Just heard on

[justsam]

MSNBC that Ted Kennedy is going to make a speech describing how the Bush administration distorted, lied and manipulated the truth so they could go to war with Iraq and the spokes man said that we will hear a lot more of this in the months to come-- it is still puzzling to me why Kerry has not picked up on this and made it an issue so the media will stop questioning him why he voted for the war,all he would have to state is that they were lied to. He's the one running for office not the people that are bringing up the war.

[WilliamPitt]

1. Kerry doesn't have to pick it up

if Teddy is swinging the baseball bat. Kerry and Kennedy are intimately linked in the public mind, so Teddy with the bat works for Kerry. Shrewd.

[CWebster]

4. By having Kennedy be his mouthpiece?

LOL!

[cindyw]

8. It's almost like Kennedy is functioning as Kerry's VP nominee when he

has none. Saying things he cannot say. What do you think?

[lancdem]

9. I agree, Will

Let Kennedy do the heavy lifting.

[YNGW]

19. Problem is...

...the only thing Ted Kennedy reminds people of is Chappaquiddick and Mary Jo Kopechne, you know, that thing that if you or I had done it we would have been strapped to the electric chair and fried to a burnt crisp.

[iowapeacechief]

22. So, in your new hat, please differentiate...

...this "shrewd" move by Kennedy and Kerry from the Kucinich blasts at other candidates for promoting WMD lies.

Unless there's been a later one on your watch, the latest such statement is at http://kucinich.us/statements.htm#WMD2.

Sunday he said: "Senators Kerry, Lieberman and Edwards, Dr. Dean, and General Clark, all claimed that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, and, therefore, contributed to the political climate which falsely justified a war."

How is this different from Dean trying to make a litmus test of IWR votes?

Answer, please, wearing your new DK hat. Thanks!

[iowapeacechief]

23. Let's see Will in his new hat...

...while amazing us with a wise explanation.

[sandnsea]

29. It's promoting your candidate

This is too funny. That is Will's job. Put his candidate's views in the best possible light. Don't you think somebody has the ability to take in facts, organize them, and write a piece even if they personally disagree with those facts? It's called objective thinking. I could write an article about George Bush that would make anybody think I was an ardent supporter. I would hope anybody had the mental capacity to do that.

[molly]

2. Welcome to DU!

Kerry voted for the resolution to force shrub to go to the UN.

[PVnRT]

11. WOW that's some good spin

Exactly how did it force George to go to the U.N. again?

[krkaufman]

32. Incomplete truth

> Kerry voted for the resolution to force shrub
> to go to the UN.

Yes, forced him to *go* to the UN. But the resolution failed to require him to come back to Congress for authorization to go to war, as a check on executive policy and actions.

Hmmm... checks and balances, interesting concept.

[mmonk]

3. Also the Dem party leaders

don't want a candidate that asks questions on this directly. They want the candidate to stay silent and be one that voted for the resolution. They feel this is the best strategy to show toughness on defense so the repubs won't be able to (in their minds) to paint the country would be safer voting for bush. Flawed a little in my book but its the establishment position.

[cindyw]

10. Absolutley not true. Kerry questions, it just isn't picked up on by

the media. They, in interviews, only talk about why he voted for IWR. Saying Kerry represents support for Bush on the war is a misunderstanding of his position. If they are hoping for that in Kerry, they are mistaken.

[Sean Reynolds]

14. How are they misunderstanding his war vote?

Didn't he cast it? Didn't he support the war leading up to the attack? I mean if Kerry had ANY doubts, why would he risk giving Bush so much power? Me thinks the good senator Kennedy needs to pull Kerry aside and tell him to get with the fucking program.

[cindyw]

15. It is you who misunderstands his position. If you had actually read what

Kerry said during that vote, you would know that he said he felt the only reason to go to war would be the existence of WMD. He said at the time that he was only voting yes in order to place trust in a president who said that he would go through a certain course of action and only because of WMD. You can chose to ignore what he said then, but it won't change the facts. Kerry has since said that he was lied to and that he was wrong to trust this president.

[Sean Reynolds]

25. But didn't he put his trust in Bush's hands?

Is Kerry that dumb to believe Bush would have gone through the UN? Is Kerry that dumb to believe Bush was telling the truth?

