Kerry hammers new UN pick as “baggage we cannot afford”

[truthpusher]

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/index.php?p=157

3/7/2005
RAW STORY
------------------------------
Exclusive: Senator Kerry hammers new UN pick as “baggage we cannot afford”
Kerry slashes Bush’s new UN pick; Reid offers more muted critique
------------------------------
In a release issued this afternoon, former presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) said President Bush’s nominee to be ambassador to the United Nations was “baggage we cannot afford,” RAW STORY has learned.

“I recognize John Bolton’s long service to our country, but this is just about the most inexplicable appointment the President could make to represent the United States to the world community,” Sen. Kerry will assert.

“If the President is serious about reaching out to the world, why would he choose someone who has expressed such disdain for working with our allies?” Kerry will tell the press. “Mr. Bolton once said ‘if the U.N. secretary building in New York lost 10 stories, it wouldn’t make a bit of difference.’ Mr. Bolton once celebrated our failure to win the U.N.’s support for the Iraq invasion as ‘further evidence to many why nothing more should be paid to the U.N. system.’ Now we’re supposed to believe he’s the right person to represent the United States at the United Nations?”

(snip)

“As under secretary of state for arms control and international security for the past four years, Mr. Bolton has achieved little in the way of either of these vital aims,” Kerry continues. “We secured more nuclear materials in the two years before September 11th than in the two years after. North Korea and Iran are burgeoning nuclear states. At this critical time in our history, he is not the best person to rally the world together in our common goals of defeating terrorism and making the world safer from the threat of weapons of mass destruction. ”

“Quite simply,” Kerry concludes, “Mr. Bolton’s nomination carries with it baggage we cannot afford.”

complete story: http://rawstory.com/news/2005/index.php?p=157

[VegasWolf]

1. Gee, I wwonder if kerry will put his vote where his mouth is? Kerry

seems to say things all the time that aren't matched by his
vote.

[WildEyedLiberal]

3. Like how Condoleeza Rice and Alberto Gonzales are wrong for America?

Oh wait, Kerry voted against them.

Or when he talked about how he didn't support the bankruptcy bill or the tort "reform" bill? Oh, oops, he voted against those too.

Yeah, his words and actions never match up, clearly. :eyes:

[VegasWolf]

6. We'll see. His absoulte silence over the election results in Ohio

does not bode well. Sorry, guys, I like Kerry as a person
but I don't respect his spine.

[Occulus]

10. What if he learned something specific

that made him really not want the job?

Enough to buck-buck out?

[VegasWolf]

14. And leave us in booshes hands, that would be a crime worthy of

execution!!!

[WildEyedLiberal]

15. What would you have him say?

"I wuz robbed?" You want him to have credibility, don't you? What he's doing now - being a fierce instrument of opposition in the Senate- is FAR more beneficial than throwing himself on his proverbial sword over unprovable election fraud. No concrete evidence exists to support the theory that the election was stolen. Does that mean I don't believe it was? Of course I do. And, based on some comments Teresa made recently, I think they do too. But every prosector worth his salt knows that you don't press charges until you're SURE you can win a conviction. And simply put, there's no way you could prove election fraud at the present time. His lawyers are still joining the legal action down in Ohio; what else, really, would you have him do?

I really don't like how people continue to attack John Kerry's character based on vague charges of post-election cowardice (a damning charge, especially against such a provably courageous man) while offering no real concrete plan as to what better he could've done.

[VegasWolf]

19. My personal take would be that he fight the election results and

dig in. I agree with your points completely. I just wished
he had really stood up for himself.

[WildEyedLiberal]

23. I understand your frustration

But I realized that this was not 2000, and it wasn't a matter of a few hundred contested votes, like it was for Gore. Kerry would somehow have to - on November 3rd - make a believable case that there was widespread fraud that may have altered the results of the election. And on November 3rd, I do not think it was possible to make that case. The man was NOT in an enviable position.

Don't give up on Kerry. He's not about to stop fighting Bush and his minions, despite what some of the more hysterical around here may say. I can't even begin to understand how long it'll take to dig up the kind of hard proof we need to make heads roll in regards to election fraud - I just hope it's sometime before 2006. America needs to KNOW that this election was stolen. Have faith.

