McCain Pummels Saddamite Sob Sister Howard Dean

[valniel]

Sen. John McCain is outraged that White House wannabe Howard Dean blubbered after U.S. troops took out Saddam Hussein's bloodthirsty sons, "The ends do not justify the means."

"I am astonished. A lot of people have compared me with Governor Dean. I could not disagree with him more — to say that the end doesn't justify the means," McCain, R-Ariz., said Wednesday on MSNBC's "Hardball," the Washington Times reported today.

"The ends were the eradication of two psychotic, murdering rapists, and the means were through legitimate use of the American military helped out by some excellent information that they gained," McCain said.

"How in the world someone could in any way think this end was not justified by anything, which was the removal of two odious characters, frankly, is beyond me.

"And I think, frankly, Mr. Dean does the nation a great disservice when he doesn't recognize how wonderful an event this is and how important it is to the morale of the troops that these guys are gone. I mean, our troops serving in Iraq," McCain said.

[Duder]

1. Saw the headline for Newsmax and...

...figured it wasn't worth reading.

[valniel]

17. Worth Taking Note

It is just a reminder, that if you are running for President, you need to be careful who you offend. McCain speaks for a lot of voters we will need in November 2004.

[salin]

100. interesting choice of words in the title thread

original or citing someone else?

[DrFunkenstein]

105. Yeah, Somehow I Overlooked That Before...

I'm not sure what's worse, the cheap homophobia or the lame pun...

[valniel]

117. Original Title

http://www.newsmax.com/showinsidecover.shtml?a=2003/7/25/102950

I left the original title as an indication of how some people viewed the comment, and also as a reminder that as few as 537 offended voters in Florida might loose you a Presidential election!

[blm]

132. Typical newsmax headline.

straight from Rush Limbaugh.

[valniel]

133. Yes, maybe I should not have used it verbatim

but I was upset about Dean’s comment. And since I might wind up voting for him I thought I should vent my frustration with his of the cuff remarks, especially his attacks on my favorite candidate!

[blm]

143. not blaming you, at all...

Newsmax is just SO overthetop, no matter the subject matter. ;))))

[WyLoochka]

102. Oh Poo Bahhhh

John McCain was THE candidate of

Little Willie Kristol and His PNACer Cohorts in '00

McCain's opinion on the invasion and occupation of Iraq is highly suspect IMHO.

It's history - check it out - '99 and early '00 Weekly Standard diatribes would be a likely starting point. Check out David Brooks' stufff during that time too

Maybe I'll post links later, maybe not - in the meantime, I encourage those who are interested to check it out

[JohnKleeb]

2. at least he was respectable but

Senator McCain Uday and Qusay were horrible guys but I fear that the attacks will go on and I know you as a vet know the hardships and especially as a POW I know you and I wouldnt see eye to eye on a lot but this war was wrong and I dont like your party not sure if you supported cutting the troops benefits. Please Mr. McCain the man who slandered you in 2000 in South Carolina is not a trustworthy or honest man he lied to everyone.

[Cha]

3. Mccain is f*cking bush ass kisser! And I wouldn't trust mccain

and further than bush which less than ZERO.


You tell 'em Dean ..."The end does justify the means." There ya go mccain ..go blow out your barracks bag.

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

104. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Duder]

109. Dean never preformed an abortion...

...although he won't interfere with your right to abort.

[DrFunkenstein]

4. As A Kerry Fan, I Disagree

With the first part - I do not believe the ends justify the means, either. However, I do recognize McCain's point about troop morale - it is clear that McCain is definitely a veteran.

From the TNR Primary:

Candidate: Howard Dean
Category: General Likeability
Grade: D

When the statue of Saddam Hussein came crumbling down in Baghdad's Firdos Square, Howard Dean blithely remarked that he "suppose that's a good thing." It wasn't exactly his finest hour. Now, upon learning that U.S. forces in Mosul killed Saddam's blood-thirsty heirs, Uday and Qusay, in a pitched battle, Dean was once again caught in the act of being himself. Dean told a Manchester, New Hampshire audience that "the ends do not justify the means," and went back to attacking his presidential rivals as Johnny-come-latelys to the Bush administration's intelligence scandal.

Where to begin? Dean might have recognized that the "means" he scolded are very likely to save the lives of U.S. troops in Iraq, since Uday and Qusay almost certainly played a leading role in the anti-coalition guerilla campaign. Furthermore, Dean might also have recognized that the prospect of a free Iraq received a massive boost yesterday. As a jubilant 26-year-old Baghdad resident told The Washington Post, "We are really happy because now we can say for sure that we have gotten rid of the old regime." As Dean is constantly- and rightfully-emphasizing the need to win the peace, he might have acknowledged that the deaths of Uday and Qusay go quite a long way in this regard. And perhaps this is asking too much, but it would not exactly be untoward to mention that Saddam's children are responsible for untold thousands of deaths as leaders of a reign of terror, and it's a good thing that Hell is now short two apartments.

What did the other candidates say? Dick Gephardt: "A good thing." Joe Lieberman: "An important victory." John Kerry: "Once again, our troops have taken an important military step towards winning the peace in Iraq." To be fair to Dean, his rivals didn't exactly express jubilation. But none of them made as blithe a comment about ends and means--one that's particularly offensive when you're talking about mass murderers.

[Cha]

6. The Troops are complaining themselves and some would

like rummy to resign. It's not the "war" it's the quagmire aftermath that they had no plan for.

bushco is just trying to change the subject again and get the heat away from the real problem which is them. And mccain can kiss my partiotic :kick:

[polpilot]

12. Dean was merely not playing the part of the 'enabler' and promoting

this illegal invasion and murderous folly known as the 'Iraq War'.

Many know this only escalates hostilities against the U.S. and the 'display' of the dead only encourages more hatred and killing of the U.S. troops. This ultimately makes the U.S. more, not less, suseptible, to terrorist attacks.

Dean, once again, stands alone as the demo candidate not contributing to or supporting Chimpy's war. And as you pointed out above, the only one.


Dean '04

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[polpilot]

24. McCain will ALWAYS support Kerry over Dean. They both have 'shoot

'em up' backgrounds and belong to the Senate Club. Surely this isn't surprising.

Dean '04

[JohnKleeb]

27. "shoot em up background" because they are vets

and also whats wrong with being a war vet. We have plenty here some of our best presidents were such like Truman an artillary company captain.
Actually those two werent infantry men in the war. They were Navy guys. "The senate club" are you impling just because those two are in the senate that means you cant support Kerry. I dont know who I prefer Dean or Kerry but I think Kerry is the more liberal and being a fan and supporter of the kennedy family anyone who got Teddy's support and Teddy was anti war really makes me realize that I think I would prefer him to Dean.

[polpilot]

79. I support everyone being comfortable with their choice. I don't have a

'I'm a vet' versus 'I'm not a vet' bias. I give equal credence irregardless if they have 'served'. If you support the war and the continue killing just say it. If McCain supports George Bush's war plan in Iraq just say 'so do I'.

Dean '04...Let's heal not kill

[Name removed]

106. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DrFunkenstein]

122. I Support The War And All The Killing, Just Like Kerry

The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position.

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a position simply does not constitute an attack on the position itself. One might as well expect an attack on a poor drawing of a person to hurt the person.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html

[DrFunkenstein]

30. Not To Be Too Stuffy, But You Are Being Very Disrespectful

Perhaps you are just trying to come off clever, but I don't think you understand the level of sacrifice the two Senators have shown. Although I disagree to my soul with the Vietnam War, I would never make light of a POW and a soldier with three purple hearts. These men will be haunted for the rest of their lives by what they have seen. As someone avowedly anti-war, I hope you might understand that.

