer was obviously "you do" but your priority is to protect your political future at all costs. And those costs were and remain today staggering beyond belief.
Sam
Nay
(12,051 posts)because somehow they were duped -- many, many people (and not just us keyboard commandos) saw through the whole charade. That's why 600,000 of us even marched on DC before the war. That's why Italy, France, and Israel, among others, were going WTF????
The Dems who voted yea voted that way for the most cynical and myopic reasons -- they didn't want to appear 'weak on defense' in contrast with the pubs. IOW, they were willing to send our kids to die, kill innocent Iraqis, and bankrupt the country just in order to look good for some future ambition of theirs. This is why we dems on this board have a terrible time with many prominent Dems -- they simply have no real standards of behavior, nor do they exhibit any inclination to lead the nation in a different direction; they just want to follow everybody else around nose-to-asshole and hope they can get a better-paying job out of it. It's simply disgusting. And don't get me started on the loony bin Republicans.
Brewinblue
(392 posts)I think Obama realized, however, that with an irrelevant nay vote in the Illinois senate, he would have the liberal base in his pocket in a future run for national office.
HardTimes99
(2,049 posts)against the war at a time when it was very politically risky to do so. A true profile in courage. That his decision ultimately proved quite shrewd is beside the point and, his many political skills notwithstanding, Obama had no way to predict the future. Remember RummyDummyu telling us it would all be over in 6 hours, 6 days or 6 weeks?
HardTimes99
(2,049 posts)Dick Gebhardt and Tom Daschle's Rose Garden Concordat that took Iraq "off the table" for the 2002 mid-terms. That is appeasement that shall forever live in infamy, imho.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)thousands of children are on their hands. They werent duped, they were cowards. I will never vote for anyone that kissed Bush's feet.
I sometimes think a lot of people who have come to this site since those early Bush* years are not aware of the politics that went into this decision as opposed to the purported need to act in our national security interests. But when one looks at the pure raw consequences of that authorization some of our Dems penned their names to, how can we look at them today and say we support them. These were not honest mistakes or poor judgment; these were calculated decisions designed to settle old scores, get the big oil companies a leg up on the Iraqi oil fields, and line the Carlye Group (Bush's father reaped a lot of profit from this war as a result of his inclusion in this company), as well as Halliburton (that would be the same company paying Dick Cheney "deferred compensation" while on leave from his position there to serve as the selected Vice President, which compensation he was free to access upon leaving office) POCKETS. In other words, the old trite truism -- follow the money -- came into play once again. Surprise, surprise.
Sam
KoKo
(84,711 posts)If hundreds of thousands of Patriotic, Involved and Aware Americans did all they could to Protest that Invasion before it begun and the vote.. and continued to protest long after it began....WHY did so much of our elected officials sign off onto it. To be fair in the house...a majority of Dems voted against it. I don't remember the Senate vote...but, I remember those spirited debates between Senators Kennedy and Robert Byrd who tried to stop it. That's down the memory hole these days here on DU...but those of us who were there at the time remember it as an incredible moment in our histories...I think.
Quote from you...says it all:
" I was among those who were outraged that people who are supposed to be more politically knowledgeable and sophisticated than we had the audacity to think they could sign on to give Bush* the authority to go to war and justify that decision in words that made no sense. "
Samantha
(9,314 posts)Have you ever noticed that? I will always remember Byrd's words on this subject. When push came to shove, he never feared speaking truth to power. I do not think we will ever see the likes of him again in Congress.
Sam
Generic Other
(28,979 posts)Well, here are all the links I could find nos! This is for you! And Keph and Andy! Question "W"
8/22/05 Thousands Protest Bush, Iraq War In Salt Lake City
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
7/25/05 Post ball game protest
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
7/5/05 Do The Bobby-Conga ( and other Edinburgh protest pics_
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
6/28/05 Fort Bragg Speech Protest Photos #1 http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
6/27/05 Pics from Saturday's Fox News Lies Denver protest (large files)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
5/17/05 Professors Protest Bush Appearance!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
4/9/05 Photos from todays rally to stop the US occupation in Baghdad
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
4/8/05 Bush Booed at Pope's Funeral
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
4/2/05 St. Petersberg: Is it too late for some protest pics?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
3/27/05 PHOTOS: all across USA, we STAND UP for Peace: the WAGE PEACE campaign
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
3/24/05 PHOTOS: Laramie Wyoming STANDS UP against bush* wars and demands peace
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
3/23/05 My report from anti-war protest at U of M today (we took over a building!)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
3/23/05 Prince Charles greeted by Topless Protester(s)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
3/20/05 My San Diego Anti-War Rally PICTURES March 19 .....
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
3/20/05 Twin Cities Protest Photos
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
3/20/05 Post your protest photos here
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
3/19/05 L.A. protest photos
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
3/19/05 Pictures from Fayetteville, NC
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
3/19/05 Protest PHOTOS already coming in on the wire services LOOK !
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
3/20/05 Some pics from New Orleans protest.....from Maggie (FunkyButt on DU)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
3/20/05 Sunday: Greece Pro-Peace rally PHOTOS....standing against bush* wars
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
3/19/05 My half-hour at the Fayetteville protest
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
3/10/05 A Bunch More Video Of Police Intimidation Of Protesters In NJ on Friday!!!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
3/4/05 Bush in Westfield, NJ Protest - Pics.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
3/4/05 Semi-Official Daily Protest Pics Thread - Are you ready for some protests?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
3/2/05 Semi-Official Daily Protest Pics Thread - Are you ready for some protests?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
2/25/05 Semi-Official Daily Protest Pics Thread - Are you ready for some protests?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
2/24/05 Semi-Official Daily Protest Pics Thread - Are you ready for some protests?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
2/23/05 Semi-Official Daily Protest Pics Thread - Are you ready for some protests?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
2/22/05 Semi-Official Daily Protest Pics Thread - Are you ready for some protests?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
2/21/05 Semi-Official Daily Protest Pics Thread - Are you ready for some protests?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
2/10/05 Protesting the Coronation of King George: Slideshow
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
1/22/05 Just got home from the Jazz Funeral for Democracy.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
1/20/05 WTF? Protesters(behind 10 ft. fence) pepper sprayed
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
1/20/05 Washington State protests
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
1/20/05 Yahoo Slideshow-63 Protest Pics (and counting)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
1/4/05 THIS is how anti-Bush protesters should look!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
2004
11/10/04 MILITARY TANKS vs Protestors Downtown Los Angeles, CA
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
8/30/04 Feel The Love! Classic NYC Protest Photos
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
8/28/04 I came within 20ft of W today, Ask me anything!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
8/28/04 Powell cancels Athens visit amid protests
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
8/28/04 Attention Tucson DU'ers BIG PROTEST TOMMOROW
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
8/27/04 War Protests at the Olympic Closing ceremony
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
8/27/04 Protest pics from NYC: Chinatown, etc.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
8/3/04 Two arrested at demo against Bush
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
8/2/04 Missouri protesters get a gold star
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
7/29/04 "Free speech" in Boston: Eyewitness report from the FSZ
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
7/7/04 Okay! I saw the P-Resident! I was in the NC Protest this a.m. Motorcade!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
7/25/04 What a Day!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
7/25/04 Protestors in Boston "clash" -- anti-choice & anti-war
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
6/11/04 All who MARCHED against the invasion?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
7/11/04 Best Article Seen About Protests Along *'s Road Trip in PA
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
6/28/04 Mother of dead soldier protests Pentagon ban.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
6/27/04 PHOTOS: the brave IRISH stand up against war-criminal bush*
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
6/28/04 Turkey protests war-criminal bush* and his minions (PHOTOS)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
6/27/04 * Visits Ireland: Irish People Say "Make Love, Not War".