[DrZeeLit]

26. Thank you, thank you, thank you!

I am so glad to read all your posts on this.
I have been feeling the same. I cannot understand why those who supported him and voted for him are so quick to bale. And not only bale, but throw stones.

The entire deck was stacked against him -- media, money, smears, and voting machines just a few -- and he's working on issues, fighting for the very people who voted for him. I, for one, am glad he's not whining and crying in his beer -- that would give the * side more ammo.

I watched "All the President's Men" the other night and it just makes me sick -- where the hell is the media on all this fraud, this administration's secrecy, lies, and impeachable offenses?

At least Kerry is still a leader.

While we're at it, can we flush Lieberman? There's a contrast, huh?

Thanks, again, for your eloquent statements.

[WildEyedLiberal]

29. You're welcome

:hug:

And I agree about Lieberman. If there's one "democrat" who deserves DU's ire, it's him - he's the one who's betrayed on many votes. Hopefully we can keep him in line for Social Security, but all the same, I think Joe has to go.

[burythehatchet]

66. HEY-HEY-HO-HO ALF's DAD HAS GOT TO GO

[jeanarrett]

100. Hear, Hear!

[sendero]

53. I'm not giving up on Kerry..

... he's a fine senator.

But we have much better choices available for 2008, and I'm not supporting Kerry for another shot at the presidency.

I listened to all the "he's working behind the scenes" wishful thinkers in the wake of Ohio, I'm damn sure not listening to them any more.

Even the rhetoric in the original post is perfect evidence of Kerry's inability to set forth a case with any passion or conviction. Pronouncements of this ilk get no press whatsoever, and they sound so utterly generic they are not going to sway anyone.

We can, and will, do better.

[SlavesandBulldozers]

77. I agree with you

and WildEyed lib.

[karynnj]

83. His comments are quite specific to Bolton.

Not to mention his Bolton quotes are right on target. his language is clear, strong and on target. Will it get much MSM play? no. Yesterday in one of the early NYT on the web stories, Kerry was quoted very high in the article. By this morning, the Kerry quote is replaced by the tamer Reid comment and the comments of lots of Republicans. (Knowing Hagel and Lugar are not trilled with him is significant, but knowing Frist and a spokeman for a conservative group are is not.)

The selection of the Reid comment over the Kerry comment was interesting in that Kerry's was the stronger quote and he is on the Foreign Relations Committee.

[sendero]

90. So far..

... I find Reid's rhetoric to be head and shoulders above Kerry's.

I don't know how many different ways I can say this:

The reserved, understated, measured, nuanced style of speaking does not get air time, does not play to the voters and is functionally obsolete.

And yet Kerry seems incapable of any other type of rhetoric. "Baggage we cannot afford?" This is lame, there is no other way to put it.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

57. Well put, WildEyed.

And as an alumni --- GO ILLINI!!!

[WildEyedLiberal]

58. Yay!

So much for that perfect season, though. DAMN YOU OHIO STATE. Well, as long as we bring home the big trophy, that's all I care about.

[Laurab]

27. Thank you, WildEyed

You beat me to it, and said it much better than I would have. I am just wondering when, if ever, the bashing will stop. John Kerry still has his credibility/integrity, which is something he would not have, had had he gone running around spouting allegations without proof.

Unlike Biden, and some of the others, who speak so eloquently, then vote the opposite, Kerry has backed up his opinions with his votes. He is working for us, and fighting against *, and he's doing it well. WHEN will the bashing stop?

[Seabiscuit]

46. He also argued forcefully against the Iraq War Resolution on the floor of

the Senate, then silently voted in favor of it.

Seems half the time he backs up his words with action, and half the time he doesn't.

That pretty much defines "half-assed" to me.

[Seabiscuit]

75. OTOH, I whole-heartedly applaud Kerry's recent statements!

[merh]

62. His views on the election fraud was read into the record on the

6th, a vote from him would have been sour grapes, as the pukes tried to portray it any way. Would you like the link to his stance on this that was read into the record?

[LittleClarkie]

93. Did he get up on MLK day and just stare at the audience?

"Absolute silence" is so... absolute, don't you think?