[JohnKleeb]

34. dont forget Kerry's silver star

[polpilot]

80. I would never 'make light' of any person's life's misery albeit through

war imprisonment or watching your baby die in Iraq because of U.S. led sanctions. It is irresponsible to the men and women soldiers, U.S. and otherwise, in Iraq, facing death daily, to give McCain, Kerry, or anyone a 'pass' because of 'hardships' endured in Vietnam.

Had capable and effective U.S. leaders come forward prior to the Vietnam War then McCain & Kerry wouldn't have been there. If capable and effective U.S. congressional leaders would have vehemently fought our intervention in Iraq no U.S soldier would have died.

Dean'04

[DrFunkenstein]

87. Gephardt Caves

HOUSE MINORITY Leader Richard A. Gephardt acceded to the drums of war on Wednesday, agreeing to an overly broad resolution authorizing President George W. Bush to attack Iraq. In the process, Mr. Gephardt undermined efforts in the Senate to limit the war authority to disarmament, rather than regime change.

Mr. Gephardt -- who was joined by other centrist Democrats, including Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut -- claimed to have won important concessions from Mr. Bush, and waxed on about how "this should not be about politics." But the concessions he won were minor, and his actions appear to be driven by the political imperatives of the coming election.

Before Mr. Gephardt decided to cave in on the war resolution, Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D. had hoped to make the Biden-Lugar resolution the basis of a vote in the Senate. That now appears unlikely. Mr. Biden said Wednesday that he was a realist and knew that the new compromise, ballyhooed Wednesday afternoon in the White House Rose Garden, pretty much meant the end of his approach.

http://www.commondreams.org/views02/1003-01.htm

Kerry's floor statement:

I want to underscore, this Administration began with a resolution that granted exceedingly broad authority to the President to use force. I regret that some Democrats supported it. I would have opposed it...

I would have preferred that the President agree to the approach drafted by Senators Biden and Lugar, because that resolution would authorize the use of force for the explicit purpose of disarming Iraq and countering the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs and delivery vehicles...I believe that this approach would have provided greater clarity to the American people about the reason for going to war and the specific grant of authority that Congress was giving the President. The Administration, unwisely in my view, rejected the Biden-Lugar approach.

http://www.johnkerry.com/site/PageServer?pagename=statement_iraq_2002_1009

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JohnKleeb]

36. I was once Pro Dean too

I really think I am beginning to prefer Kerry to Dean.

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DrFunkenstein]

44. Absolutely - Progressive Policy Before Progressive Rhetoric

Kucinich in a perfect world, Kerry in this one.

[JohnKleeb]

49. really I respect that

Most Dean and Kerry supporters would be for Kucinich but they are cynical thats not meant to be negative. Well you know I am a Kennedy family supporter Mr. Kerry got Teddy's endorsement which is good. He's far from perfect Kerry is but hes preferable to Dean I've read Kerry's union marks not too shabby not Kucinich like but impressive. He is also opposed to the death penalty right.

[Dragonfly]

67. So many of us are in the process...

of riding along together on this widening/intriguing "mother lode soul road," which is lined with steadily brightening beacons, illuminating the advance of a truly transformative vanguard of win-win societal change proponents.

Dennis Kucinich is the first candidate since Robert Kennedy that I see poised to capture the valiant hearts and minds "present and accounted for" ready to rightfully go after "the ideal America."

Isn't it time to go all the way?

[LWolf]

124. Yes.

If everyone who believes DK is the right man to take us the direction we want to go actually voted for him, he'd win in a landslide.

For me, I'll stand up for my own idealism and go after the "ideal america" with DK.

I think our constitution, our bill of rights, and our nation itself were founded on ideals that no one has ever lived up to. It's the journey. It's keeping the ideal front and center and continuing to progress toward it.

Turning our backs on the ideal because we don't have hope that it can ever be achieved guarantees failure.

I won't participate in the politics of failure; I choose the politics of hope.

[ModerateMiddle]

52. here, too

I started off very interested in Dean. When Kerry announced, I was interested in him as well. Kerry's campaign caught me up with is desire to see us rid ourselves of our dependence on foreign oil. Not being dependent on the middle east would have dramatically changed the dynamics of the Iraq discussions, and the war on terror in general. Kerry outlined the plan to promote research to get us where we want to be vis a vis energy independence. But no one is yelling "copy cat" at Howard Dean for saying the same thing now. Let's face it, every one of the candidates is going to have good ideas and they ALL need to be considered.

I'm not supporting Howard Dean any longer because I believe he is running on a sham. His anti-war position isn't any more principled than anyone else's, he's just louder and ruder.

[DrFunkenstein]

41. I Was Also Active In The Anti-War Movement

And I think Kerry's progressive internationalism represents the best insurance against future Iraqs.

[polpilot]

81. 'So I won't ever bother responding to you.'?????????????????????

Conflicted??

Dean '04

[DrFunkenstein]

19. This Contradicts Several Reports From Iraq

That they would not trust the US if it said they were dead. Although Saddam's sons were also God's children, their deaths will certainly discourage guerilla forces loyal to the Baath party.

It resolves alot of uncertainty on the parts of Iraqis who are unsure if their bloddthirsty despot will return to power. That may seem far-fetched to you, but you have not lived in totalitarian conditions your whole life.

[polpilot]

23. Guerrilla forces will hardly be discouraged by this...but if one thinks

displaying these dead bodies brings this region closer to peace then perhaps some congratulatory phone calls to the white house are in order.

This is all really, really crazy.

Dean '04

[ModerateMiddle]

54. no one is asking anything of the sort

but Dean and his supporters showing an ability to give credit where credit is due would do a world of good for y'alls images.

[blm]

134. If Dean thought the war was illegal

then why didn't he join in the legal petition to stop the war like Kucinich did?

Why didn't Dean speak out at ONE antiwar rally?

Why do Dean supporters insist on saying he is against this illegal war, when he was really FOR the version of the resolution with the Biden-Lugar amendment? Not much different than the resolution itself.

[w4rma]

151. Here are Kerry's & Dean's statements just before the Iraq resolution vote

...
Kerry, a Vietnam War veteran, said the United States should be willing to hold Hussein accountable and destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, but only if there is clear international support.

"I'd be willing to be the first to put my uniform back on and go and defend this country," Kerry said. "But I don't think we should pretend that protecting the security of our nation is defined by turning our back on a century of efforts by patriots and presidents of both parties to build an international structure of law and live by higher standards."

Dean, whose advocacy of liberal domestic policies has struck a chord among grass-roots activists here, offered the sharpest dissent. He contended that Bush has yet to make a compelling case to justify going to war.

"The greatest fear I have about Iraq is not just that we will engage in unwise conduct and send our children to die without having an adequate explanation from the president of the United States," he said. "The greater fear I have is the president has never said what the truth is, which is if we go into Iraq we will be there for 10 years to build that democracy and the president must tell us that before we go."
...
http://www.dre-mfa.gov.ir/eng/iraq/iraqanalysis_27.html

[AmyStrange]

111. more than 7 soldiers have died since ookie and kookie were killed...

"Dean might have recognized that the 'means' he scolded are very likely to save the lives of U.S. troops in Iraq, since Uday and Qusay almost certainly played a leading role in the anti-coalition guerilla campaign."

So how come the anti-coalition guerilla campaign hasn't stopped? It seems to be getting worse?