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
6/26/04 photos of Dublin anti-Bush demo
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
6/5/04 10,000 protesters march in Paris against bush.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
6/4/04 HOLY CRAP! 500,000 protesting in Rome...Now that's a Protest!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
6/2/04 From my home town...Colorado Springs....
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
6/2/04 3 Days until June 5 Mass Mobilization in LA, SF, Washington ...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
6/1/04 POLICE ATTACK CROWD in SW Baltimore Sunday May 29th 2004
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
5/30/04 today's anti-American protests in Pakistan AND India (PHOTOS)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
5/13/04 Antiwar Group Protests Torture in Front of Rumsfeld's House
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
7/5/04 anti-bush* demonstrators in Richmond Virginia !! (PHOTOs)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
7/1/04 Protests scheduled for Cheney's visit to New Orleans today
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
6/27/04 A better-late-than-never report from the Dublin protest
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
6/10/04 Protest Pics from the G-8 Summit..
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
6/4/04 Italian protests bush photos
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
5/4/04 Bush Protest-------Dayton OHIO
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
4/10/04 150 protest Iraq violence in Chicago--Washington Times (Uggghhhh)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
4/8/04 **Emergency Iraq Protests** Friday & Saturday
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
4/2/04 Group protests outside Rove's house
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
4/27/04 Pics from Boston Protest Against Bush 3/25 (Warning: PHOTOS)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
3/21/04 Reflections on the Crawford Protest - It was a Beautiful Day!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
3/21/04 Personal PHOTOS and NARRATIVE of UFPJ anti-war march NYC, March 20, 2004
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
3/21/04 This time the protests are coming from the heartland
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
3/21/04 Chicago M20 report: Lots of good pictures of police, protesters, freepers
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
3/27/04 Pics from Boston Protest Against Bush 3/25 (Warning: PHOTOS)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
2003
12/2/03 A Grieving Father Protests Iraq War
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
11/25/03 Protests mark Bush's first visit to Las Vegas as president
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
11/20/03 Thousands Protest (200000- but police say 70000, and US Media ignores)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
11/20/03 Thousands in Britain protest Bush visit, pull down statue of Bush
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
11/20/03 Cops busting heads in Miami right now
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
11/19/03 pictures from the London protest
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
11/19/03 Protesters Jeer President Bush in London
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
11/19/03 Ordinary People Join in Protests
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
11/19/03 Scotland stages anti-Bush protests
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
11/18/03 Police retreat to let marchers go down W
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
11/16/03 Protests greet Rumsfeld in South Korea
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
11/15/03 American Expatriates to Lead the Protests Against Bush
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
11/15/03 Anti-war pupils to face crackdown
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
10/25/03 25,000 stage anti-Iraq War Protests in Washington, San Francisco
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
10/25/03 Anti-War Protesters Gather in D.C., S.F.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
10/25/03 families of US soldiers in Iraq lead anti-war protests
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
10/25/03 Anti-War Rallies Today on Both Coasts
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
10/24/03 Anti-War Protesters Gathering on Coasts
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
10/24/03 Hundreds in Waikiki protest administration policies
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
10/18/03 Protests greet Bush in Philippines
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
9/29/03 Marchers Demand U.S. Pullout From Iraq
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
9/9/03 Protesters greet President Bush in Fort Lauderdale
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
9/3/03 Boston TV-5: Protesters Greet Ashcroft On Patriot Act
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
8/24/03 Protesters near Bush ranch demand withdrawal of troops from Iraq
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
7/23/03 Anti-War protest in Chicago
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
7/23/03 Hundreds protest President Bush a day after his visit (Seattle)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
7/20/03 Protestors Must Stay on Sidewalk for Bush Visit (Portland)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
7/25/03 Protestors stop White House Karl Rove's speech at convention!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
7/21/03 Antiwar Students Rock the Vote
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
2/21/03 (rw) Extremists Arrested During Weeklong Protests in Charlotte
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
7/20/03 Bush stop brings funds, protests
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
7/18/03 Protestors Greet Ashcroft in Portland
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
7/8/03 Protest crowds gather for Bush visit (10,000 expected)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
7/23/03 2 Code Pink Ladies arrested today at UN's Special Council on Iraq
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
7/25/03 Slogans from signs at protests:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
7/9/03 Alright. When do we get credit for taking to the streets? The Protests...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
1/20/2001 Skinner: Seven Days Underground
http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/01/01/010...
KoKo
(84,711 posts)Will Bookmark for later read. THANKS!
I'm going to see later if I can find that Petition to the UN...because many newer DU'ers would find that interesting.
limpyhobbler
(8,244 posts)We have better choices.
cart/horse
Good point though.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)
leveymg
(36,418 posts)Last edited Wed Aug 7, 2013, 09:36 AM - Edit history (1)
Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and then, finally, Iran. These folks -- Perle, Feith Wurmser, etc. -- explained how to do it in '96; reproduced here: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1438.htm
KoKo
(84,711 posts)Where have we gone that new Candidates haven't been Groomed by our "Forward Leaning Democratic Party?
Why is it that Barack Obama and the Clintons are the only NEW IDEAS the Dem Party has GOING FORWARD? Why is it that the Repugs want to go back to the Bush Years with Jeb being Groomed? WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO US?
That's what I want to know! My vote is precious to me..and so far it has been used to put Wall Street Bankers, Hedge Funds for Privatization AHEAD to PILFER us who live Under the 1% and USE US for their Own Purposes while Labor, Teachers, Service and Health Care-Care Givers and the rest of Us like Police, Fire Protection and Civil Servants go UNDER THE BUS...for LOW WAGES to Compete with Third World Countries!
Privatization is the New Model...pushed by both Dems and Repugs. Schools, Roads, Infrastructure, Cities and Towns. Then the FRACKING forced on us and the GMO Monsanto Seeds sucking the life out of Independent Agriculture. Mom and Pop's growing gardens left out of Heritage Seed Stock forced to grow the same CRAP that Big Agra Business does because..."It Ships Well!"
On and on.....and on.
joshcryer
(62,265 posts)
ForgoTheConsequence
(4,867 posts)How was she suppose to know? It's not like there were hundreds of thousands of us marching through the streets that knew otherwise. I mean we were just dirty hippies, communists and assorted other pinkos.
ctsnowman
(1,903 posts)JAbuchan08
(3,046 posts)who'd just led us through a national tragedy on through his strength of character and commitment to transperancy
immoderate
(20,885 posts)And I'll rule out Cuomo. I don't think he'll govern well. 
--imm
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)I heard again today that things are worse than ever in Iraq. The Iraq War competes with Viet Nam for the most failed war in American history.
ohheckyeah
(9,314 posts)why would we trust any politician with our future?
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)you mean?
ohheckyeah
(9,314 posts)I don't trust any politician......even the ones I vote for.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)I have a conscience. Politics doesn't mean you give up your conscience.
And anyone who asks you to do that, is someone to watch out for.
JI7
(89,239 posts)Quite the opposite. DU has the records, feel free to search.
JI7
(89,239 posts)Of the three frontrunners, I supported Obama, only because he might not be a disaster. The other two were near-certain disasters.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)Big REC for post #24
leftstreet
(36,097 posts)What were the other axii in the axis of evil? I forgot already
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)Now on to Syria, Iran, or wherever.
BainsBane
(53,012 posts)Over three years away?
Nay
(12,051 posts)with the fundraising and putting together an election team within the next 6 months to a year. It's the nature of our hideous election system that it takes a BILLION dollars to fund a long, drawn-out fight, and it takes serious money to even start the process. It's sick, I know, but no one with the power to change this seems to want to. In fact, with Citizens United, there's an expansion of this sick funding/vetting/buyout process.
