Kerry Disses Murtha?

[SHRED]

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/11/john-kerry-undercuts-murtha.html

Thursday, November 17, 2005

John Kerry undercuts Murtha
by John in DC - 11/17/2005 07:03:00 PM

You gotta love John Kerry. Just when you think he's totally worthless, he comes back on more time to remind us why he lost.

John Murtha makes an amazing personal sacrifice, putting his reputation on the line, by going public against this growing fiasco of a war. So what does John Kerry do within hours of Murtha's speech? He says Murtha is wrong about needing to set a timetable for withdrawal. Kerry also hinted he might be running for election AGAIN in 2008. Gee, do you think that's why Kerry still can't make up his mind about this war?

Message to Kerry: You lost against a moron. Go away. I know some of you still like Kerry, but I really think he (and you) underestimate the amount of anti-Kerry-ism that exists on the Democratic side of the aisle. He needs to go away.

--------------------------------------------

This is making the rounds on the Web.
I ask people who post this to give a direct link to a transcript of Kerry saying that "Murtha is wrong".
No one has yet.

Is there one?

This blog is a bit irresponsible in it's lack of sources for this post.

[rainy]

1. Yes, Kerry says things he thinks will help his political career

He has lost all truth and passion in his efforts to please a certain voter group. I want the old anti-war hero back or else forget him he has sold out.

[Mass]

2. What Kerry said on CNN

BLITZER: John Murtha, who’s very involved in the Armed Services Committee, … says there should be an immediate withdrawal over the next six months of all U.S. troops from Iraq. Good idea?

KERRY: I respectfully disagree with John Murtha.

Then he went to explain his plan. (Can you call that diss somebody? It is up to you - Murtha said more or less the same thing concerning Kerry's plan earlier and I was not shocked).

Apparently, he was more lenghty and more supportive on Harball, but the transcript is not on yet.

[MADem]

18. He has differences, but he respects the guy

I didn't get a sense of any dissing in the HARDBALL interview.

[flpoljunkie]

39. Murtha's plan involves deploying troops just outside of Iraq, and sending

them back in--Murtha said something about terrorists may make redeployment back into Iraq necessary. I think he later said suggested stationing "quick strike forces" nearby. Murtha also said he brought up his amendment to start the discussion and that something needed to be done soon to change what we are doing in Iraq, as what we are doing now is not working.

Iraq has indeed become the central training ground for terrorists--something it was not before we invaded and occupied the country--so this part of what Murtha said franky does not make a whole lot of sense.

Murtha himself suggested six months to redeploy the troops, because of safety factors. This is not "immediate withdrawal." In reality, he and Kerry, as well as Feingold, are not that far apart in their plans for withdrawal of our troops from Iraq. They are all headed in the right direction--ending the Occupation in Iraq--as soon as possible.

[Mass]

43. I agree with you - OTOH, I respectfully disagree with Kerry and Murtha

And I can assure you I am not dissing any of them on that.

[zann725]

51. I saw JK on "Hardball," and don't recall such negativity.

JK was clearly annnoyed by a lot of what's going on in this Admin. Frankly I was impressed by the overall intelligence and FINALLY frequent reference to his position on issues during 04's campaign in AT LAST an 'I told you so' quality. No more "Mr. Nice Guy!" Go JK!

[rox63]

3. This is bullshit!

Kerry said he has a lot of respect for Murtha, but that he disagrees with his plan. I don't see anything wrong with that. Kerry put a plan of his own out there 3 weeks ago. The timing of Murtha's announcement of his plan and Kerry's appearances on the cable news shows are completely unrelated.

[sendero]

7. No fan of Kerry's..

... I agree there is a huge difference between "I respectfully disagree" and "he's wrong".

Of course, I vehemently disagree with Kerry on this issue but I cannot fault him for taking and stating a position in a respectful way.

[still_one]

17. I see plenty wrong

this is the reason kerry lost

KERRY go to the arizonia desert during the campaign, and when they ask you knowing what you know now, would you have voted the same way, YOU ANSWERED YES, YOU MORAN KERRY

Incidently, Russ Feingold never used the word disagree with Murtha

Bring me the Paul Hackets, Russ Feingolds, etc. People that have integrity

[OKNancy]

4. All I know is a saw a blip on the TV

and that's what Kerry said.