Dave (AmyStrange.com)

DU (slang/ folklore) Glossary (Dictionary): http://DUG.SeattleActivist.org/
Index of WMD Articles: http://WMD.SeattleActivist.org/

Here are some excellent resources and timelines of quotes and interviews and newspaper article quotes documenting the different things Bush and Co did and said for the last two plus years concerning the war in Iraq and WMDs (and other fun things) from the Howard Dean Website---even if you're not a Dean Fan, these are still excellent resources:

The Bush Administration And WMDs: Then And Now:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=bush_wmd_summary

Niger-Uranium Timeline:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=niger_timeline

Bush and WMD: Assumptions vs. Reality:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/DocServer/TikTok_-_Bush_-_Iraq_-_Side_by_Side.pdf?docID=781

The Bush Administration and WMD: What did they know and when did they know it?:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/DocServer/TikTok_-_Administration_-_Iraq_Deception.pdf?docID=762

[CarlBallard]

5. I think part of this is a question of what is the means

I mean are 250 dead Americans worth 2 dead brutes? With more on the way. Is the loss of credibility that the US suffered around the world considered a means of offing them? Is the loss of any information we might have gotten from them if they were taken alive a means?

If the only means are a couple bombs and the cost of the informant, that's one thing, but if the means are everything that led to this point that's quite another. While I'm opposed to the death penalty generally, I make an exception in my own mind for crimes against humanity, and surely the Husein boys qualify for that. Still a trial would have been nice that seems like a better means to the same end.

[Cha]

8. IMO they knew too much for a "trial" so they had to be "executed"

with out judge or jury.

The husseins and the bushes go way back!

Which some people conveniently forget.

And you're right it would have been been a "better means to the same end."

But as I said and it's not just the bushes, it's rummy, too.

Remember the picture of rummy shaking daddy hussein's hand?

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JohnKleeb]

25. Looking at it I agree

Both were terrible guys its just a shame that so many had to die you know. Saddam and his regime were untolerable. I am not supporting Kerry but hes just about to pass Dean for 2nd place.

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CarlBallard]

33. I wasn't trying to minimize

how awful they were. Christ on the cross, I said they had committed crimes against humanity. The only point I was trying to make, and I may have made it badly, was that if one desires to be rid of the Husein children or to punnish them, that there are better ways. There were costs to taking them out generally, and to the way we took them out specifically.

Also I have no idea how many women and children they tortured, but over a million seems like a random number.

I'm not saying any of this as a Dean supporter. I'm hoping Clark throws his hat in the ring and if he doesn't, I'll probably be a Kerry boster. Still I generally agree with Dean that everything bad about this war outweighs everything good about it.

[Name removed]

50. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ModerateMiddle]

59. I agree with you about this

line: "I generally agree with Dean that everything bad about this war outweighs everything good about it."

However, none of us have the ability to go back in time and change what was done. There is a lot of finger pointing from the Dean camp to the congress critters who voted in favor of the resolution being responsible for how poorly Chimpy handled the matter in total. And that's simply not fair. Chimpy was willing and ready to attack Iraq without ever even going to congress or the UN. And he, like every president before him, had that right, if they were to make the determination, as the Shrub administation did, that Iraq and Hussein posed an imminent threat. Being proved wrong later is immaterial.

Now, if there were solid reasons for not believing some of the things that the Bush Admin was telling the American people, and congress, which is EXACTLY what W. was doing in the SOTU - and lying - he's in big trouble.

I hated hated hated the war. But I don't care for Dean's waffling position on it either. I will likely go with Kerry's principled, nuanced stand, cuz I don't think the world is black and white, and I'm very disappointed with Dean's nastiness towards, well everyone who isn't him and his supporters

:shrug:

[Larkspur]

43. I don't hear McCain complaining that Pinochet was allowed to

escape justice. Gen. Pinochet, our former stooge in Chile, murdered and tortured as many victims as Saddam did, but where is the outcry from McCain and his breed of militant male chauvanists? Oh, but I forget, Pinochet was installed by a Republican admin in the 1970's, that was Nixon, wasn't it? I guess its OK if the brutal dictator was a foreign General who paid lip service to the USA.

McCain go suck an egg!

[Name removed]

53. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Larkspur]

71. My statement is a guantlet slapping McCain's face

otherwise known as a challenge to his so called honor.

Tell him to get some estrogen injections to balance out his uncontrolled testosterone.

[Name removed]

107. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[valniel]

125. This Is Sad!

You should really remove your "Dean" sign when you make these statements. I won't be voting for McCain, but that does not mean that I don't respect him. On the other hand, I might vote for Dean, but I would not respect him if he made a statement along those lines!

[Larkspur]

140. As a feminist, I've never liked McCain

he comes across as a male chauvanist and he has always irked me. I prefer him over Bush, but not by much.

[AmyStrange]

112. !!! Welcome to the DU !!!

they were probably afraid that ookie and kookie would reveal the truth that there really are no WMDs nor was there any weapons program.




Dave (AmyStrange.com)

DU (slang/ folklore) Glossary (Dictionary): http://DUG.SeattleActivist.org/
Index of WMD Articles: http://WMD.SeattleActivist.org/

Here are some excellent resources and timelines of quotes and interviews and newspaper article quotes documenting the different things Bush and Co did and said for the last two plus years concerning the war in Iraq and WMDs (and other fun things) from the Howard Dean Website---even if you're not a Dean Fan, these are still excellent resources:

The Bush Administration And WMDs: Then And Now:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=bush_wmd_summary

Niger-Uranium Timeline:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=niger_timeline

Bush and WMD: Assumptions vs. Reality:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/DocServer/TikTok_-_Bush_-_Iraq_-_Side_by_Side.pdf?docID=781

The Bush Administration and WMD: What did they know and when did they know it?:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/DocServer/TikTok_-_Administration_-_Iraq_Deception.pdf?docID=762

[madrchsod]

7. oh that`s why

5 soldiers have been killed since the brothers were killed..really raises morale when 5 of your buddies are dead... john maybe you should ask bush where he was while you were in the hanoi hilton.....

[Cha]

9. Yeah, john mccain has it bassawkwards like all the bushys.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JohnKleeb]

11. yes got it down good

[polpilot]

29. How long will it take for Americans to understand that invading Iraq,

bombing Iraq, and killing 'all the bad people' won't EVER work.

Dean '04

[DrFunkenstein]

35. So We Should Let Iraq Collapse And Let Iran Pick The Scraps?

I disagree with bombings and other forms of great violence, but it would be irresponsible in the extreme to pull out now. Not only for the Iraqi people with no infrastructure and standing government, but also for our own long-term interests.

[JohnKleeb]

38. no offense doc funk but didnt your guy Kerry advocate withdrawal

[DrFunkenstein]

47. No, That's Not What He Means

By ending occupation. He means ending the sense of Iraq as an American occupation by bringing international legitimacy through the UN - thus opening the door for our European allies with money and peacekeepers.

[JohnKleeb]

55. oh ok thanks for the explanation

Kerry or Dean I really am prefering Kerry. Still for Kucinich but if he withdraws Kerry. Another reason why I will make Kerry my backup because the person who really got me political is backing him my grandmother shes either gonna suprised for the good when she realizes that her guy is more liberal than Dean.

[ModerateMiddle]

62. Exactly

all of those countries that Rummy says we have asked to take part in Iraq - have all turned us down because no one wants to volunteer their military to serve under US command. UN command, yes. NATO, yes, but under US military command? No one would do that.

But if the UN were to take over the whole reconstruction operation, then other countries would be okay about joining in, and that's what Kerry is advocating - that it not be a "US occupation" any longer.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Giverney]

13. newsmax??

you guys read newsmax??
isn't that an ultra right-wing site?

[JohnKleeb]

21. know thy enemy I guess yeah it is

[DrFunkenstein]

48. I Read GOP Talking Points Against The Candidates

Never hurts to see it coming.