There's a certain point where the system is broken but no one in power wants to fix it, because it is generally profitable for them. We're at that point, IMHO.
One thing I can't figure out, though, is why some very wealthy liberals don't use Citizens United to fund their own liberal candidate, someone like Dr Dean. Or why they don't fund other things that might help this country, like a leftie Fox News. All I can assume is that nearly all rich people are very happy with the way things are. That makes them sociopaths, of course.
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)their triangulation than a Democratic candidate who simply wants to be a Democrat, (2) they will have better financial support from the big money people, (3) when they get enough money for themselves, they will be able to apply the trickle down theory to benefit all the rest of us.
Please don't just look at potential candidates who voted for the Iraq War Resolution. Look at the ones who approved of let's-send-jobs-to-foreign-countries "free trade" agreements and those who voted to amend the Bankruptcy laws for the benefit of the rich and super-rich. These people are team players. They know how to get along with other players.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Yay!
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)Plenty of West Virginians repeatedly elected as their senator someone who had held the office of Exalted Cyclops in the KKK. Voting for the war, given the torrent of misinformation and spin, is similarly forgiveable IMO.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)I haven't seen anything like this from the potential 2016 Dem candidates.
Note that I have permission from the blog owner to repost anything from this blog.
http://www.balloon-juice.com/2008/03/21/my-iraq-war-retrospective/
Everything.
And I don’t say that to provide people with an easy way to beat up on me, but I do sort of have to face facts. I was wrong about everything.
I was wrong about the Doctrine of Pre-emptive warfare.
I was wrong about Iraq possessing WMD.
I was wrong about Scott Ritter and the inspections.
I was wrong about the UN involvement in weapons inspections.
I was wrong about the containment sanctions.
I was wrong about the broader impact of the war on the Middle East.
I was wrong about this making us more safe.
I was wrong about the number of troops needed to stabilize Iraq.
I was wrong when I stated this administration had a clear plan for the aftermath.
I was wrong about securing the ammunition dumps.
I was wrong about the ease of bringing democracy to the Middle East.
I was wrong about dissolving the Iraqi army.
I was wrong about the looting being unimportant.
I was wrong that Bush/Cheney were competent.
I was wrong that we would be greeted as liberators.
I was wrong to make fun of the anti-war protestors.
I was wrong not to trust the dirty smelly hippies.
I mean, I could go down the list and continue on, but you get the point. I was wrong about EVERY. GOD. DAMNED. THING. It is amazing I could tie my shoes in 2001-2004. If you took all the wrongness I generated, put it together and compacted it and processed it, there would be enough concentrated stupid to fuel three hundred years of Weekly Standard journals. I am not sure how I snapped out of it, but I think Abu Ghraib and the negative impact of the insurgency did sober me up a bit.
War should always be an absolute last resort, not just another option. I will never make the same mistakes again.
TheKentuckian
(25,020 posts)Hillary has not given the slightest hint she is sorry and has learned from her mistake, in fact it seems more likely she would double down considering her saber rattling toward Iran.
As far as your example goes, it is plausible it had less to do with forgiveness than not much giving a shit. Hell, some might be less than pleased with the turning of the new leaf.
HardTimes99
(2,049 posts)burnodo
(2,017 posts)if there were Dems who voted for it, they did so because they wanted to and are unforgivable, your nonsensical introduction of Robert Byrd notwithstanding
summer-hazz
(112 posts)on this.. Why would we vote for someone who voted yes for the war?
Furthermore, I read daily we want money out of politics
She is a Washington insider
She has a shady past
She is a Third Rail
She is a Centrist...
There are so many reasons we need to find/get Liz Warren
on the ticket. She is fresh, not connected, or obligated to the
machine that's Washington bubble...
The last post on this thread before I posted asked why are we even
talking about POTUS for 2016? Well, b/c its all over the news, its being
tossed around on DU, and we need to get in front of everything
for the elections of 2014 and 2016. Its not to early, ... The RWing
are already talking and campaigning, and fundraising.
Why would we vote for her? Only b/c she is all we have that can win and that is sad!
ps please send me the way to have the same post on my page. WARREN2016. I would also like to use it if you don't mind.. Thank you. 
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Take a look, I just added it. Let me know if it's unclear.
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)Indeed. In fact one could argue that therein lies the current system's primary weakness. As well as ''the tell'' of who this whole political paradigm is designed by and for.
Just who were they ''trying to look presidential for?" The world stage? The other leader-actors of the old guard states in Europe? Or, the MIC? Of course. The MIC. That's where the REAL power is in this country. And why wouldn't it be? We're still top dog because we have more killing machines than anyone else on the planet.
And we're in the war-making bid'ness, and so it stands to reason that the the war-making companies would have all the power, since they have all the information and control all of the buttons to the important shit.
- So maybe we should be asking ourselves, why do we continue to trust anyone but ourselves with our future? Isn't one definition of insanity where one continues to do the same thing over and over again expecting a different result? If we want a different result then we'll have to start with building a different system.
K&R
[center]"Neurosis is the inability to tolerate ambiguity." --Sigmund Freud[/center]
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)
robertpaulsen
(8,632 posts)Until we change the way money works, we change nothing. That 94 year old man is right on!
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)...however, the critical-mass we need to reach here at DU is still a ways off.
- But I'm ever hopeful more and more will awaken.....
[center]PLANS NOBODY'S USING RIGHT NOW
This is how we get there: Resource-based Economy
This is what we do when we get there: The Venus Project
We are human beings of the planet Earth. This planet belongs to us in-common, as we belong to it. Until we all understand this, things can only get worse than they are now.
There is no other way.[/center]
robertpaulsen
(8,632 posts)I'm trying to stay hopeful too. The 100th monkey will come sometime this century. It has to, or we're done for.
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)[center]The LIES won't do and they're becoming sickening to hear.
And they LIE to us so poorly. They don't even care anymore.
The talking points ring hollow, rendering them contradictory or speechless.
Before, always the protests stopped. They won't stop.
Before the defiance was quashed. The defiance won't stop.
There is no need to fight the system because to fight it is to become it -- just another destroyer.
There is no need to resist the system, stop using it, stop supporting it -- and create a new one to take its place.
The Declaration of Independence says that we have the God-given inalienable right to do so.
The system is NOTHING without us. They realize this and always have used it to their advantage. We haven't.
We must remove ourselves from their equation.
We. Must. Not. Fear.[/center]
- Take heart! It's always darkest before the dawn....
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)They were told Saddam needed the THREAT of an attack and it had to be credible or he wouldn't cooperate with the inspectors.
So what is really in question is how gullible these Democrats are that they were so easily fooled by a bunch of guys who were obviously itching to go to war with Iraq before 9/11.
We saw it.
They didn't.
That's just plain blindness to reality of how evil the Neocons are. They were willing to use a national tragedy to advance their own agenda and Democrats considered them to be respectable.
Dwayne Hicks
(637 posts)Who allow republicans to steal elections. Any Democrat is better than a republican. If Hillary is nominated and you stay home and don't vote, you are not a Democrat.
intaglio
(8,170 posts)Enjoy being under a Republican House Senate and Presidency - or do you think that is a precondition for revolt?
nxylas
(6,440 posts)He has said that he voted for Kerry over a Republican. But that shouldn't have to be the choice.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Hillary has war experience now.
You wouldn't want an inexperienced president without war experience. There's a good chance Hillary might have to do a preemptive strike on Iran while she is president. At least she will know how to get started.
Third--Way Enthusiast.
JVS
(61,935 posts)Just like they thought it was her turn in 2008.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)I'll just tune out presidential politics completely if she's nominated.
There are enough progressives to whom I can donate my time and money.
bluedeathray
(511 posts)And reacted patriotically. Not saying it was right, or just, or desirable.