Sounds to me like Kerry is a self serving whore. Voted for the war either because he's too stupid to realize a lying president and an unjust war, or because he didn't want the upcoming election to be about the war. So he took it off the table. I think it's a little bit of both.

[krkaufman]

34. Vote was politically convenient

Kerry's vote, like that of many other Dems, was politically expedient. Kerry was up for re-election to the Senate in the 2002 mid-terms, and didn't want to appear "weak on defense" to his constituents -- with which he knew, rightly, that the right-wing media would plaster him for a "no" vote.

A "no" vote by Kerry would not have stopped the resolution's passing; but it would have been in keeping with Congress' responsibilty to maintain a check on executive power. Kerry failed to exercise his duties properly; he abdicated the MOST IMPORTANT responsibility that Congress has -- authorization for going to war -- and gave Bush a blank check.

Kerry put his short-term political goals ahead of the welfare of the soldiers. You can argue otherwise; but you would have no reasonable facts to stand on. 23 other Senators and 123 House members managed to see the situation correctly, and vote appropriately. Why couldn't Kerry?

Do we want or need a leader who can be so easily "misled"?

---

http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/10/11/iraq.us/
"Senate ... voted 77-23 to authorize President Bush to attack Iraq if Saddam Hussein refuses to give up weapons of mass destruction as required by U.N. resolutions."
...
"House approved an identical resolution, 296-133."

"The resolution requires Bush to declare to Congress either before or within 48 hours after beginning military action that diplomatic efforts to enforce the U.N. resolutions have failed."

"The resolution does not tie any U.S. action to a U.N. resolution."

"Bush also must certify that action against Iraq would not hinder efforts to pursue the al Qaeda terrorist network that attacked New York and Washington last year."

...

"This is the Tonkin Gulf resolution all over again," Byrd said. "Let us stop, look and listen. Let us not give this president or any president unchecked power. Remember the Constitution."

...

But Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, said the 133 votes against the measure were "a very strong message" to the administration.

"All across this land Americans are insisting on a peaceful resolution of matters in Iraq," he said. "All across this land, Americans are looking towards the United States to be a nation among nations, working through the United Nations to help resolve this crisis."

Senate Roll Call
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/11/national/11SROL-WEB.html?ex=1075438800&en=3f0918660bca3538&ei=5070

House Roll Call
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/10/international/10AP-IROL.html

[Snivi Yllom]

21. bingo

It reminds me of Burger King...instead of 'having it your way', Kerry's is 'having it both ways'.

[krkaufman]

35. Oh, dear god...

I can just see/hear the Rove commercials now....

(singing)
"Have it booooth ways... have it both ways."
"Have it booooth ways... have it both ways."

Voiceover: "Senator John Kerry votes for President Bush's stand against terrorism."

"Have it booooth ways... have it both ways."
"Have it booooth ways... have it both ways."

...

[Doctor_J]

5. This is what we need

if we controlled the airwaves like the GOP, THE MEDIA would being doing this job. THat's why Smirk can pretend to always be on the high road, because limbaughhannitynorthingramschlessingerliddyoreillygallagher, and also blitzerzahnkoppeltweetywilliamskurtzmillerkudlow, do the dirty work. Since the media REFUSES to tell the truth about *, and our candidates should stay positive, we're going to need Ted, Byrd, Hollings, Durbin, Waxman, and Conyers to keep the corruption on the front pages.

[blm]

6. He did say they were lied to last June and called for an investigation

last July.

Problem is that noone wants to hear anything from Kerry because they are too busy not listening to him for the last two years.

[Skip Intro]

12. Then he should clear up the confusion in this Thursday's debate

If his position is that he was lied to, which I believe I've heard him say, he should state it as clearly, and in as few words as possible this Thursday.

[mmonk]

16. It's safe for him to say so

as long as he keeps saying also that it was the right thing to do which he also says.

[sandnsea]

28. It was right

JMJ, it was right to hold Saddam accountable based on the intelligence they had. Wes Clark testified to the exact same thing in September. Sanctions were crumbling, Saddam was a threat, had WMD, etc. Something had to be done sooner or later.

It's the HOW of it that George Bush screwed up AFTER the vote. It's the HOW of it that Clark testified to, there was a procedure and priorities. Clark didn't have to vote, Kerry did. He voted with the intention that any President of the United States, no matter what, MUST be expected to use the same reasoned process that we would expect ANY President to use.