[valniel]

64. Ultra-Right or Far-Left, read it all!

If you don't know the opposition, you will loose!!!

[w4rma]

20. Dean(paraphrase): Killing sons victory for Iraqis, but doesn't justify war

...
Questioned about the deaths of Saddam's sons, Odai and Qusai, in Iraq, Dean dismissed suggestions that it was a victory for the Bush administration.

"It's a victory for the Iraqi people ... but it doesn't have any effect on whether we should or shouldn't have had a war," Dean said. "I think in general the ends do not justify the means."
http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/stories/D/DEAN_IRAQ?SITE=PAPHQ&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=28302&mesg

[JohnKleeb]

22. I dont support Dean right now but I think hes right

[rucky]

28. Funny How...

When you reduce Dean's quotes to teeny sound bites, he sounds crude and abrasive. But when you actually quote Ho-Ho in context, he sounds - dare I say - Presidential?!

[AmyStrange]

113. !!! Welcome to the DU !!!

it's a fovorite anti-Dean ploy. Like their own candidates, they don't have any political guts. That's why they NEVER quote anything he says in context.




Dave (AmyStrange.com)

DU (slang/ folklore) Glossary (Dictionary): http://DUG.SeattleActivist.org/
Index of WMD Articles: http://WMD.SeattleActivist.org/

Here are some excellent resources and timelines of quotes and interviews and newspaper article quotes documenting the different things Bush and Co did and said for the last two plus years concerning the war in Iraq and WMDs (and other fun things) from the Howard Dean Website---even if you're not a Dean Fan, these are still excellent resources:

The Bush Administration And WMDs: Then And Now:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=bush_wmd_summary

Niger-Uranium Timeline:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=niger_timeline

Bush and WMD: Assumptions vs. Reality:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/DocServer/TikTok_-_Bush_-_Iraq_-_Side_by_Side.pdf?docID=781

The Bush Administration and WMD: What did they know and when did they know it?:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/DocServer/TikTok_-_Administration_-_Iraq_Deception.pdf?docID=762

[polpilot]

26. 'how wonderful an event this is', 'legimate use of the American military'?

LEGITIMATE USE OF THE AMERICAN MILITARY????????????

I think some DUers should just admit that they support this invasion, support Kerry's support of this invasion and move on.

Dean '04...

[JohnKleeb]

32. why do you say that

I know a lot of Kerry supporters who were anti war. I am not for Kerry but if you really looked at things you would find that Dean and Kerry have much in common. Dean wasnt a total dove on the war. One of the misconceptions about Kerry is that hes not that liberal hes more so than Dean. Dean would have supported the war with a resolution I hear. Why I support Kucinich he was on the frontlines of the protests fighting the unjust war himself and he always seems to bring up things that affect all kinds of people. He's working on something for the farmers now. No offense to Dean and his supporters but you wont admit it but your guy has more in common with Kerry than you may believe. No offense again.

[polpilot]

83. Dean and Kerry are polar opposites. Why do you think that the Dean/

Kerry camp is constantly at odds. Dean won't play the 'game', Kerry's been playing for almost 3 decades.

Had just a few congressional leaders joined Kucinich then the 'sheperd bombing' wouldn't have occured. Kucinich's a real hero with all of his honor intact. He doesn't need the validation of the U.S. voter. He's already won by choosing 'honor' not 'political position'


Dean '04

[DrFunkenstein]

85. Playing The Game

From Salon:

"Dean is stirring up antiwar people," a senior advisor to one of his Democratic opponents says. "They are against all war, not just against war without U.N. support. When we do go to war, and Dean says he's with our troops and president in time of national crisis, the antiwar activists he's cultivated will turn on him quickly."

Dean says that's fine, and denies that there's any inconsistency. "I think people are madly trying to find one," he says. "It's part of the game."

From the LA Times 2/11/03:

"Dean's own position is more nuanced than his speeches suggest. In interviews, including one with The Times on Sunday, he has said he would support U.S. military participation if Hussein continues to resist disarmament and the U.N. then votes to invade. But he insists that Iraq does not pose a sufficiently "imminent threat" to American security to justify a unilateral invasion without U.N. approval."

“I will support a multilateral effort to disarm Iraq by force, if we have exhausted all other options. But I cannot—and will not—support a unilateral, U.S. war against Iraq unless the threat is imminent and no multilateral effort is possible." - Sen. Kerry 10/10/02

Kerry after the Powell presentation:

“It’s about doing what’s right for the country. I’m worried about the national security of our nation and doing what’s correct. I want the president to continue to work through the multilateral structure, and I’d like to see us get the support of other countries, but I’ve always recognized that you need to face up to the threat of weapons of mass destruction.”

Kerry in 1997:

“Saddam Hussein cannot be permitted to go unobserved and unimpeded toward his horrific objective of amassing a stockpile of weapons of mass destruction. This is not a matter about which there should be any debate whatsoever in the Security Council, or, certainly, in this Nation.

While we should always seek to take significant international actions on a multilateral rather than a unilateral basis whenever that is possible, if in the final analysis we face what we truly believe to be a grave threat to the well-being of our Nation or the entire world and it cannot be removed peacefully, we must have the courage to do what we believe is right and wise.”

Kerry has been calling for the multilateral disarmament of Iraq since the late 90's. He has stuck by that message ever since. Who is playing "the game"?

[polpilot]

88. Kerry got what he's always wanted & voted for, an Iraqi war. Consistent.

war...war....war war war...McCain war war kill kill celebrate kill war war.

Dean '04...Healing not Killin'

[DrFunkenstein]

90. You're A Goofball!!!

I have to admit, you are pretty funny. Touche, pussycat.



(That's an old Tom & Jerry quote, if that made absolutely no sense to you).

[polpilot]

94. Great rebuttal!! sort of a Kerry/McCain-like grasp of the issues!!!

Dean '04..Calm...cool...deliberate.. versus pow! pow! pow!

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

118. Getting it straight:

Because the President of the United States and the Central Intelligence Agency made us believe that Iraq was cultivating Nuclear and biological weapons to hand over the current Al-Queda cells already existing in the United States.


Al Qaeda= Islamic fundamentalism.
Iraq= secular despotism.

Al Qaeda= threat to secular despotism.

I've heard assertions that Iraq had links to Al Qaeda, but only that: assertions. Terrorists camps in Iraq (and it's debatable that that is what they were) were located in Kurdish controlled territory supported by the northern No-Fly zone.

Where is this evidence that "made us believe" that Iraq was intent on handing over WMD? Millions of people around the world understood the implications of the secular/fundamentalist situation. Why couldn't the 29 Dem. Senators who voted for the Iraq resolution figure it out, while 21 Dem. Senators could? Where is this "evidence" of an Iraq-Al Qaeda linkage that was so overwhelming that it "made us" believe?


Help me "get it straight," please.

[phegger]

46. People...

...this is politics. Of course Dean is right. The question is, will statements like this alienate voters who might otherwise vote for him. I like Dean, but abrasiveness only gets you so far...

As for McCain, when it comes to military matters he's a reflexive hawk. In other respects, I think the comparisons to Dean are apt.

[DrFunkenstein]

99. Hold Up, I'm Still Waiting For A Response To #85

Given that Dean's position was the same as Kerry -

1. He would first seek a multilateral, non-military effort to disarm Iraq (presumably, some sort of voluntary inspections).

2. If that fails, he would support a multilateral military effort to disarm Iraq.

3. He would support a unilateral military approach if the threat from Saddam became imminent.

- how did Dean present himself as the anti-war candidate earlier this year (although he's flip-flopped to now being a - ahem - realist)? He didn't seem to eager to elaborate the conditions of his opposition to the crowds of anti-war activists.