AND, if HRC isn't a viable candidate, OR a true representative of our goals and philosophies, THEN let's debate on those terms.
A single issue won't do.
Nay
(12,051 posts)Or cynical, grasping, greedy assholes just like Republicans. That's our point. There's no way. The info was out there multiple places, multiple times. 15 of the damn hijackers were Saudi - so how come we weren't invading Saudi Arabia? Oh, never mind. They couldn't even keep their shitass, crappy stories straight, they outed CIA agents, they didn't listen to their own CIA operatives, or Italy, or France, or Israel, or the inspectors they sent to inspect for WMD, or anybody.
I think Dems who voted for that war resolution should be terminally ashamed of themselves and should excuse themselves from further office, just because they WERE SO FUCKING WRONG, if for no other reason.
bluedeathray
(511 posts)Cynical? Almost certainly. She is not stupid.
The nation wanted to attack someone because of 9-11. She may have wanted to ride that wave of Bush's popularity and go along. I don't know.
I'm only saying that a single issue doesn't work for me. Part of that decision (in this case) is the fact that I was fooled for a while too.
HRC isn't out of it, based on that vote. She's going to have to earn a nomination. But I will probably end up writing in E Warren if necessary.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)But it was 10 years ago.
Nay
(12,051 posts)way. And you can bet rainbow unicorns that if we vote in one of those war voters, we will get exactly what we deserve, and we will have no excuses.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)So I hear you.
KoKo
(84,711 posts)That's what I think needs to be discussed.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)RC
(25,592 posts)She sounded just like she was substituting for George Walker Bush. And we want this woman for our President?
No, we don't.
Smarmie Doofus
(14,498 posts)>>>Why would we trust one of these people with our future? >>>>>
We CAN not.
And.... we don't *have* to. Plenty of talent... some, but not all of it, new....in the party to chose from.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)I'm not sure I would vote for one in the primary.
At the same time, wasn't Obama vocally opposed to it. Yet he foolishly takes aggressive stances with our military across the globe, fomenting more and for hate.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Now that's settled three years before the election, what now?
I love these posts for the sheer irrelevance.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)The reality that Obama won re-election is setting in. After 4+ years of complaining about him and having it not matter, its time to look forward to the next outrage target.
The endless complaining about Hillary won't do much to advance some other candidate. But that won't slow it down.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)etc:
https://www.readyforhillary.com/petition?ms=gs.t.hrc.p.aq.5302013
Seems prudent to try to nip the Warrior Queen in the bud.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Still, good luck with this campaign. It's good to get an early start.
I'm going back to focus on the current administration and Congress now.
brooklynite
(94,330 posts)...she's campaigning for them. This is intended to harvest names of existing Hillary supporters for the upcoming Senate races.
"Ready For Hillary" is a PAC that IS campaigning for her. And if you want Elizabeth Warren to be a viable alternative, better get an alternative movement organized.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)L0oniX
(31,493 posts)KoKo
(84,711 posts)Auntie Bush
(17,528 posts)Then vote Hillary! We'll lose the election to Christy or Cruz or Rubio or even Jeb Bush if we don't back Hillary. Hillary has far and above better credentials for president. The ReThugs and Independents take one look of her lack of foreign policy experience and we'll never get one of their votes. Besides, we NEED Elizabeth in the senate tearing into Wall Street Bankers with vengeance. Also, if she leaves the Senate a ReThug could take that seat again. Horrors!
Hopefully Hillary has this election in a bag...don't ruin it!
Scuba
(53,475 posts)... on the other hand, she has a good chance of picking up tens of millions of votes from the 40% of potential voters who don't bother because neither Party offers them squat. THAT's where the votes are to be had, not peeling them away from the right.
KoKo
(84,711 posts)gets Rights...while other Groups Suffer. So far Wall Street has gotten all the Rights with both Clinton and Obama.
I'm sick of bones being thrown to us to divide us over Social Issues. That's how they work it...Women's Rights vs Gay Rights, Hispanic vs African American Rights, Southern States Voters vs the "Supposed Liberal State's Voters Issues"...Basic Education vs. Technological Improvements. Gun Owners vs. those Who Want to Restrict, Union/Labor vs. Needs of Wall Street and Bankers rights, Privatization of America over Locally Controlled, Box Stores vs. Local Businesses, "Privacy of our Bodies vs. TSA (Right to Be Safe) Violations of our Bodies....On and On and On........!
Carolina
(6,960 posts)Hillary, Biden and Kerry can twists themselves in knots rationalizing their cowardly votes, but those aye votes just before the 2002 midterm elections (in safe seats no less) showed a complete lack of moral courage and leadership.
Many posters will complain that these once and current "leaders" voted as they did because they were lied to. But what tripe that is. They knew the Bush cabal was a bunch of liars and cheaters, they knew about PNAC, and they knew that a nation that had been bombed into submission in 1991, kept under UN sanctions for the subsequent decade plus and then bombed sporadically during the Clinton years was no imminent threat to US!
fredamae
(4,458 posts)"Why on Earth should we nominate a presidential candidate who voted for war with Iraq?"
Especially when WE were Ignored when WE said NO!
Autumn
(44,976 posts)We will vote for whomever the Democratic party and TPTB decide will be best for us. Doesn't matter if they voted for the Iraq war or not. Sooner or later any politician that runs is going to support that war or any other war. It's just bidness.
Now just calm down and eat your freedom peas. You gotta understand this. The system is rigged.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)
Sid
Zorra
(27,670 posts)owns TV stations, newspapers, radio stations, and trolls.
Whoever controls the media, the images, controls the culture.
Allen Ginsberg
"Whoever controls the media, controls the mind."
Jim Morrison
Still, we'll struggle against all odds to get it done, because it is worth the effort...
brooklynite
(94,330 posts)It might be simpler to say: "Nominating a candidate who doesn't want to run is virtually impossible"
Zorra
(27,670 posts)are extremely different circumstances.
It's true, Elizabeth may not want to run.
In that case, we're most likely screwn once again.
It's really interesting to see who funded Elizabeth's Senate campaign:
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00033492&newmem=Y
brooklynite
(94,330 posts)...if fact, the WSJ did an article about her supporters that took a dig at my wife.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)candidate wants. 2008 was a picture of desires thwarted. Personally, I see this needful agenda to push Presidential politics now rather than focus on the midterms to be suspect. If we don't get a better House and hold the Senate we are screwed. Who wants us to neglect the next election while dreaming of WH wins? Republicans.
Nothing should distract readers from the next very important and quickly looming round of elections. Many on DU come from districts that have vital races impending, long months and years before the precious divas of the Presidential tussle get up to dance. Focus. On the next election, not the one after than.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)I have given up on the country being saved. The Obama debacle has completely crushed that hope. Right now I am just hoping that it waits until after I die to plummet into full 3rd-world status. Voting for her will slow down the slide compared to either of the two fat Republicans.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)with regard to Iraq certainly informs how one would see her Iran policy turning out.
Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)At any cost.
brooklynite
(94,330 posts)I was beginning to worry that we'd run out.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)fellow citizen for President is not 'anti' that person, it is a choice for the highest office. I can love and adore you and still not want you to do my books or represent me in my absence.
I'd say that your own threads promoting her were posted and that others in the Party have every right to do the same. Are you under the impression that you are in charge of what others discuss? Your choice is somehow entitled to the support of all others? Why is that?