[bigscott]

5. i watched kerry

last night on CNN and MSNBC - despite the fact that Wolf and Matthews make me gag:puke: Kerry was exactly the same as when he blew it in 2004.

Just once I would like SOMEONE to make a stand on principles like John Murtha. I wish SOMEONE would make me proud to support them

[babylonsister]

10. You need to do some research. Principled stands are out

there if you read and pay attention.

Kerry said this on 26 OCT:

snip//

The country and the Congress were misled into war. I regret that we were not given the truth; as I said more than a year ago, knowing what we know now, I would not have gone to war in Iraq. And knowing now the full measure of the Bush Administration's duplicity and incompetence, I doubt there are many members of Congress who would give them the authority they abused so badly. I know I would not. The truth is, if the Bush Administration had come to the United States Senate and acknowledged there was no "slam dunk case" that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, acknowledged that Iraq was not connected to 9/11, there never would have even been a vote to authorize the use of force -- just as there's no vote today to invade North Korea, Iran, Cuba, or a host of regimes we rightfully despise.

I understand that as much as we might wish it, we can't rewind the tape of history. There is, as Robert Kennedy once said, 'enough blame to go around,' and I accept my share of the responsibility. But the mistakes of the past, no matter who made them, are no justification for marching ahead into a future of miscalculations and misjudgments and the loss of American lives with no end in sight. We each have a responsibility, to our country and our conscience, to be honest about where we should go from here. It is time for those of us who believe in a better course to say so plainly and unequivocally.

snip//


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

[still_one]

19. Russ Feingold came out in support of Murtha

he realized the courage it took Murtha to do what he did


Paul Hackett is another person who is NOT afraid to call it like he sees it

[Mass]

22. Link please

[still_one]

26. here you go

http://feingold.senate.gov/~feingold/statements/05/11/20051117.html

it is posted on his site

[Mass]

30. I dont see the difference between that and Kerry's statement on Hardball

But happy to see what Feingold said.

[still_one]

42. big difference what he said on CNN

he used the word "disagree"

the details are NOT what are important, it is the shift

this was the same nuance Kerry pulled with voting against the 87 million for Iraq. It was nuance.

[TayTay]

25. Cong. Murtha is being supported.

MATTHEWS: But why would a guy who`s so fond of military say let`s get out guys out?

KERRY: Because he sees the mess. Because he doesn`t see this administration changing their policy. Because he has no confidence, as most of us do, have no confidence, in this administration`s willingness to do what`s necessary.

And if they are not willing to do what`s necessary, a lot of people here are beginning to feel very deeply, the responsibility for the lives of those young soldiers. And I know Jack feels that above all.


What part of that is not supporting Cong. Murtha? They have policy differences as to the particulars of their respective plans. That is part of their jobs. Kerry obviously support Murtha and supports what he is going through in coming to the heart-wrenching and difficult choice Murtha has come to. This is called support.

[underpants]

6. KERRY: I respectfully disagree with John Murtha.

BLITZER: John Murtha, who's very involved in the Armed Services Committee, ... says there should be an immediate withdrawal over the next six months of all U.S. troops from Iraq. Good idea?

KERRY: I respectfully disagree with John Murtha. And I laid out a plan which is, I think, a good plan, a solid plan -- that builds consistently on everything I said throughout the campaign last year -- of what you need to do to be successful. And I believe my plan supports the troops in the right way.

has said very clearly that the large presence of our troops in Iraq is part of the problem. It attracts terrorists. ... Melvin Laird, secretary of defense for Richard Nixon, has written the same thing, that it's our presence of troops that's part of the problem. ...



http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/11/17/cnna.kerry/

[still_one]

21. Kerry is wrong

both kerry and mccain have brain damage from Nam

[karynnj]

36. Neither man has brain damage - Think of what you're saying

the GOP has slimed every veteran to protect GWB. Should we join them in this? Both Kerry and McCain are intelligent, competent talented men who have been very successful. (Kerry narrowly lost the Presidency - but he is in the very small part of the population that were their party's nominee.)

[TayTay]

8. Well, This is what Kerry actually said, from the transcript

Make up your own mind:

The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer
Nov. 17th, 2005 CNN

BLITZER: Let's talk about a proposal that was put out today by Congressman John Murtha, who's very involved in the Armed Services Committee. He says there should be an immediate withdrawal over the next six months of all U.S. troops from Iraq. Good idea?