His lawyer, McTigue, continues to fight in Ohio. Doesn't seem like he's ignoring the situation to me.

Not to mention the election reform he's co-sponsoring.

I'd say he has quite the spine. He just went through what must have been a crushing loss, and yet he has hit the ground running. The environment, voter suppression, health care, help for military families, etc. He's like a really tall Energizer Bunny.

[wisteria]

9. Yes!

You are absolutely correct. Kerry has been very consistent. Apparently, some people haven't been paying attention to his votes.

[Warren Stupidity]

17. well I for one wish he would flip flop on Iraq

The war was fought on fraudulent terms senator. Stand up and say its wrong and you were wrong to support it.

I'd vote for him again though.

[TheFarseer]

22. He's been a real pain in the arse for bush

*after* the election.

[Metrix]

4. Did you disagree with how he voted

on Rice and Gonzales?

[VegasWolf]

7. Of course not!!! n/t

[Redleg]

21. Some people always look for the opportunity to trash Kerry.

What makes those people any different from Rethugs?

[sandnsea]

44. And have for two years

Then wonder why people didn't want to vote for somebody whose own party trashed more than the right did. It's just insanity.

[sendero]

54. That's a nice cheap shot..

... and I'm sure you are proud of yourself for coming up with it.

Now STFU and listen. I DO NOT THINK KERRY CAN EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER WIN THE PRESIDENCY.

And as such I do NOT WANT TO WASTE ANOTHER ELECTION ON SOMEONE LIKE HIM.

Here's a news flash for the "with us or against us" crowd. I'm not AGAINST John Kerry - I think he is UNELECTABLE because he has no passion, he has no conviction, he has to explain his positions with too many details and the voters don't buy it. This DOES NOT MEAN I don't respect JK or like JK or anything of the sort. It means there are candidates more worthy of a 2008 run and I WANT TO WIN.

So, call me a Kerry basher if you must but be careful about calling me a puke - that is over the line.

[WildEyedLiberal]

55. You respect him but think he has no conviction

Sorry, I'm not convinced.

If you think Kerry has no convictions, you haven't been paying attention to anything for the past 40 years.

[sendero]

63. He has no conviction...

... that he can convince a mass of voters of, so he might as well not have any.

As for whether or not you are convinced of jack, I could care less. I supported Kerry with words and dollars in 2004, but I won't do that again. Anyone who cannot defend themselves against the right is never going to get elected, sorry.

[Joe Chi Minh]

70. You don't believe, then,

that John Kerry won in a landslide (or at all, for that matter), or that he wants to introduce a New Deal for the American worker (currently unemployed or working for sweatshop wages)? A very strange DU post, indeed.

Personally, on balance, I'd prefer Kuchinich's outright socialism, but Kerry showed in this election that he would more than produce the goods on an even playing field.

[sendero]

74. I believe that if he did win.

... he didn't deserve it because HE HID IN THE CORNER AFTER THE FACT.

The shenanigans in Ohio were not the slightest bit unexpected and he should have been prepared to deal with them.

[Joe Chi Minh]

96. Nevertheless,

just assuming that your criticism of him has merit - and, to some extent, it *may* be arguable that he made an error of judgement in playing a "long game" (I want to see fierce aggression against all anti-social neocon schemes *at all times*) - it remains the case that *Kerry won in a landslide*. Horses for courses.

Unfortunately, it seems that in America, to say that you can't legislate against fraud is no mere metaphor, (as, indeed, the term would be understood elsewhere). So, if he had *not* been defrauded, would you have railed against his New Deal policy planks? Would *you* prefer a prospective road-kill, middle-of-the-roader?

They realise they made a mistake favouring him over Dean, and are now pushing like mad for Hilary. If they succeed, she may really do her best to bring about some kind of New Deal, herself. But at the moment, to favour *anyone* over John Kerry seems to me to be utter madness.

[Joe Chi Minh]

97. The mainstream

*always* try to anoint (and ususally succeed) someone more to the Establishment's taste than the people's choice (in the UK, too). However, with the Net and the bloggosphere, things could be different in a country of political firebrands, such as yours.