Kerry was always up front with the activists. He said, "If you want someone that reflexively opposes war, don't vote for me." You can watch it yourself in the C-Span archive during the question & answer part of his foreign policy speech.

http://www.c-span.org/Search/basic.asp?BasicQueryText=john+kerry&SortBy=date

Dean, however, wanted to play it both ways - that he was anti-war to the activists, but when he had some legitimacy as a candidate he could say he was really for enforcing disarmament.

But it's all part of the game...

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

119. The Iraq Resolution did not hold ShrubCo to a UN-voted mandate.

Remember, Smirk was going to make the UN "show it's cards." And then didn't when France indicated it would veto.

I don't recall the outrage from the pro-Iraq Res. Senators following this departure from the UN process. If they were so intent on holding Shrub to the UN process why did they not scream from the rooftops that he had just violated the spirit of the Resolution? Only now, when that vote doesn't look as popular and politically expedient as it did then, do we get the moral indignation that was called for back in March.

[DrFunkenstein]

121. That's Revisionist History

I am finding it very hard to contain the urge to start using darker language against the claims made against Kerry. So, let's talk about rooftops instead. This is John Kerry on March 17, after Bush announced Saddam Hussein had 48 hours to leave the country.

"I find myself genuinely angered, saddened and dismayed by the situation in which this nation finds itself tonight. As the world's sole superpower in an increasingly hostile and dangerous world, our government's obligation to protect the security of the United States and the law abiding nations of the world could not be more clear, particularly in the aftermath of September 11th.

Yet the Administration's handling of the run up to war with Iraq could not possibly have been more inept or self-defeating. President Bush has clumsily and arrogantly squandered the post 9/11 support and goodwill of the entire civilized world in a manner that will make the jobs ahead of us - both the military defeat and the rebuilding of Iraq - decidedly more expensive in every sense of that word.

The Administration's indifference to diplomacy and the manner in which it has treated friend and foe alike over the past several months have left this country with vastly reduced influence throughout the world, made impossible the assembly of a broad, multinational effort against Saddam Hussein, and dramatically increased the costs of fulfilling our legitimate security obligations at home and around the world.

At home, the Administration has given too short shrift to the needs of homeland security, ignoring the advice of their own experts, doing the job on the fly and on the cheap. To this administration, homeland security is a fine political weapon, but not high enough a priority to force a reassessment of their tax cuts to the rich and the special interests.

That said, Saddam Hussein is a tyrant, truly the personification of evil. He has launched two wars of aggression against his neighbors, perpetrated environmental disaster, purposefully destabilized an entire region of the world, murdered tens of thousands of his own citizens, flouted the will of the United Nations and the world in acquiring weapons of mass destruction, conspired to assassinate the former President of the United States, and provided harbor and support to terrorists bent on destroying us and our friends.

From that perspective, regardless of the Administration's mishandling of so much of this situation, no President can defer the national security decisions of this country to the United Nations or any other multilateral institution or individual country.

My strong personal preference would have been for the Administration - like the Administration of George Bush, Sr. -- to have given diplomacy more time, more commitment, a real chance of success. In my estimation, giving the world thirty additional days for additional real multilateral coalition building - a real summit, not a five hour flyby with most of the world's powers excluded -- would have been prudent and no impediment to our military situation, an assessment with which our top military brass apparently agree. Unfortunately, that is an option that has been disregarded by President Bush. In the colloquial, we are where we are.

It will take years to repair the needless damage done by this Administration, damage to our international standing and moral leadership, to traditional and time-tested alliances, to our relations with the Arab world, ultimately to ourselves. Let's finish the process we began twelve years ago of disarming Saddam and ridding the world of this menace. Let's begin to rebuild our sense of national unity. Let's begin the work of building a stronger, safer world, of rebuilding alliances, and staying the course of long term involvement the Middle East in order to reclaim our rightful place of respect in the world order."

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

123. Revisionism indeed!

Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SEC. 1. SHORT TITLE. This joint resolution may be cited as the "Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against Iraq".



I respect you Dr. F, but what part of the War Resolution don't you understand? I know that Kerry wanted Shrub to engage with the UN. I know that his "strong personal preference would have been for the Administration - like the Administration of George Bush, Sr. -- to have given diplomacy more time, more commitment, a real chance of success." What I don't know is how Kerry, a former prosecutor mind you, could have failed to understand the pertinient tracts of the Iraqi War Resolution, such as the all-important one above.

Here's another tract from the resolution that Kerry should have (and indeed did) understand:

(a) AUTHORIZATION. The president is authorized 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.



Look Dr. F, I respect your support for Kerry, as I respect blm's, and others, support as well. But any spinning of Iraq War Resolution support as anything other than carte blanche for ShrubCo to go to war is patently and provably false. Read the Resolution (here's one of many sources: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/july-dec02/house_resolution_10-02.html)


You cannot, on the one hand, have me believe that Kerry is reknowned for his crafting of legislation and then, on the other hand, have me believe that he did not understand the full implications and meaning of the Iraq War Res.

The text speaks for itself. Votes are one thing. Ass-covering speeches are another.

[DrFunkenstein]

127. Revisionism Revisited

I recently put together a little research on the build up to the Iraq resolution. There are three articles that I believe put Kerry's tough vote (and Dean's non-vote) into context.

First, the administration had been pushing hard to circumvent Congress and the UN until Cheney overplayed his hand in a saber-rattling VFW speech:

"Administration officials said yesterday there was never any serious consideration given to avoid consulting Congress, despite an interpretation by White House Counsel Alberto R. Gonzales that Bush has all the authority he needs, from the 1991 resolution authorizing his father to go to war against Iraq, to mount a military campaign to depose Hussein.

Though some White House officials - Vice President Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis Libby, among them - were privately squeamish about the idea of taking the case on Iraq to Congress, there was no significant opposition in the White House, officials said. "The inclination has always been to consult and we gave fairly serious indications of that," said a White House official.

Although Bush has used the words "consultation" and "debate," senior officials repeatedly say he has not made up his mind yet on an Iraqi invasion, nor has he indicated what he might ask for in a congressional resolution.

But in attempting to stipulate that they were under no obligation to seek a new resolution, the administration ceded the playing field to others, and brought rebukes upon themselves from such prominent Republicans as House International Relations Committee Chairman Henry J. Hyde (Ill.) and Sen. John W. Warner (Va.), ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, who urged Bush in blunt terms to embrace consultation.

Gary J. Schmitt, director of the Project for the New American Century and an advocate of military action against Iraq, said the administration had a plausible case for not consulting but couldn't sustain it politically."

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0906-05.htm

Next, Pentagon hawks in Bush's ear were talking openly about "reshaping" the entire Middle East.

WASHINGTON - As the Bush administration debates going to war against Iraq, its most hawkish members are pushing a sweeping vision for the Middle East that sees the overthrow of President Saddam Hussein of Iraq as merely a first step in the region's transformation.

The argument for reshaping the political landscape in the Mideast has been pushed for years by some Washington think tanks and in hawkish circles. It is now being considered as a possible US policy with the ascent of key hard-liners in the administration - from Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith in the Pentagon to John Hannah and Lewis Libby on the vice president's staff and John Bolton in the State Department, analysts and officials say.

Iraq, the hawks argue, is just the first piece of the puzzle. After an ouster of Hussein, they say, the United States will have more leverage to act against Syria and Iran, will be in a better position to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and will be able to rely less on Saudi oil.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0910-01.htm

Knowing the dangers of an unaccountable, Senators Biden and Lugar came up with a resolution forcing Bush to get Security Council approval. Although the administration said it "tied their hands," they appeared open to negotiations. But they never needed to, thanks to a handful of Democrat centrists led by Dick Gephardt.