KERRY: I respectfully disagree with John Murtha. And I laid out a plan which is, I think, a good plan, a solid plan. It builds consistently on everything I said throughout the campaign last year of what you need to do to be successful. And I believe my plan supports the troops in the right way. General Casey has said very clearly that the large presence of our troops in Iraq is part of the problem. It attracts terrorists. Former Secretary Melvin Laird, secretary of Defense for Richard Nixon, has written the same thing, that it's our presence of troops that's part of the problem and we need to reduce that presence.

BLITZER: But you don't want a timetable or a hard and fast deadline?

KERRY: I have laid out a plan where we could withdraw some 20,000 troops around the holidays, based on the fact -- not as a rigid timetable -- linked to the success of the election. We have about 160,000 troops in Iraq today, Wolf. We had 138,000 -- it went up for the purpose of making Iraq safer for the referendum and the elections.

My benchmark is, if you have a successful election after having had a successful referendum, we've done our part with those extra troops; they should come home, taking us back to the level that we were at before that. Then you set a target for the taking over of security responsibilities in Baghdad and in other provinces and Syria (ph), in a sort of step by step basis. You set out a timetable, not for withdrawal, but for success, that allows you to withdraw. And I believe if you do the right things, and I've laid out what they are, we can bring the bulk of our combat troops home over the course of next year.

***********************************

Hardball with Chris Matthews
Nov 17, 2005 MSNBC

MATTHEWS: The president`s been very tough on the Democratic opposition and that`s fair enough. That`s the way it works. It`s a debate. But you had the Republican majority operate this week to go along with a resolution which is a bit watered down from your sides, but what did you take from that Republican majority resolution this week on the war in Iraq? What`s the message to the president?

KERRY: Many of our colleagues in the United States Senate are deeply concerned. They know, and in conversations will acknowledge, that unbelievable mistakes have been made. Many of them, obviously, with 2006 coming at them, are realizing that this is something they are going to have to live with

And I think they`re beginning to try to pressure the administration, together with others, to come up with the real policies that made a difference.

MATTHEWS: Are you surprised that Jack Murtha, the Congressman from Pennsylvania, he`s such a pro-military guy, another combat veteran from Vietnam, coming out so emotionally today, saying we basically have to get the troops out. This is not where we should be.

KERRY: I have so much respect for Jack Murtha. He is one of the best in the Congress. His love of the military, his respect for those in uniform is second to nobody in the Congress. Everybody knows that.

So that`s a very important statement that he made. I don`t happen to agree and I`ve laid out a way that I think we can get out over the course of time, in a way that doesn`t require such precipitous transition.

But, I understand -- I understand where he`s coming from.

MATTHEWS: But why would a guy who`s so fond of military say let`s get out guys out?

KERRY: Because he sees the mess. Because he doesn`t see this administration changing their policy. Because he has no confidence, as most of us do, have no confidence, in this administration`s willingness to do what`s necessary.

And if they are not willing to do what`s necessary, a lot of people here are beginning to feel very deeply, the responsibility for the lives of those young soldiers. And I know Jack feels that above all.

**************************

[Mass]

12. Thanks TayTay - I had not read the Hardball transcript yet.

I doubt it can be called dissing.

[rox63]

13. Thanks for posting the transcript, TayTay

If the following exchange is in any way a diss, I will eat my hat:

MATTHEWS: Are you surprised that Jack Murtha, the Congressman from Pennsylvania, he`s such a pro-military guy, another combat veteran from Vietnam, coming out so emotionally today, saying we basically have to get the troops out. This is not where we should be.

KERRY: I have so much respect for Jack Murtha. He is one of the best in the Congress. His love of the military, his respect for those in uniform is second to nobody in the Congress. Everybody knows that.

So that`s a very important statement that he made. I don`t happen to agree and I`ve laid out a way that I think we can get out over the course of time, in a way that doesn`t require such precipitous transition.

But, I understand -- I understand where he`s coming from.

MATTHEWS: But why would a guy who`s so fond of military say let`s get out guys out?

KERRY: Because he sees the mess. Because he doesn`t see this administration changing their policy. Because he has no confidence, as most of us do, have no confidence, in this administration`s willingness to do what`s necessary.