I don't know if people's hatred of Bush will ever let them understand that this is his undoing. In the most serious test of a President, war, George Bush and the Republican party failed the American people in the most atrocious way. They LOST the security issue. If anti-war people would ever shut the fuck up and let it happen.

[MoonRiver]

7. Can you imagine what would have happened if a Dem pres.

had done what * did in Iraq? Not only would he have been impeached by now, but Congress would have delivered him to the Hague to be tried for crimes against humanity. Instead, there's a Senate kangaroo court inquiry going on, in which the Repuke chairman basically said in his opening statement that * is totally exonerated from all blame!

:mad: :mad: :mad:

edited for spelling

[krkaufman]

36. Can't wholly agree

> Can you imagine what would have happened if a Dem
> pres. had done what * did in Iraq?

The ROG'd still be tickled pink if a Democratic President had invaded Iraq. It *was* their goal, and then there's the oil.**

But imagine how they'd yell if a Democratic President were to use military force against a brutal dictator, a dictator actively killing thousands of his own people and not just some historical reference to a time when the US actively supported the dictator -- but currently?

I wonder how the ROG would respond to that? Oh, wait. There's Kosovo.

---

** Well, they probably *would* publicly eviscerate a Dem Pres if he invaded Iraq, but they'd be privately joyful and would work like mad dogs on profiting from the war.

[maddezmom]

13. watch CSPAN or CNN for David Kay testimony on WMD n/t

[montanacowboy]

17. I watched about as much of the CSPAN

hearing with David Kay as I could stand - Warner's glowing opening, propping up the administration, saying we must go on and no conclusion must be reached,,,blah blah and Kay - oh he is covering his master's asses all the way, blah blah...it's the fault of bad intelligence...blah....

Believe me Nothing will come from this.

[krkaufman]

37. Office of Special Plans

Office of Special Plans!! Office of Special Plans!! Office of Special Plans!! Office of Special Plans!! Office of Special Plans!! Office of Special Plans!! Office of Special Plans!! Office of Special Plans!! Office of Special Plans!! Office of Special Plans!! Office of Special Plans!! Office of Special Plans!!

For god's sake, the Democratic Presidential candidates need to get on the stump and shutdown this Kay b-s. Bush's 'Office of Special Plans' was created expressly for the purpose of ginning up the intelligence.

Sacre bleu!!

See:
The Lie Factory
http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2004/01/12_405.html
By Robert Dreyfuss and Jason Vest
Mother Jones, January/February 2004 Issue

Office of Special Plans!! Office of Special Plans!! Office of Special Plans!! Office of Special Plans!! Office of Special Plans!! Office of Special Plans!! Office of Special Plans!! Office of Special Plans!! Office of Special Plans!! Office of Special Plans!! Office of Special Plans!! Office of Special Plans!!

[robsul82]

18. So if Kerry doesn't think it's prudent to say something himself...

...he sends out Teddy. Good strategery.

Later.

RJS

[creativelcro]

33. I guess he's gonna wear an earpiece during the debates with GW

and wait for Kennedy's lines...

[xultar]

20. Kerry can't he voted for the war. Teddy will do it for him

good strategy!

[genius]

24. The media is owned by Bush. Look what they did to Clark.

Kerry needs to campaign carefully at this point.

[sandnsea]

26. He just did yesterday

He just called for investigations yesterday. He said either the Administration exaggerated and hyped the intelligence or there's something seriously wrong with our intelligence gathering. He gets to be the reasoned, concerned, Presidential, candidate; Kennedy and others rile up the masses. Geez people, get on board here.

[Renew Deal]

27. I want an Impeachment

Let's do this

[LuminousX]

30. Republican Misdeeds

I may be talking out of my rear here but I suspect that the Democrats are going to spend this entire year investigating and hounding Bush over every last lie and bit of corruption he has uttered or done in the past three years. The Democrat's October surprise is going to be the previous nine-months of scrutiny.

9/11 commission, Weapons of mass destruction intelligence, Patriot Act crap, his No Child Left Behind crap, corporate malfeasance, every screw up on his watch is going to come home to roost this year - ideally.

[edzontar]

31. Kerry voted for Bush's war, Kennedy voted against....

Kerry is tied to the Bush war no matter how much claims (untruthfully) that he was "fooled"---Kennedy was not fooled, and neither was I.

Kerry means a repeat of the DINO strategy in 2004--and almost certain defeat in November