[Joe Chi Minh]

101. I should have said "They realise they made a *very big* mistake favouring

Kerry. His talk of a New Deal must have scared them sh*tless.

[Redleg]

102. Don't tell me to STFU.

I'll break your god-damned head for you.

[Just Me]

61. Actually, I have noted those who post nothing other than Democrat-bashing

positions. I've taken note of those whom rarely if ever post pro-Democrat perspectives

[LittleClarkie]

94. Well, lefty freepers are different from righty freepers

because they're on the other side, silly.

Thought processes are the same, though. Which is the scary part for me. Facts? We don't need no stinkin' FACTS!

[bunny planet]

81. You mean like he already did with Alberto 'Torquemada' Gonzales and

Condy Rice? HE VOTED NAY. He'll do it this time too.

[BuyingThyme]

2. You are the essence of evil,

but I support your nomination.

[WildEyedLiberal]

5. Like how he supported Rice and Gonzales?

Oh wait, he didn't.

[BuyingThyme]

12. No. Like how he supported the Patriot Act, Scalia, Bork and Thomas.

But thanks for the straw.

[WildEyedLiberal]

20. WRONG

He voted against Bork AND Thomas. And no one voted against Scalia (a vote which occurred in 1986, by the way). And everyone but Feingold voted for Patriot.

So what you're saying is that Russ Feingold is the only acceptable Senate Democrat to you?

[BuyingThyme]

25. You're right. I screwed up on the Supreme Court votes.

But I didn't say anything about Feingold.

I guess your point is that Kerry cannot be held responsible for what he does as long as everybody but Feingold does it too?

Or are you saying that Feingold is mean to old people?

[WildEyedLiberal]

28. What the hell are you talking about?

Where did I say he can't be held responsible? He voted AGAINST Bork and Thomas. He voted AGAINST Rehnquist as Chief Justice. And the two other examples you cite were not controversial votes. I fail to see how you are making a case for Kerry's untrustworthiness here.

[BuyingThyme]

32. Okay

So you want me to explain what you said?

(We'll just pretend that I believe that you really didn't read what I just said about the Supreme Court. It's fun to pretend, isn't it?)

How about if you just say it yourself:

Why do you support the Patriot Act, Scalia, and Kerry's decision to flee Washington when the time came to certify the election? (Yes, I understand that you don't see the Patriot Act and the presidential election as controversial issues, so try to look beyond the lack of controversy.)

[WildEyedLiberal]

33. Your patronizing tone is not really making me want to engage in any debate

I never said I supported the Patriot Act. Thanks for putting words in my mouth. However, I will not base my support for a senator because of his Patriot Act vote, whereas you obviously do.

You clearly would rather make glib and condescending jibes at me than actually make any sort of coherent argument. So unless you can manage to argue like an adult, this conversation is over.

And I reiterate - if you feel you must not support a senator based upon his/her votes on Scalia and the Patriot Act, then clearly, you only support Russ Feingold.

[BuyingThyme]

37. Your fascination with Feingold has nothing to do with me.

It's hilarious how you come up with this nonsense about Feingold "being the only acceptable Senator" to me, and then accuse me of putting words in YOUR mouth. You should be a comedian.

[WildEyedLiberal]

40. You never answered my question

Does supporting the Patriot Act make a senator unacceptable to you? You implied this in your first post.

Rather than answer the question, you again make cute patronizing remarks. Sort of like Sean Hannity when he gets backed into a corner, can't defend himself with facts, and resorts to namecalling and ad hominem insults.

So answer the question, or stop replying to my posts.

[BuyingThyme]

43. Sorry. I didn't know that you were the post police.

If you want to debate somebody, you will have to allow that person to take his or her own positions. What's happening here is that you're debating yourself to the point where you're actually identifying your own fallacies and faults.

You clearly don't realize it, but you've even likened yourself to Sean Hannity.

Thanks for the laugh.

[WildEyedLiberal]

47. You never took a position

There's no debate.

Glad you're laughing.... you must be easily amused.

[Firespirit]

34. Kerry had planned to "flee Washington"

long before he knew there would BE a contested vote in Congress. He planned the trip to Iraq in November or December. And if you recall, the planners of the election contest weren't sure until the day of it that there would be one. Barbara Boxer, of all people, supposedly didn't make up HER mind until just before the event.