And if they are not willing to do what`s necessary, a lot of people here are beginning to feel very deeply, the responsibility for the lives of those young soldiers. And I know Jack feels that above all.

[still_one]

23. same bullshit they did in viet nam

there was always light at the end of the tunnel, and time went on, and more people died

we are in the middle of a civil war, and that says why we can't stay

[TayTay]

31. The Democrats do not have the power to withdraw any troops

At all. They do not have the power to get even so much as one person out of harm's way in Iraq. They are the minority party in a time when the majority is firmly holding onto power and denying the minority any rights at all. (No accountability hearings. No subpoena power to compel Aministration witnesses to testify as to how this war started. No power of the purse to direct money in a way that will affect a change in policy.)

Democrats have no power to withdraw anything. This has to be faced. The power of a Murtha (or any other Dem willing to speak out against the current course of action in IRaq) is that they sway public opinion, which is about the only thing that may force Bush to listen and change course. Murtha, as other Dems before him, is a pebble in an avalanche that might just topple the current Admin's arrogant and heartless appraoch to the war and force some saneness into the policy toward Iraq. One pebble won't do it, but enough of them can.

These people are not at cross purposes, they are working together. They understand that their strength has to be in supporting each other. It is the only thing that can form a force that can make Bush change his ways.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

53. One point

There is a flaw in what you so eloquently wrote: the public opinion is trying to get the elected representatives to catch up with it, not the other 'way round.

Murtha spoke on behalf of himself AND his constituents. I know how constituents, coming from that part of the country myself, and they want our troops home NOW.

It's that simple. That the Democrats did not stand behind Jack Murtha, that they took active steps to distance themselves from him, is beyond belief.

[TayTay]

55. Some did. Some didn't. I think more listened and thought it over.

This is the norm in Congress. Give this the weekend and give the import of what Cong. Murtha said and how he said it to sink in. The immediate reaction will mutate into something else. (Opinions on CapHill are mutable and will change.)

This is but the first paragragh of a big book. Give it time.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

56. That's the problem

There is no time. Congress recesses this week for Thanksgiving.

The time was as soon as Murtha spoke. Everyone had his or her chance, and they opted to run.

There is no time.

The people are speaking, and the Democrats are going deaf.

The book is not long, and it is not complicated. In fact, a page turned yesterday, and only one name appeared on the page: Jack Murtha.

There is no time. The mother of whomever will die in Iraq today knows that.

[TayTay]

58. But Lefty, even the recess is controlled by the Rethugs.

As they control everything else.

There have been many names on that page as there are more and more people calling for a withdrawal. (There are dozens of Dems who have been calling for withdrawal since at least Jan. My congressman, Marty Meehan, voted for the war, but started to work for a withdrawal in Jan.) So far, this hasn't amounted to any action on the part of the Administration. The troops still die, the Iraqis still suffer and nothing is happening. What actions will result in getting the Admin to change their ways?

Well, a combination of citizen action and Congressional action. We need more Cindy Sheehans. They you seem to get more Cong. Murtha's. Which can generate more public figures to speak out. I believe that process is going along and is not stoppable.

Murtha is an important voice speaking out. I think that all Dems need to show respect for that voice and the obvious painful soul-searching that went into that. (I'm off the kumbaya reservation here - I saw that in Kerry's remarks, as you have stated you did not. I think they have a policy difference which is the kind of thing you sit down and hash out. I saw Kerry on Hardball talk warmly and supportively of Murtha and of the process that led this tough man to come out against this war. Your mileage varies on this. You saw what you saw and I accept that. I saw what I saw, and thought the support for Cong. Murtha was a good thing.)

[OldLeftieLawyer]

70. Recesses are controlled by Republicans?

That's news to me. Can you say more about that?

There can be all the names on the page you want, but only Jack Murtha has had the courage (along with the credentials) to step out and make the noise. That the Democrats didn't rush to embrace what he said is discouraging and more self-defeating behavior on their part.

The citizens are already on to what a clusterfuck the Iraq situation is. That's why the polls are so interesting and why Fuckface's numbers are down.

You cannot believe that Murtha wasn't reflecting the beliefs on his constituency - a most conservative group - when he spoke out. That's telling in a way that belies any kind of huddling or planning or hiding behind closed doors, as the Democrats have been doing.