"HOUSE MINORITY Leader Richard A. Gephardt acceded to the drums of war on Wednesday, agreeing to an overly broad resolution authorizing President George W. Bush to attack Iraq. In the process, Mr. Gephardt undermined efforts in the Senate to limit the war authority to disarmament, rather than regime change.

<>

Mr. Gephardt -- who was joined by other centrist Democrats, including Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut -- claimed to have won important concessions from Mr. Bush, and waxed on about how "this should not be about politics." But the concessions he won were minor, and his actions appear to be driven by the political imperatives of the coming election.

Before Mr. Gephardt decided to cave in on the war resolution, Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D. had hoped to make the Biden-Lugar resolution the basis of a vote in the Senate. That now appears unlikely. Mr. Biden said Wednesday that he was a realist and knew that the new compromise, ballyhooed Wednesday afternoon in the White House Rose Garden, pretty much meant the end of his approach.

Mr. Gephardt has long favored regime change in Iraq and called Saddam a serious threat. But as recently as two weeks ago he said that Mr. Bush was not justified in waging war to overthrow Saddam, only in disarming him -- a position exactly in line with the Biden-Lugar resolution he has torpedoed.

http://www.commondreams.org/views02/1003-01.htm

Thus ended the hopes of most Democrats, including Dean and Kerry, of effectively stopping Bush in his tracks. Although the Gephardt-apporved resolution didn't stop Bush entirely, it at least forced him to submit to a UN process he had planned to circumvent entirely.

Here is Kerry on the Biden-Lugar proposal:

"I would have preferred that the President agree to the approach drafted by Senators Biden and Lugar, because that resolution would authorize the use of force for the explicit purpose of disarming Iraq and countering the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs and delivery vehicles.

I believe that this approach would have provided greater clarity to the American people about the reason for going to war and the specific grant of authority that Congress was giving the President. The Administration, unwisely in my view, rejected the Biden-Lugar approach."

http://www.johnkerry.com/site/PageServer?pagename=statement_iraq_2002_1009

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

144. Ok, so no Biden-Lugar and Gephardt's an asshole.

Now look at the text of the IWR, forget about Biden-Lugar (it's fantasy, not reality) and tell me what you think about the vote.

"I would have preferred...." blah, blah, blah.

IWR= Kerry "Aye." What is so hard about admitting this?

I just don't get the apologia going on here.

[killbotfactory]

40. Is McCain retarded?

Dean is was talking about the war in general and his view that it wasn't justified, not the elimination of two murderous dipshits in a sea of murderous dipshits.

"It's a victory for the Iraqi people ... but it doesn't have any effect on whether we should or shouldn't have had a war," Dean said. "I think in general the ends do not justify the means."

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[killbotfactory]

51. Dean said it was irrelevent to whether or not we should have gone to war.

And unilaterally attacking a country which poses no threat to the US is wrong, even if some good things happen as a result.

Why is that a slam on his democratic rivals? Are they advocating the USA become a vigilante nation?

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[killbotfactory]

57. He was asked about it by a reporter.

You have a problem with this because... ?

[JohnKleeb]

58. I guess so

You know what the shame is that so many had to die before the war and during the war for those two to die.

[DrFunkenstein]

61. Disarmament, Not Assassination

Kerry was very clear about the reasons for invasion (major obstruction of inspections, failure to disarm), and reasons not to (regime change). Kerry attacked Bush last year for confusing the rationale with tough talk of invasion and regime change - alienating our allies, and getting us off track. But disarmament wouldn't do much for Halliburton...

[JohnKleeb]

65. Thanks for the clear up doc funk.

[valniel]

66. In The End

I'll vote for the democrat who gets nominated. I just hope that whoever get the nomination will be elect-able by the U.S. at large, and not have offended too many independents and moderates on the way to getting the nomination!

[DrFunkenstein]

73. See Post #69

Can anyone else feels things tense up around here in the last day or so? I found very few statements where I could say, "Dean or Kerry, let's win this together." It just seems that gears switched from debate to attack. I may just be having an off day and letting people get to me that I wouldn't normally.

And to post #69, to everything its season - a time to be aggressive and a time to lay off. If the Dean campaign doesn't learn this, they will find themselves in the off-season quick enough.

[CMT]

60. McCain was one of the biggest hawks on Iraq

so of course he will say this. He is also a booster of his friend John Kerry for the Dem nomination so it doesn't surprise me that he attacks Howard Dean. Well on Iraq Howard Dean was right and John McCain and John Kerry were wrong. The seeds they sowed are coming home to bite us in the ass.

[jos]

63. McCain got it wrong

and he knows it.

The means Dean was referring to was invading Iraq.

[MercutioATC]

68. The fact that McCain called the death of ANYBODY a "wonderful

event" is sickening. I used to have some respect for him....no more...

[JohnKleeb]

70. thats sickening I didnt know that I agree

[DrFunkenstein]

72. I'd Celebrate Osama's Death

It may not be the most Christian of acts, but it would be right up there with watching Bush give up the White House keys in my book.

[JohnKleeb]

86. I wouldnt celebrate then of course I wouldnt mourn of course

I'd just move on.

[DrFunkenstein]

91. Victories and Funerals

Weapons are the instruments of fear; they are not the wise man's tools.
He uses them only when he has no choice.
Peace and quiet are dear to his heart,
And victory no cause for rejoicing.
If you rejoice in victory, then you delight in killing;
If you delight in killing, you cannot fulfill yourself.

When many people are being killed,
They should be mourned in heartfelt sorrow.
That is why a victory must be observed like a funeral.

Tao Te Ching, Thirty-One.

[MercutioATC]

101. Amen to the Dr....

Killing is never an event to be celebrated.

[poskonig]

69. Dean will win because he is always aggressive.

McCain, a loyal Republican, is playing politics. The "pummels" are taking quotes out of context. Whup-de-doo. The muscular Dean campaign values action over inaction and will continue to take hits while hitting back harder.

[chimpymustgo]

75. Dean will lose because he's aggressive, abrasive and arrogant.

Un-Presidential in the extreme. The job requires thoughtfulness, nuance. People are not going to vote for somebody who's always yelling at them.

[ModerateMiddle]

76. Yes, and what is horrible

is that Dean took the "Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party" from someone who was so very UNlike him - Paul Wellstone. On policy and on style, Wellstone was the "happy warrior". What is Dean? The Angry Crusader?

My very real problem with Dean (besides all the policy stuff) is that in his need to attack, he fails to see the full picture. And his loyal followers just rationalize everything he says. A politician must be able to say what they mean without having to have a bunch of folks run around after him interpretting his remarks. He shouldn't rely on apologies. Especially someone who wants to be President, should learn how to make his point with out pissing off more than 1/2 the people.

[chimpymustgo]

77. Bingo, kplongco. And the attacks on other candidates is low.

Sure it got him on the map - but it pissed the other candidates and their supporters off. And he won't stop. It's actually very freeper-lik behavior. But I don't think it will fly with most Democrats. In fact, I think Dean is self-destructing.

We need to run an aggressive but positive, optimistic campaign about making America a better place. That's why I like Edwards and Kerry best at this point.

[ModerateMiddle]

84. I don't see a problem with pointing out Bush's mistakes

of policy and implementation. I sure don't see a problem with pointing out that in the rush to war, a lot of very poor assumptions were made and that led to a severe lack of realistic planning. I was very against the war and was horrified to watch our country walk up to and off that "pre-emptive" precipice.