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)
Beacool
(30,247 posts)Or maybe that's just the nausea inducing OPs that have become a daily occurrence on this board.
madrchsod
(58,162 posts)her war vote and her age.
i`d rather have new wine in new bottles
mainer
(12,017 posts)he opposed the Iraq War, and he's been right about almost every damn thing.
brooklynite
(94,330 posts)He screwed it up by not finding a way to get people to vote for him.
cascadiance
(19,537 posts)I knew someone that attended that rally, and he HAD to yell as loud as he did to speak to be heard by the people there. Of course the way the mikes were positioned to isolate out the crowd noise and amplify Dean's voice made it appear that he was yelling when he didn't need to. And of course the corporate media were just THRILLED to be able to position him as a "crazy" candidate then with that event. That way they could get back to having only DLC/corporatist candidates at the top of the ticket.
brooklynite
(94,330 posts)cascadiance
(19,537 posts)... and misrepresented how he was communicating to his followers in Iowa, even if he did lose.
http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-250_162-596021.html
That coverage of his speech and the media aftermath did put him on the defensive about it in the weeks to come. If he hadn't had to deal with that, he still might have lost New Hampshire, etc. But I don't think it was necessarily a foregone conclusion.
Of course in the case of Republicans, you have them instead have the favorite's losing to Santorum in Iowa be covered up with vote totaling snafus to have it appear that Romney won fine, so that he could win other primaries later with Santorum likely less of a threat than he would have been had Santorum been declared the winner. But it's hard to tell there as well.
mainer
(12,017 posts)And Americans don't like that.
They didn't like being told that going to Iraq was BS.
They didn't like being told a lot of true things.
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)The Democratic Party Machine will shove her down everyone's throat, marginalize all other contenders and starve their campaigns. By the time Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina has finished voting, viola! Instant candidate that 90% of the population never got to vote on. See how that works?
MisterP
(23,730 posts)brooklynite
(94,330 posts)when the nomination dragged out until June.
To paraphrase Mitt Romney: "The Democratic Party is people, my friend". People who vote (35 million of them); people who walk door to door canvassing, and people who chip in money, whether $1000 or $10. Complain that THEY chose the candidates is a sour grapes way of saying "my candidate didn't win".
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)They unexpectedly ended up with two pro-corporate candidates who had to fight it out for a few more states. Notice there were no liberals from which to choose after the above three states. It was Corporate Whore A and Corporate Whore B. As George Carlin said, we don't have choice, we have the illusion of choice. It made for a nice dog-and-pony show.
on point
(2,506 posts)I could tell the evidence was faked. Millions around the world could tell too and marched against the war. So candidates which one the three was it?
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)L0oniX
(31,493 posts)Safetykitten
(5,162 posts)heaven05
(18,124 posts)oh by the way, it will be done anyway. As long as the money people(corporations) like the nominee, a shoo in.
Beacool
(30,247 posts)Hate Hillary, hate Bill, some days hate Obama, hate every moderate Democrat who is alive today and some who are dead too. Did I miss anybody?
The Left is so predictable. Yeah, push for Warren, Brown and any other LW candidate who wouldn't have a chance in hell to get the job in 2016. Wake me up when the whole drama is over and we end up with a Bagger as president, or maybe the Right will hold their nose and nominate my fat governor. Then he can piss off both party bases equally.
BTW, anyone worried that 2014 may be another 2010 for the Democrats? Just asking..........
cascadiance
(19,537 posts)That is what most of us are saying in these posts, since the corporate owned media is trying to "establish" Hillary Clinton as a favorite for the coming election now. Those of us who don't feel our interests (or that of MOST Americans that aren't rich) are being represented by this corporate media feel it necessary to say that the race should still be open, and to voice our concerns of where we think our leadership has failed us over the last 30 years while both parties that have lead have sought to represent the 1% instead of the 99% during that time.
As the recent Quinnipiac poll just noted she was a close third behind Christie and Clinton. Arguably as a political newcomer, who has taken stances that contend with corporate interests more than those two front runners do, her biggest problem that would keep her from getting elected is visibility and parts of the populace not knowing what her record is compared to these other two, who the corporate media like to talk about a lot more.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/08/06/why-you-shouldnt-underestimate-elizabeth-warren/
If she already is getting that kind of visibility, I would argue the biggest argument against her having a shot in 2016 is being shot down. If she can get her message out through the corporate media filters, which it seems she already has, then I think in some ways she can be amore TRUE moderate with TRUE bipartisan viewpoints that support a majority of what Americans want, even if it isn't what corporate America wants. Her stances against the banksters, wanting to fight students' debt load, and other positions on issues that maybe the corporate sector don't want, but members of both parties and independents want, could make her a strong candidate for 2016, and not for just the "far left" as the corporatists are trying to depict her as being, unless the corporatists understand that "the far left" is in effect the 99% of Americans versus their "mainstream" corporatist 1%er camp.
I believe many here don't "hate" Hillary Clinton. Many would vote for her over any Republican that she'd run against if she won the nomination. But we really think that there are better options for us to nominate for our candidate than Hillary, and that in a time where we face economic and environmental devastation from many world problems now like climate change, it is very essential in our minds that we make some big changes to stop this love affair with the corporate sector that has failed us for too long. That isn't "hating" her. It's wanting a new direction that she doesn't offer.
Metric System
(6,048 posts)not equal a corporate conspiracy.
cascadiance
(19,537 posts)I guess she really wasn't then was she, in terms of what actually happened later. What were they trying to say then? Not so much that they expected her to win, but that they WANTED her to be in a position to win. When Obama was a close second, he obviously was an "acceptable" second choice too.
Now, Obama serves their interests as well. It would be interesting to see if they try to push down Elizabeth Warren if they feel she's more of a real threat towards controlling their power over our government. And to deny corporate power over our government is pretty ludicrous these days. It's hard to say whether either Obama or Hillary in their heart WANT this corporate power, if they felt they had the freedom to do whatever they wanted. But whether or not Obama and Hillary want corporate power to be dictating what goes on in Washington or not, they have both been enablers of it happening, and don't appear to outwardly have too much problems doing so. Someone like Warren I feel wouldn't embrace being an enabler as much as they do.
If you go strictly by the numbers of the Quinnipiac poll as the word of god, then Chris Christie is our next president. But many have noted, he would be lucky to get out of the Republican primaries, let alone win the presidency then. It's still way too early to read too much in to the polls what will happen later and who we should "anoint" yet. A lot of time still before then. I refuse to anoint someone because "they have the best chance", when that really hasn't been established yet, just as it wasn't this early before the last presidential election.
We should do our best when the time comes evaluating who has the best stances representing party values, and hopefully build a good consensus with someone that we feel will also appeal to the populace in general.
And again, whether it is Warren or another "left" politician running that advocates issues like prosecuting banksters, etc., I think we shouldn't have them diminished as being "too partisan left wing" when in many of these cases, these issues are something that not just the left among the general populace will support but the independents, and some of the right as well. It is those issues that the corporate elites don't want that work against them that they will try to position as "far left" in order to try and diminish their importance as factors in who should get elected. We as the voting populace should DEMAND that these issues be used as a measuring stick, as many of these issues are the ones that have been avoided for way too long, and are a large reason why our country is in the mess it is in now because of that selective avoidance brought on by corporate lobbyist corruption. Then we can get a Democrat that can really make a difference the way an FDR would.
pansypoo53219
(20,952 posts)
Gregorian
(23,867 posts)It's the military, stupid!
I even had an idea for essentially eliminating the military, since by doing that we slow down the carbon emissions, stop the terrorism, among other things. Just keep paying the bastards to not do what they've been doing. They get to keep their jobs, but we don't bomb anyone, or make any military machinery. Once people realize that life is actually better that way, then we can get them to start working on renewable energy research and development and implementation.