But that aside, what would his presence have accomplished? Lord knows I believe it was stolen. Look at my SIGNATURE for crying out loud. But they don't have irrefutable proof of that, either now or then. Yes, there's proof of fraud now, what with the conduct of the recount. But there's no proof--yet--that fraud flipped Ohio or New Mexico or anywhere else. And the Senators just couldn't get up and make a claim like that without proof.

If Kerry had been there and had stood up in support of the objection, it would not have made him president and it would have been painting a target on his back for the despicable media to call him a "sore loser." If he'd been there and NOT stood up, it would have been used as fodder for people who want to shoot down claims of fraud and theft without even investigating them. Being there that day would have been a lose-lose for him and for the entire election reform movement, because no matter what he did, it would have been used against us.

[BuyingThyme]

36. It was not appropriate for him to flee Washington

no matter how long he planned ahead; it's not like he didn't understand how the process works.

Whether or not the vote was contested has nothing to do with it.

[Firespirit]

38. It'd be nice if all the senators were there 100% of the time,

but it's my opinion that he was doing at least as much good, probably more, where he was, rather than being part of that event. That day there were several who were absent. So let's not pick on Kerry.

[ginnyinWI]

59. But they asked him not to be there!

The Dems in the House and Senate asked Kerry not to be there. And they were right; if he had been there if would have been a major distraction to what they were trying to say--all of the media would have been on Kerry.

[keroro gunsou]

72. Yeah...

and Senator Feingold kicks sleeping puppies too!

seriously, Senator Feingold's my senator from Wisconsin, I am allowed a bit of kidding at his expense.

He's a good guy, and really fun person to meet and talk to. There's a set of titanium testes on the man, but he keeps them shrouded in a good matzo... makes others think twice about him. unlike a lot of pols, he does have a good sense of humor as well as what's in the best interests of his peeps.

i've voted for him twice, no complaints thus far.

sorry about the matzo referance, i tried to make me a funny by playing off the old saying of "the will of iron couched in the velvet glove." well, you win some and then you don't ^_^;

[bemildred]

8. Attaboy John. Keep it up. nt

[confludemocrat]

11. OK let's admit it, at least he's not Barack Obama or Ken Salazar

So give him a break.

First he has credentials and didn't do in his early Senate career, as these two did--foul themselves out of the starting gate.

[hopein08]

13. Which Senate committee has to confirm Bolton? n/t

[karynnj]

87. Foreign Relations Committee

which Kerry is on

[Sabriel]

16. What kind of parallel universe is this?

Each pick is the absolute opposite person who should be picked. I'm confounded by their desire to bankrupt us, in every way possible.

[Warren Stupidity]

18. they are wreckers

They are trying deliberately to wreck the current world system. They think, and they may very well be right, that the new system that will evolve from the ruins of the old will be to their advantage.

[Generator]

64. What absolute contempt they show!

It's like Bush is creating the anti-America. Against everything and every last shred that was good. Bush, President of the anti-America.

I think I've found my nom du nightmare.

[Rex]

24. Gore, Kerry, Lieberman - these guys are baggage

John Bolton OTOH is a corrupt businessman who will do everything in his power to undermine the U.N! This was a business decision, everyone should know that by now.

[Califooyah Operative]

39. how?

how are kerry and gore baggage? They've brought in more votes than any other democrats, kerry is fighting harder for us everyday, and he's baggage?

[Rex]

71. Kerry should have went public with the voting fraud and not let up

until every camera in the world was on him. Gore should have stood up in the Congress and demanded the Supreme Court 5 be removed from office for throwing the election in 2000 (he just gaveled down pleas for help from House critters). These two guys did not rise to the occation as was needed. Now we are going to pay for it.

[ginnyinWI]

60. Kerry is saying essentially the same thing that you are,

except that he has the ability to be heard by many more people. How is he baggage?

[cestpaspossible]

68. So you agree with Kerry - but can't help but oppose him anyway?

:wtf:

[Rex]

73. Agree with Kerry? Not a chance.

He voted to give the Giggling Murder power to kill innocent people in Iraq. No way do I agree. He can 'make his case' all day long - it's beyond redemption IMO!