I watched John Kerry's floor speech that day, and I didn't know which way he'd vote. I knew that there wasn't any chance at all of having the resolution fail because they already had enough votes. I was hoping that the vets would prevail and get something that guaranteed appropriate action on the part of the White House and W. But W and Co were going to go into Iraq regardless of what Congress did, and obviously, regardless of what the UN did.

I wasn't happy with Kerry's vote, but he did convince me in his speech that it was appropriate to address threats and that Saddam had ALWAYS been considered a threat and there was no reason not to think he still was. What Kerry wanted was to allow the threat of military action to convince Saddam to cooperate and allow the inspections to work - and to build a broad international coalition to put pressure on Saddam.

But the Administration's bullying techniques (that fight fight fight mentality - sound familiar at all?) to smear anyone who disagreed with the Emperor and his minions made a mockery of the idea of "diplomacy".

I am leaning heavily towards John Kerry because I believe that he has the international credibility to restore respect for the US internationally. No other candidate has that at this point. Dean says the right words - we need to get the UN to take more responsibility and provide troops - but on what basis should I believe that he is able to negotiate something like that? To me, he sounds like the same kind of bully that Bush is - "I am right and I don't need a 'focus group' to tell me how think/believe/vote".

I don't see the problem with Dean being one of electability. I simply don't want him to be president.

I think you're right about Dean self-destructing. I think he got so much benefit out of the anti-war stance that he doesn't know how to let it go at this point, and he's taking it way too far. The fact that he doesn't even seem to consider the troops over in Iraq and how they'll respond to his words really bothers me, and makes me lean even further to Kerry, who I believe DOES understand what the troops are going through.

[poskonig]

82. Nope. The Carville/Begala stuff works.

You think **Bush** is thoughtful, nuanced, et cetera?

No. We does well because of his toughness, initiative, and willingness to roll in the mud. Politics has always been a bloody winner-take-all sport.

[DrFunkenstein]

92. Not Necessarily The Loudest, But The Toughest

A Village Voice article from May:

"Rove's rangers have already begun bashing the Democratic candidate most likely to make Bush look like all cake and no beef: John Kerry.

First they questioned his patriotism, then they accused him of looking French, and now they're landing on his wife, casting her as a hyper-Hillary. Teresa Heinz Kerry's outspokenness, her devotion to her dead former husband, her current prenup, and her vow to maim any man who steps out on her are all being used to portray her as a ball-breaking bitch and John Kerry as her emasculated victim. So powerful is this harridan image that it actually allows the Bushies to bash Teresa for her wealth. If she doesn't finance Kerry's campaign, she's dissing him; if she does, he's a kept man.

Kerry isn't the front-runner, yet the White House has singled him out for sexual calumny. To understand this fixation, you have to consider Kerry's stature (he towers over Bush), his war record, and his sloe-eyed Kennedy aura. In another era, these would be clear signals of masculinity. Today, you have to flash your stash, and Kerry's patrician style doesn't lend itself to that. But he does have those tales from 'Nam, and in a one-on-one he could expose the angst under Bush's aggression. If the economy tanks while Iraq seethes, we just might have a real contest."

http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0321/goldstein.php

Bush is not a chickenhawk so much as he is a peacock. He loves to talk tough and strut around, but he's also mind-numbingly incompetent. My guess is that people are going to look for someone solid, and not a tough-talking peacock.

[Forkboy]

74. McCains an idjit

he may be a slightly better brand of idjit than a lot of repukes,but he's still an idjit!

[DrFunkenstein]

78. He Does a Good Daily Show Interview, Though

I have to agree that quite a few of his beliefs are wrongheaded, and he most definitely twisted Dean's "ends and means" quote. However, I think he had a point about Dean's unnecessary snarkiness.

I can understand that Dean didn't want to give any momentum to Bush, but I think he turned some people off by refusing to acknowledge that their deaths contribute to securing the peace by removing a tremendous uncertainty, not to mention that these guys really were pretty low-down scum.

As part of the anti-war movement, I noticed some of the more zealous people refused to acknowledge how despicable both Saddam and Osama are. This was a disservice to the anti-war cause, as Jon Stewart rightly pointed out several times (just to come back to the title).

Whatever else McCain may have said, I think he was right to tie the confirmed deaths of 2 out of the top 3 leaders of the resistance back to troop morale. However politically useful low morale and an unsuccessful winning of the peace, these are still not things to hope for. The only way home for the troops is a successful peace, and I for one hope it comes before November 2004.

[AmyStrange]

115. Wasn't that way here in Seattle...

no one I knew out here ever made it secret that Osama and Saddam were bad evil men, but it rarely (if ever) got media play




Dave (AmyStrange.com)

DU (slang/ folklore) Glossary (Dictionary): http://DUG.SeattleActivist.org/
Index of WMD Articles: http://WMD.SeattleActivist.org/

Here are some excellent resources and timelines of quotes and interviews and newspaper article quotes documenting the different things Bush and Co did and said for the last two plus years concerning the war in Iraq and WMDs (and other fun things) from the Howard Dean Website---even if you're not a Dean Fan, these are still excellent resources:

The Bush Administration And WMDs: Then And Now:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=bush_wmd_summary

Niger-Uranium Timeline:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=niger_timeline

Bush and WMD: Assumptions vs. Reality:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/DocServer/TikTok_-_Bush_-_Iraq_-_Side_by_Side.pdf?docID=781

The Bush Administration and WMD: What did they know and when did they know it?:
http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/DocServer/TikTok_-_Administration_-_Iraq_Deception.pdf?docID=762

[jerryster]

89. Dean may have blown it

Once again one of our candidates, instead of practing real politics, shoots us all in the foot. I didn't see or hear the exact Dean quote but this could be a terrible miscalculation. Why, instead of doing something so politically asinine as blubbering over two murderers, rapists, and overseers of torture - which is what these 2 assholes were - didn't he just say that the world is better off without them and let it go. By taking this road he may have done the repugnicants a favor. Consider: No one sees these two deaths in a sympathetic light. However, like a lot of people I don't think it translates into all of Iraq suddenly loving us unconditionally. Dean would have been better off saying something like how he's not unhappy about the world being rid of these 2 assholes, but that we shouldn't now think that everything is hunky dory in Iraq. And he could point out the deaths of the soldiers shortly after the deaths of the sons as evidence. Did he do that? Apparently not. And if people buy into this "blubbering" he is pretty much screwed. The last thing we need is a Dem to appear sympathetic to the wrong side. And believe me, the repugnicants are skilled at slander. So they will make sure that people will believe that Dean was upset only about the ends while making sure to get everyone to forget about the means. If we want any of our candidates to have a chance they need to think about the long term consequences
of EVERYTHING they say.

[chimpymustgo]

93. Dean is overplaying his hand. He only has the war card.

And he keeps using it to attack the other Democratic candidates. He just went too far. Dean needs to back off - he's really looking ugly, unprofessional and unprepared for higher office.

[poskonig]

108. This is ridiculous.

You guys are taking a minor quote OUT OF CONTEXT for whatever motivation. The Dean campaign has been pronounced dead by people over and over again. His opponents, Democratic or Republican, really need to become more creative.

[jerryster]

135. No motivation

You are incorrect in assuming I have any motives re: Governor Dean. The fact is I have not made up my mind about which Dem to support at this time. My concern is how well what our candidates say is received. Remember they are by choice on a national stage now. As I said, they all, not just Dean, have to think about the long term consequences of everything they say.

[valniel]

136. The Essence of this Discussion

That was the initial complaint, especially about Dean’s statement regarding the deaths of Uday and Qusay and his earlier statements about the other Democratic candidates.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

120. "He only has the war card."