If you think that's crazy, then just keep doing what we're doing now, and see how much life improves.
avaistheone1
(14,626 posts)
ctsnowman
(1,903 posts)And I don't by "but we were lied to by Bush". Many people could see through the lies and if someone couldn't then I question their thinking abilities. Now I'm sure some will say but they were told secret stuff behind closed doors. If that's what sold them on the pack of BS then why didn't they ever call it out after it was proven to be BS. All of the people that supported it have argued over BS talking points that were presented in the MSM to this day. Some of them now want to pretend like it turned out to be a good thing in the long run and even go so far as to claim Bush meant well.
Bake
(21,977 posts)Just sayin' ...
Bake
totodeinhere
(13,056 posts)We don't need to nominate Clinton just because we want to win.
brooklynite
(94,330 posts)I personally think there wouldn't be a lot of daylight between Clinton and Warren on policy positions (yes, I know people here disagree, but I'm still waiting for an example of a policy that Warren would definitively support and Clinton would definitively oppose). A lot of the game is political experience, and the ability to build a national campaign. I think Hillary edges Warren out there. Given the likely Republican alternatives, I'll go with whomever has the best chance of winning.
Bake
(21,977 posts)Me too.
Bake
cascadiance
(19,537 posts)If you watch this video, which I saw many years ago, way before Warren was on the political scene and even before she was selected to help start the Consumer Protection Bureau, I was way impressed with how much she understood what has happened to the middle class since the time before Reagan and in a very detailed fashion. She really UNDERSTANDS what the middle class has had to face over the many years of the degradation they've faced since Reagan's time, and it is reflected in her efforts in the Senate towards legislation.
Watch this video here and see what I mean.
I think the more visibility she gets as she speaks to all Americans, and NOT just the "left", I think more Americans will understand that she is the best option to lead us towards getting us out of the economic mess we are in now, which I think is and will be the highest priority for American voters in 2016, perhaps next to Climate Change, and other issues facing the middle class.
The fact that the Quinnipiac poll shows that she already has a sizable visibility quotient, which I think would be her biggest liability, I think shows that she can be a strong candidate in 2016. Unless Obama finds his way towards embracing an FDR style identity and really repairing the current Democratic Party's image as to also being toadies for corporate America, Americans will be thirsty for someone NEW and will absolutely reject the Third Way/DLC candidates in 2016.
KharmaTrain
(31,706 posts)...or a 15 second campaign spot? If not...you've lost the attention of a majority of American voters. A vast majority of people don't need a history lesson as to how we got here...they want a blueprint on where to go and how it will get done. How can a "President" Warren get legislation passed in a hostile legislative? Will she wave a wand and automatically 60 or more Progressive/Liberal Senators will show up or 240 or more Congresscritters?
It's an amusing exercize going on here building up the ideal candidate (who hasn't indicated any interest in running) and then using her as a strawman to pummel the current administration. Kinda like playing fantasy football...
cascadiance
(19,537 posts)And the more she speaks to people, whether in a campaign or in a debate, this knowledge will come out more and more and show her to be the "real deal" and not someone that's just mouthing talking points about what the middle class is facing. We've already seen many clips of news interviews here of her smacking down "journalists" who she exposes as being these kind of people.
Why should she be stupid enough waving a "I'm a candidate for president" flag now, when she's only in the first part of her first term as senator. That wouldn't rub very well with those of Massachusetts who would feel more that she was using this job as a stepping stone then. If she continues to work hard as senator for the next couple of years, and then announces after she's "coaxed" by many to do so, then she will be looked more on as someone who's feeling like she's being "called for duty" rather than "seeking the job". And to be honest, I think she might be happy continuing being a senator. But I think many close to her could persuade her that she has a rare opportunity to make a difference at a national level that we all as Americans need, not just those she represents in Massachusetts. I think that in that context, those in Massachusetts will support her as well.
I think someone who understands the history as well as she's shown to be in the video clip here, will have far more ability to draw that blueprint of where to go and how it will be done. And from what I've seen so far in her efforts towards legislation, I think she's trying to act in that capacity.
Now the Senate still is lead by a do nothing Harry Reid, and the House of course is dead now. But that could change in 2014 too, especially if the Tea Party carries through on their threats to stay home for that election, and perhaps give the Democrats a gift that they gave Republicans in 2010.
"Pummel the current administration"? Hmm... I support Obama in areas he has made a difference in the right direction, like gay rights, etc. But let's face it, areas like gay rights aren't what the corporatist backers care about too much, so he can work more for his base in those areas than he can in the areas they want to pull the strings (like prosecuting banksters that Obama and Holder can't even seem to do as good a job in doing as Reagan did with the Savings and Loan crisis, and instead prosecute more whistleblowers for espionage than all administrations collectively before them). Obama is pummeling himself for those Democrats that have principles and aren't just "yes men" for what he does because he's "on our team" as if this was a football game.
KharmaTrain
(31,706 posts)...President Obama formally announced his '08 campaign in February '07 and by then had millions in campaign funds set aside and a campaign organization up and rolling in iowa and New Hampshire. The fundraising has to start yesterday as it is sure to cost millions to gain the visibility to be a legitimate candidate...not to mention lining up the politicians and other leaders in those primary states who will help get the word and voters out. It doesn't happen by magic. If Senator Warren were to play out this fantasy, then the reality needs to start hitting the road soon. The only challenger I'm hearing about to Hillary in '16 so far is Gov. O'Malley of Maryland...who is already out fundraising and testing the waters. Senator Warren would need to do the same thing...do the "retail" campaigning...but I don't expect she will as she's busy trying to become an effective Senator.
Yep, the Senate could change in 2015...with McConnell or Cornyn as the Majority leader turning that body into a teabagger copy of the House. The Democrats have to defend seats in purple and red states...areas gerrymandered by rushpublican majorities. A fantasy "President Warren" would face and even more obstructionist legislative than the real President Obama currently does. So what's the strategy there...other than to blame Harry Reid? Gonna hope the teabaggers stay home next year? Not with all those state legislatures they control up for re-election...they'll be there. Will Democrats show? The stakes are far higher in 2014 than 2016...very real for millions of women whose healthcare is in peril, minorities whose voting rights are under attack...what can or will a fantasy "President" Warren do about that? Again...this is pure fantasy as I don't expect Senator Warren to do anything more than establish seniority, experience and become a very effective Senator...
totodeinhere
(13,056 posts)But especially with strong opposition from minority voters the GOP is going to be very hard pressed to win a national election. That's why I have believed for some time that the real fight will be over state and local elections which are also very important.
pnwmom
(108,955 posts)She voted to authorize Bush to go ahead IF HE MET CERTAIN CONDITIONS. He didn't meet them. He went ahead anyway.
If Congress had voted against the IWR, would it have stopped the war? No, because the incoming Republican House would have given Bush a blank check to go ahead, without any conditions. All Bush would have had to do was wait a couple months and he'd have had his blank check. As it was, he didn't attack Iraq until the Repub house was in place. He didn't need Hillary's vote on the IWR or any other Democrat's.
Martin Eden
(12,843 posts)Anyone who didn't know the IWR would make war with Iraq a certainty is either fooling themselves or simply wasn't paying attention.
The November mid-term elections hadn't taken place yet, and both the House AND Senate are needed to pass this kind of authorization.
Voting for something horrible just because the next Congress might pass it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Ever hear of a principled stand? The lead-up to the war in Iraq and that vote in particvular is when our country REALLY NEEDED Democrats to stand up and show some REAL LEADERSHIP. It was a great opportunity to demonstrate that the Democratic Party is strong, principled, and shows superior judgment in critical matters.
Democratic leaders like Hillary Clinton and John Kerry demonstrated horrible judgment, and let us down when we needed them the most.
Since then I have refused to support any Democrat in a primary who voted for the IWR.
But this did not stop me from going to Cuyahoga, Ohio in November 2004 to help get out the vote for John Kerry. We have two choices for president, and one of those choices is orders of magnitude more unacceptable.