[cestpaspossible]

76. Actually you do agree with Kerry, your inability to recognize that fact

would be puzzling if I hadn't been witness to so many similar instances of irrational online commentary that I'm used to it by now.


You: John Bolton OTOH is a corrupt businessman who will do everything in his power to undermine the U.N!

Kerry: “If the President is serious about reaching out to the world, why would he choose someone who has expressed such disdain for working with our allies?” Kerry will tell the press. “Mr. Bolton once said ‘if the U.N. secretary building in New York lost 10 stories, it wouldn’t make a bit of difference.’ Mr. Bolton once celebrated our failure to win the U.N.’s support for the Iraq invasion as ‘further evidence to many why nothing more should be paid to the U.N. system.’ Now we’re supposed to believe he’s the right person to represent the United States at the United Nations?

As under secretary of state for arms control and international security for the past four years, Mr. Bolton has achieved little in the way of either of these vital aims,” Kerry continues. “We secured more nuclear materials in the two years before September 11th than in the two years after. North Korea and Iran are burgeoning nuclear states. At this critical time in our history, he is not the best person to rally the world together in our common goals of defeating terrorism and making the world safer from the threat of weapons of mass destruction. ”

[Rex]

78. So Kerry agrees that Bolton is a crook, BFD

Does that excuse Kerry of all the things I listed? If you are pro-Kerry then good luck! You guys ain't got a prayer in hell.

[0007]

91. No fucking way Gore & Kerry are baggage.

[Dr Fate]

30. Did he say it on TV to Wolf Blitzers face???

No?

Then it didn't happen.

[countmyvote4real]

31. Kerry who?

More power to him, if his position on this argument represents that of his constituents. He’s on the right side of this debate. Today. Good for him.

However, I am not likely to support him for POTUS. While I strongly opposed the totally false flip-flop campaign waged against him, it has developed into a wee bit of truth for me. How could somebody be so determined to be President and then just shut down in the wake of clear voter election frauds across the country?

Anyway, I’m glad he’s choosing his battles going forward. However, this time I won’t be fighting for him.

[wisteria]

35. As one of those of us who have sadly moved on after the election

and think John Kerry made the only sensible choice he could make, I are concerned about what is happening now. I appreciate his efforts on our behalf. I think it is wonderful that he is speaking up and voting in opposition to people and ideals he does not believe in. If in the future, he considers running for president again, I would gladly support and vote for him. Just because the man is working on our behalf and doing what he was elected to the senate to do, it does not mean he is only out for your votes. Why can't you show him a little respect?

[FlemingsGhost]

41. But, if he had the opportunity, he'd vote for Bolton's appointment.

I *STILL* can't believe Kerry was the best alternative the Democratic Party could muster.

[WildEyedLiberal]

42. You make that assumption based on what exactly?

He voted against Rice and Gonzales. What on earth makes you think he'd vote for Bolton? Back that up, please.

[FlemingsGhost]

49. I was eluding to his laughable stance on the war. (n/t)

Flem.

[WildEyedLiberal]

56. As opposed to his laughable stances on Rice and Gonzales?

You just can't wrap that head of yours around the fact that Kerry isn't the bad guy, can you? Pity, when there are so many bad guys to choose from. Like, I dunno, Bush for example.

I am convinced there is nothing Kerry could say in criticism of Bush and the neocons that the lunatic fringe here on DU wouldn't twist and distort into something negative. "He's just campaigning for '08!" "He doesn't have any REAL convictions!"

Hey, fellas, the primaries are over. You can stop trashing other Dems now. Give it a motherfucking rest. :puke:

[FlemingsGhost]

89. Hey, at least *I'm * being consistent.

Wish I could say the same about Senator Kerry...

[cestpaspossible]

69. He will have the opportunity, and you will be proven wrong.

[Commendatori]

99. I'm with you.

I still believe to this day that we would have won with almost any other serious candidate.

[Zhade]

45. Kerry voted for John Negroponte to be U.N. ambassador.

I will never understand how he could do that.