His stance on Health, Education, Labor, Economy, Environment, Civil Rights, etc... are all meaningless. So I guess Edwards only has the "looks card." Right, cmg?

[Ellen Forradalom]

95. a few pohints

Source? please link.

The 'removal of two odious characters' is not in itself a bad thing. However, it's indicative of the * Administration's heavy-handedness, and it's possible that had Oootie and Kootie been taken alive (however slight that chance) they might have been useful (however slightly.)

The parading of the corpses is certainly not our finest hour either. I don't subscribe to the neo-con double standard of according special rights to ourselves since we're the biggest guy on the block; I believe that America should display leadership by holding itself to a higher standard.

[ModerateMiddle]

97. there are several sources

msnbc transcripts of the hardball show from wednesday night is the original source... but it's now been quoted several times in other sources, including the wash times.

[Mairead]

96. Are we all losing our grips, here?

Should we now expect that all alleged criminals can be extrajudicially killed without warning or recourse?

This is not a proper war situation, if it ever was. The summary-execution rules should no longer apply, if they were ever legal to begin with.

There should at least have been an attempt to take those people alive.

[ModerateMiddle]

98. actually, there was

the soldiers who initially engaged went to the building and tried to access the 2nd floor, and were shot at, and several were injured.

[Name removed]

103. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Mairead]

114. I'm not sure that justifies the killings, though, since they

certainly couldn't escape. They could certainly have been surrounded and starved out.

On the other hand...what would they have been charged with? Doing what was probably legal for them to do? An international war crime? Something else? I bet that would have opened a can of worms that SmirkCo doesn't want opened.

[Name removed]

110. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RevolutionStartsNow]

116. Hmm, me thinks the poster is finished, not Dean

Here lies johnkerryAriz04, previously JohnKerryAZ04, also tombstoned.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

126. John McCain is Right, 100%...

Howard Dean is nothing like him. Dr. Dean wouldn't tow the line for Bush's lies. McCain does. Dr. Dean wouldn't have got us into this illegal pre-emptive war. McCain did. Dr. Dean wouldn't support extremist judicial nomminees like Pryor, Owens, and Estrada, McCain has fully supported them. So, as you can see, Dr. Dean is nothing like that Arizonan Hot Air Bag McCain.

God Bless Howard Dean and shame on you Mr. McCain!

[Madball02]

128. wow dean got walloped

hehe :)

Poor Howard, he won't even win 3rd place by convention.

[lastliberalintexas]

129. You've got to be kidding me!

A NEWSMAX article citing REPUB John McCain? And you people are bending over backwards to AGREE with this?

FWIW, although I am a Dean supporter, I wouldn't buy ANYTHING that these people or McCain have to say about our Dem candidates. Have you really forgotten that this man supported Shrub in 2000- even after the dirty tricks they pulled against him in South Carolina? McCain is a repub above all else, and you people are able to find gravitas in anything that he has to say? Baloney.

[valniel]

130. No, not at all. You missed the point!

What McCain objected to was that some Dean supporters kept comparing Dean to McCain.
McCain, in no uncertain terms, stated that he and Dean have NOTHING in common, "I am astonished. A lot of people have compared me with Governor Dean. I could not disagree with him more — . . . “

[lastliberalintexas]

131. Umm, no

That was NOT the point of your post at all. You cited to McCain's complaints about Dean's opposition to taking out Hussein's regime and his comment that the ends don't justify the means. Your post was not solely to point out that Dean and McCain have nothing in common- it was yet another attempt to discredit a Dem candidate.

Don't you think that I could find this same kind of crap from McCain about Kerry or most of the other Dems? But why would I choose to? I can stay positive about my candidate without trying to discredit any of the others. You know, on the chance that someone else is the nominee!

And again, why would you EVER use a repub's words to bash another Dem?

Unlike so many here, I don't want a candidate who is so bloodied that Shrub merely has to show up for the fight to win it. No matter WHO that canidate is- my guy or yours.

[valniel]

138. My Objective

was not Dean bashing, but an expression of frustration directed at Dean’s of-the-cuff statements, which I find less than helpful, or even hurtful. I like Kerry, especially the fact that he is a veteran which have seen the horrors of war. To suggest that he, or anybody who has been a soldier, take war lightly is a mistake!

Like you, I want a candidate who is electable. I happen to think that Kerry would be a better candidate to take on Bush, but I'll vote for whoever is nominated!

[lastliberalintexas]

139. So then do positive something about it

"I happen to think that Kerry would be a better candidate to take on Bush"

So then make positive posts about Kerry. But why post this piece of crap "journalism" EXCEPT to BASH another Dem? God, you people kill me.

[valniel]

146. Maybe I should not have used the title verbatim

but I was upset about Dean’s comment. And since I might wind up voting for him I thought I should vent my frustration with his of the cuff remarks, especially his attacks on my favorite candidate!

I, like Kerry, joined the military (Air Force) out of college, and I think that the people who serve their country deserve solid support from anybody who wants to be Commander in Chief!

[DrFunkenstein]

147. Take A Look At What Happens To Positive Kerry Threads

How long before Thorsten Verlen III (or whatever) or polpilot come and make some non-sequitar about the Iraq vote? Even the well-intentioned like killbot and Prof Plum manage to swing just about every positive thread back to the Iraq vote.

Very nice, but what about the Iraq vote?
Very nice, but what about the Iraq vote?
Very nice, but what about the Iraq vote?
Very nice, but what about the Iraq vote?

Its almost as if Dean supporters are afraid to talk about (gulp) policy. They would rather talk about a) personality, or b) the Iraq vote.

[RevolutionStartsNow]

148. Count me out

I think Kerry's getting a bad rap on the vote. Kerry is my #2 choice, and would be a fine president who (IMO) would never lead us into an unjust war.

I realized a long time ago that it's too easy to damn all the Dems who voted for that resolution --

He's not any more responsible for the war than Dean. This war was planned way back when by PNAC gang and nothing was going to stop them. If they thought they could've gotten away with it, there never would've been a damn vote.

[valniel]

149. All that happened

is that Dean rose from obscurity to prominence since end of June, and with that follows a lot of interest and scrutiny.

That we in the end will vote for the Democratic nominee, be it Kerry, Dean or one of the other eight, has never been questioned.

[RogueTrooper]

137. Dean supporters were

comparing DeanForAmerica.com, the campaign with McCain's campaign, the 'Straight Talking Express'. And in this there are great similiarties. If McCain chooses to take this personaly then that is his problem, not ours.

[valniel]

142. angry when McCain denounced Dean

It did get quite a few Dean supporters angry when McCain stated: "I am astonished. A lot of people have compared me with Governor Dean. I could not disagree with him more —— to say that the end doesn't justify the means,"

[SGrande]

141. McCain is the greatest Senator of all time

I love that man!

[stickdog]

145. Great to see McCain standing up for morale boosting executions!

What a "wonderful event" 200 vs. 4 was!

What a "wonderful event" murder vs. capture was!

What a "wonderful event" exhibiting the bodies was!

What a "wonderful event" still not allowing these bodies to be buried as demanded by Islamic law is!


"How in the world someone could in any way think this end was not justified by anything, which was the removal of two odious characters, frankly, is beyond me."

Wow! According to McCain, the act of executing the brothers Hussein justifies ANYTHING. Even dropping an atomic bomb on Baghdad, Senator? How about bombing an orphan's hospital?

[w4rma]

150. Deleted message

Didn't mean to post here.

[Nicholas_J]

152. It starts

Mc Cain Begins the attack on Dean...

McCain has said Kerry is the best Democratic candidate. DLC attack on Deans criticism of the OctoberResolution, coming soon.