If Hillary Clinton is the Democratic nominee for president in 2016 I will support her.
But I hope for someone with better judgment in critical matters.
HardTimes99
(2,049 posts)crime against humanity.
Yeah, I held my nose in 2004 and voted for the stinkbomb Kerry but not without much gnashing of teeth and rending of garments. Kerry actually said he would have voted for the IWR even if he knew Iraq had no WMD. I swear, you cannot make such craven shit up!
Carolina
(6,960 posts)craven vote authorizing war against an innocent nation at Bush's discretion (what a laugh) was in fact a vote for war. She of all people knew about PNAC since the PNAC bastards/Bush cabal members by 2002/2003 had presented their plan to Bill in 1997!
Her vote authorized war and gave Bush bipartisan cover. No excuses can wipe the blood of her complicity away
Metric System
(6,048 posts)cliffordu
(30,994 posts)"Democrat" Vs. Democrat pile on!!!
Let's hate the Dem candidates with a shot at actually getting elected and we'll sound JUST LIKE the SIte That Cannot Be Named!!!
Which is kinda the point, I think.
And this train is NEVER late.
grantcart
(53,061 posts)uninformed voters await our rehash of a rehash of a rehash of something that may or may not be relevant.
But why would we advance on uniting the party in the next Congressional election when there is so much to be hashed out on a primary run three years from now that may or may not happen.
Some folks believe that if you haven't started a Demo bashing OP in the last 72 hours you just aren't a liberal.
cliffordu
(30,994 posts)Why the fuck would people want to be on a board that is support Dems if they hate the Dems?
Makes me wonder.
Peacetrain
(22,872 posts)Do not understand it one bit. 2008 here we go again. Everyone voted for the Iraq War and the only one on that national stage at that level that I can think of off the top of my had who came out against it.. was President Obama.
Of course he is not running again, and the angst against him is palatable.
We have 2014 to deal with first, and we need to shore up what we can from the 2010 debacle first.
But 2016, Unless they have three sixes tattooed to their head, and are breathing hell fire.. I will vote for the Democratic canidate that survives the primaries.
The only thing that I worry about, it the personal investment gets so intense, that people cannot back the canidate when they do get in office. It becomes so personal, that they fire-breathe at anyone who they associate with the canidate that defeated their canidate, or was in opposition to their canidate that won..
Don't you just feel the love building 
cliffordu
(30,994 posts)Beacool
(30,247 posts)Yeah, they are still pushing Palin and every other Bagger (Paul, Cruz, Rubio, etc.). They push the most extreme Right candidates and here they push the most extreme Left candidates. In the end, none of them will be elected president.
Billy Pilgrim
(96 posts)And she has the best shot.
Why would anyone trust someone in a position of power? Everyone knows power corrupts. There are no exceptions.
We vote for the lesser of two evils.
Sancho
(9,067 posts)I will vote for the Democratic candidate and I will do what I can to help them win. The alternative is a disaster. If Hillary is our nominee, I'll vote for her...and I think she would be a good President.
If Warren or anyone else steps forward during the primary, I hope a Democrat wins.
DainBramaged
(39,191 posts)as Nader's Raiders caused in 2000?
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)And I will vote for the candidate who best represents traditional Democratic principles.
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)DainBramaged
(39,191 posts)I don't give a shit about those who try to change history ooh the exit polls, oooh they wouldn't have voted for Gore, ooh ooh ooh
And playing this game now is enabling the Pukes with their attempts to bait Hillary.
Nice try manny, many of us here know better.
Have a nice time beating on Hillary.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)And Nader got an equal number of Dem and Repub votes.
I'm not seeing how that equals "Nader lost the election for Gore".
Billy Pilgrim
(96 posts)I love Elizabeth Warren, but she has zero chance of becoming President.
burnodo
(2,017 posts)There are people on this website who will always blame Nader for what happened in 2000
quakerboy
(13,916 posts)Any idiot could see that it was a bad idea. The fact that many of them did not see it has nothing to do with the fact that they could have, which indicates to me that any purportedly intelligent person should have.
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)that we can count on.
DainBramaged
(39,191 posts)Another squawkbox screaming that no one is Democratic enough for him to vote for,, squawk squawk squawk,
Skraxx
(2,967 posts)But boy! Is he popular around here or what? What an accomplishment! I'm sure his mommy is very proud that he has a following on DU. It's so effective at....well, I dunno, maybe making him feel popular?
Koios
(154 posts)Congress (majority) voted for this:
Specifically, the resolution authorizes President Bush to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to--
(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and
(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.
DevonRex
(22,541 posts)I'll give you one.
Pretend for 10 minutes that you were Hillary back then. Seriously. You are a new Senator. Everyone comes to you, though, for information because your husband was President. Bill always believed Saddam had WMD. Always. So if Iraq had them then, they certainly do now.
The information provided to you by the Bush Admin backs that up. Bill tells you it's right. The hawkish wing of the Dem Party doesn't want to look weak. They want to sign the authorization, too. Then Bush says it's just to get in there to do all the necessary inspections. Even though the title belies that point, you grasp at the straw.
Fast forward to now. You've been something Bill Clinton never was. Secretary of State. You've seen things Bill never saw - how things work from the ground up - because you traveled extensively and managed a department. And your agency was the target of a huge op by some group who killed four of your own. You know someone on the inside was involved beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Would you ever just take someone's word for anything again? Or would you ensure that you saw actual intelligence product, not just massaged reports about intelligence, before ever authorizing war again?
Skraxx
(2,967 posts)But it sure is magnanimous of you to pretend he did!
There is hardly a post that comes out of that guy that isn't anti-Dem. It makes him very popular around these parts, which happens to be a purportedly Democratic message board that supposed to support Democratic candidates. Go figure.
I thought maybe if I gave him a good answer with a good subject line, maybe he'd rethink. Just once. I'll pack my optimism up now and put it back under the bed.
Beacool
(30,247 posts)What had occurred in NY a few months prior to that vote? The worst terrorist attack in US history. More than 70% of New Yorkers supported the vote.
DevonRex
(22,541 posts)from both parties. All of them hurting and all with an opinion. Looking for leadership and bipartisanship.
I disagreed with her vote. But time has given me perspective. I was far too hard on her for it. I don't think I could have withstood all that she was up against, either.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)At least Kerry has admitted he made a mistake and apologized.
DevonRex
(22,541 posts)argument. She represented the state of New York, the state that was hit on 9/11. GWB masterfully worked the public into a fury over that and linked the two in their minds.
We'll never know what her vote would have been if she could have been, say, the Jr. Senator from Montana, a nobody that nobody paid attention to and nobody pressured.
Things have changed dramatically.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Does that really make sense to you?
DevonRex
(22,541 posts)I think it achieves nothing to go back 14 years (by 2016) in time to rehash something that cannot be changed and that ultimately was not the deciding vote.
For women, it is often precarious to apologize in these situations. Had her vote been significant in deciding the matter, then she could and it would be seen as strength to apologize or explain. Because that would be accepting a huge responsibility and the right thing to do.
But her vote was merely one of many. A show of bipartisanship and unity for New York. She has to stay with it and live with it. Believe it or not but that is actually the harder course, knowing what she now knows.
That is how I would see it. Sometimes you have to actually live with your bad decisions (and the ones that circumstances forced on you). And their consequences. And keep going, head held high.
Enrique
(27,461 posts)and the barbarians are at the gate.
indepat
(20,899 posts)justification under international law is not requisite to looking presidential.
marble falls
(56,996 posts)YoungDemCA
(5,714 posts)...once in office?
HardTimes99
(2,049 posts)cutting through all the bullshit and background noise and getting right to the heart of things. (Thinking not only of this thread but of the one about John Brown, Edward Snowden and whether Brown should have been hanged.)