[Senator Lamb]

48. kerry is my boy

yall too rough on him

[marcologico]

50. I was hoping somebody would say that when I heard about the appointment...

:eyes:

[4dsc]

51. “If the President is serious about reaching out to the world,

Hello Mcfly, AWOLbush is not serious about reaching out to the world. He only dreams of EMPIRE and could care less what the rest of the world thinks or believes.. AWOLbush and the neocons will do their way with their people and probably laugh the whole time they're doing it..

[JNelson6563]

52. Kerry's right

Bolton's an asshole.

Julie

[indepat]

65. That's sour grapes Senator: this pick fits right in with Rice, Gonzales,

and Negroponte, not to mention retention of Rumsfeld. Get a life!

[cestpaspossible]

67. I guess that's why he voted against Rice and Gonzales

[indepat]

80. As should almost all senators who believe in advice and consent rather

than a rubber stamp.

[cestpaspossible]

82. Please explain that to:

Baucus (D-MT)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Carper (D-DE)
Clinton (D-NY)
Conrad (D-ND)
Corzine (D-NJ)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kohl (D-WI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Obama (D-IL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Salazar (D-CO)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Schumer (D-NY)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Wyden (D-OR)
Rice confirmation vote

[SlavesandBulldozers]

79. "Baggage we can't afford?"

don't encourage them John, these people can afford anything they want, and care not a bit about the cost. quite the contrary in fact, it is baggage they profit from.

[rodeodance]

85. glad to see Kerry is still harping on Bush's lack of concern for nukes!!

[ckramer]

84. Kerry needs to be consistent. Talk the talk and also

walk the walk. But he failed that test.

[LdyGuique]

86. I think EVERY Dem learned a powerful lesson from the 2004

Election: "You're going to have to defend every vote; so, make them count."

I don't think that most of Congress really believed just how much the facts presented were off the mark preceding Iraq -- they were mostly viewing it as a continuing diplomatic vs military intervention issue. The political tone of late 2002 and early 2003 was such that few could hang tough against the onslaught of opinion that was sprinning out of control for war, especially without any countering facts to back up their positions. Hindsight is always 20/20.

Kerry did win according to exit poll info -- and there appears to be an 8 million vote difference that was misapplied, let alone those who weren't allowed to vote. While I found him wooden and lacking in charisma, and without a clear consistent alternative message, I still supported him as did many others.

As the Administration continues to alienate his conservative base and the word fascism continues to become a more common analysis, I think that unless the Repugs distance themselves from him and his policies, they have little chance to win next time -- despite all of the opinions to the contrary.

The entire open border issue with Mexico will be a major election breaker. It's an open flowing wound and few understand how the Administration can continue to eliminate funds or manpower to the issue. When the next Al Queda attack occurs, there will be a complete revision to ALL of the issues about security and the Admin will not recover from the blowback.

Meanwhile, the Dems need to hold their positions, despite being called obstructionists, as this will empower them with foresight 20/20 by 2008.

[wakauf]

88. John Kerry

would do the best for the party if he would shut up and
disappear. The man is a traitor to the people he served with.
I am a Nam vet.
He is a self centered piece of garbage and it's time that Dems
realize it. There are plenty of people to follow in the party.
That loser is not needed! It makes me furious that he's still
out there talking like he has done great things for people. he
hasn't! LET GO!!!!

[wisteria]

92. I appreciate and commend your service to our country,

however I fail to see why that would qualify you to pass judgment on John Kerry. Have you personal knowledge to back up you statements? I have done a lot of research on John Kerry and I have not found anything in my research that would come close to validating your assessment of him. I get the impression, you are angry about your time in the service and perhaps your later treatment when you returned home. You must come to terms with the fact that many people were critical of the Vet Nam War and they protested to put an end to the dying and to allow you to safely return home. Contrary to your suggestion that those of us who support John Kerry and think he is a vital part of our party, "let go", I suggest you are the one that needs to "let go" of the past and deal with your angry.

[FlemingsGhost]

95. Speaking of "Letting go" ...

"wakauf"? How old are you, twelve?

Bet you thought you were being clever, huh?

[Bridget Burke]

98. He's been tombstoned....

However, a real Vietnam vet told me that 50% of the guys claiming to have served--didn't.