My sincere compliments on your manifest ability to focus one's mind. That is a talent not to be under-estimated in today's society of bread and circuses.
Renew Deal
(81,844 posts)Mostly a non-issue. Especially in the GE.
Skraxx
(2,967 posts)But I'm just curious, how does it feel to do the GOP's bidding by trying to dampen Democratic enthusiasm?
Manny and the GOP, in hot pursuit of the goal of dampening Democratic enthusiasm.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Like Senator Warren.
We've had 20+ years of Third Way Democrats running out party. How do you think it's worked out? I think it's a complete disaster.
Skraxx
(2,967 posts)Nice and squishy term, that. Sort of like "Family Values", a catch all club to beat up anyone you personally determine to be unorthodox. High priest of DU, Manny determines who the real Democrats are!
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Nor are "free" trade agreements.
Nor is deregulation of banks.
Nor is bailing out bankers without conditions.
Etc.
Let me know if you think these are compatible with the word "Democrat" and we can put 'em up for a vote.
Pryderi
(6,772 posts)
kentuck
(111,051 posts)Did they do it for purely political reasons?
Or did they actually believe it was a just war?
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)Well, maybe Texas....
mainer
(12,017 posts)Or he/she didn't have the courage to do the right thing and ignore the politics.
Chaco Dundee
(334 posts)You said it and you are dead head on.I wrote a little story about the real mesopotamia once on this side,I lived there for nine month in 1978.I met lovely people,saw places wich born again liars can not imagine,but now I have no reason to go back.my friends are dead.
dsharp88
(487 posts)
shenmue
(38,506 posts)Good luck living in your rarified purist world, where everyone is a saint. People screw up and they can change.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)So it wasn't so difficult to do.
yellowwoodII
(616 posts)I kept the list of those who voted for the Iraq War, and I vowed never to vote for them. Of course, there's always the chance that one of them would run against somebody who was even worse, so I might choose the lesser of two evils.
When I knew it was a terrible idea even then. Why could the politicians who had better access to information not see that? If they knew better, what excuse would they have for voting for it? If they didn't know better, why didn't they?
Carolina
(6,960 posts)And yes, those of us who were here back then surely saw through the Bush lies and could not believe the alternative universe we were living in when Democrats voted aye on Bush's contrived IWR, unveiled just before the 2002 midterm elections.
Clinton, Kerry, Biden... what craven moral cowards! I remember being riveted by Robert Byrd's speech and being appalled by the nation's bloodlust all aimed at Iraq.
How could a nation the US had bombed relentlessly (surgically?!) in 1991, kept under sanctions thereafter and then bombed sporadically during the Clinton years have morphed into an imminent threat?
How did the focus shift to Iraq when 15/19 hijackers and mastermind bin Laden were Saudi and the the remaining 4 hijackers were from Yemen, Egypt & United Arab Emirates?
Why was the US suddenly worried about Iraq's chemical weapons (remember Cheney's remarks
that he knew what they had and where they were) when said weapons had been given to Iraq/Saddam in the 1980s (during the Iran-Iraq War) by the Reagan-Bush cabal which didn't give a damn how the weapons were to be used? But Cheney was right that he knew what they had because he and Rumsfeld had been instrumental in giving them to Saddam!
Why weren't the weapons inspectors allowed to finish their work? They had found NOTHING and the the cabal along with the cowardly Dems who gave the war bipartisan cover couldn't let the ultimate truth -- that there was nothing there -- be known.
Common sense and even the most cursory review of history would have revealed these and so many more truths and challenges to a war of choice and aggression against Iraq. The repukes were (and are) shameless with their chickenhawk warmongering and desire to use military force without provocation or concern for the consequences. The Dems who went along to get along and advance their political ambitions deserve disdain and a special place in hell.
Tigerram
(13 posts)Simply because their not RepUGLYcans !!!! But I feel you...
elleng
(130,721 posts)but why on earth did so many fail to recognize Wes Clark would not support such disasters?
Carolina
(6,960 posts)There was the Draft Wesley Clark movement, but the PTB did not want an anti-war general out there speaking the truth and with a near blackout by the complicit media, shut his fledgling campaign down
elleng
(130,721 posts)Were/are you a Clarkie?
Loved him and thought he'd have been a great POTUS
elleng
(130,721 posts)Here's a group of us!
https://www.facebook.com/?ref=tn_tnmn#!/groups/365265313485989/
Carolina
(6,960 posts)I'm not on facebook, but we had a very active group here in Columbia, SC (a speck of blue in a sea of red) and held a fundraiser for Clark and everything.
He was the real deal: smart, experienced, articulate, a family man and in this telegenic age, handsome, too. Alas, the media marginalized him, the debate format/mods tossed stupid/inane questions his way and offered little time for response, and the wonderful candidate he was, faded from view. Precisely what the PTB wanted.
I hate to say it, but I feel as though I have been voting for the lesser of 2 evils forever. In 2008, I was initially excited about Obama until he picked IWR-aye voter Biden as VEEP. That just flew in the face of his stance before and about the Iraq war. Then came all his choices of advisors/cabinet members: Rahm, Clinton, Geithner with Summers 
, Duncan... I knew then that change was just campaign bullshit.
2012, what choice did we have... I feel sad for my son's millennial generation. They do not seem to know what we've lost since they were born during, or just after, the Reagan years that started this mess... But what is even more saddening, is I can no longer proudly point to my Democratic party and say it is different. In my grown son's eyes (and those of many of his peers), they are all bought and paid for and George Carlin was right!
Anyway, we'll have to personal message one another
School Teacher
(71 posts)Hillary's vote for the Iraq War sealed her fate with me. She will for sure go for a new war on Iran. I voted for Obama because he did not
vote for the Iraq War. But in the end I just got more war.
No matter which candidate we vote for, we still just get more war! I am done.
For once I will vote my conscience. After 12 years of anti war activism I say screw these DINO warmongers! Yes, this is my primary issue, not to mention that she loves the empire.
I will never forget her shocked face reacting to the Arab Spring in Egypt, how dare these brown people not go home and shut up and let her friend Mubarak continue to dictate! She is a stealth Republican and she used to be a real one. We can do better, folks.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Carolina
(6,960 posts)
I feel the same as you which is why I never supported HRC for anything after October 2002, and find all the Hillary for POTUS threads completely revolting.
I held my nose for Kerry-Edwards only because I loathed Bush
I was excited about Obama in 2008 until he chose IWR-aye voter Biden (Mr. foreign policy expert, my ass) and all the other retreads from the Clinton years along with Geithner, Rahm, Duncan...
I held my nose for Obama in 2012 because what choice was there with the rape-publicans
But I hear ya and I'm with ya. I am sick of DINOs, "centrists" (who are really more right of center) and war/empire wagers, supporters & profiteers.
1-Old-Man
(2,667 posts)School Teacher
(71 posts)Yes, I voted for Kerry, but never again. Also I expect a higher standard from women who mostly have not been brain washed by
the military and money and power. Hillary does not make the cut with me. I am done with her and all the other warmonger DINOS.
I am voting Green or Working Families, or writing in Elizabeth Warren.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
cynatnite This message was self-deleted by its author.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)with. You may vote how you feel and be proud of it. Stand firm on your beliefs as will I. I wish you all the best. BTW if Warren does get the nomination I would 100% support her.
Niceguy1
(2,467 posts)For the job. Warren need to get some experience before moving up to the whitehouse.
silvershadow
(10,336 posts)others as well.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)silvershadow
(10,336 posts)certainly bring a really stark, fresh, almost stunning contrast do our party's politics for years to come in my mind. So for me it would be a sort of dream ticket at this particular moment in our history.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)silvershadow
(10,336 posts)she's running yet, though.