Get out now means get out now. Anything less is weasel and waffle, and that center will not hold. When people accuse the Democrats of being soft and having no backbone, they will be right.

I just hope they're smart enough not to pass up this chance that Jack Murtha's given them.

And, really, I'd like to know how the Republicans controll the Congressional recess. In my thirty years as a Washington lawyer, I've never heard that. How did I miss this?

Thanks.

[TayTay]

71. Yes, they did control the recesses.

During the last week in August/first week in Sept. several Democrats tried to get the Repub leadership to reconvene Congress in an emergency session in order to pass legislation to aid the Gulf area. The Democrats did not have the power to do this, only the Repub leadership did. Sad, but true.

Perhaps we should reconsider our discussion in light of the press release and scheduled floor speech from Sen. Kerry in direct support of Cong. Murtha. Events may have overcome our discussion. Sen. Kerry seems to have strongly and clearly stated where he stands on Jack Murtha. I hope others follow.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

73. That's an emergency session

That's not a Federally-mandated recess.

Recesses are not emergency sessions. Recesses are when lawmakers go back to work in their home districts, and they're part of the Federal Register.

I hope Kerry jumps right in it with Murtha. I really, really do. This could be our big moment.

Let's keep hope, yes?

:)

[TayTay]

75. As do I, as do I

We need more allies who are coming up with suggestions for how to get out of Iraq. We need more Dems who will speak up and offer plans to get us out of there. (And then they need to get together and co-ordinate their plans. Sigh! Democrats!)

My apologies on confusing the power to call emergency session back and the power to control recesses. (Now about those Rules of the Senate, any hope for a 'Dummies Guide' coming out any time soon?)

As to Mr. Kerry's strong comments on Jack Murtha, I would like to add: "Who's next to step up and defend this great man and his courageous comments? Plenty of room, step right up and have your say." :patriot:

[No Exit]

9. Maybe they're playing good cop/bad cop with with repukes.

It often works when you're trying to get criminals to face up to their crimes.

[acmavm]

11. John Kerry just needs to get over himself and any hopes at being Pres.

.

[MH1]

14. AmericaBlog is more than a LITTLE irresponsible.

They have a history of Kerry-bashing, in concert with a major blogger who was on Dean's payroll and still hasn't buried the hatchet since the primaries.

So... consider the source.

SHRED, you may want to edit this post to clarify (if I am correct) that you are questioning the AmericaBlog smear, not promoting it. I almost alerted on this thread because this was already covered last night and (I thought) thoroughly debunked.

I saw Kerry's comments on Murtha and in NO way was he undercutting Murtha. OTOH, Murtha coming out with his statement when he did, could be said to be undercutting Kerry - Kerry had announced his plan on 10/26 in a speech at Georgetown, introduced a bill in the Senate in the last few days, and just started making the rounds of the talk shows to talk about it. Now all the talking heads want him to attack Murtha's plan instead of talking about his own, but he won't do that.

So, who's undercutting who?

(edited for typo)

[TayTay]

20. No one is undercutting anyone.

That is purely cynical in the worst sense possible. It is entirely possible that Cong. Murtha, who is a worthy man with a long record of service to the country, both in the military and in the Congress, had a moment of conscience and decided that he could no longer stand the way the Bush Admin is running this war. Mr. Murtha decided that he had to speak out because, as a Congressman, the lives of the young (and not so young) who have gone to war under false pretenses weighs on his soul. The voice I heard from him today was a voice filled with anguish, loss and sorrow from someone who knows what it's like to be in combat and to face the costs of military action. I commend him.

Cong. Murtha and Sen. Kerry have a difference of opinion on how to get the troops home and what method will best accomplish that goal. Cong. Murtha is acting in good faith and has posed a plan that calls for pulling out troops out of the combat theater and back to further regions in the Middle East. Sen. Kerry also wants to pull our troops back from the unstable zones in Iraq as he feels that the presence of our troops is what is fueling the insurgency. I think these two people, who worked together on the 2004 campaign, could sit down and resolve their differences as they are fairly close in what they propose.

Why is everything undercutting or political? Isn't is possible that some people in Washington actually want to do the right thing? Isn't it even remotely possible that some people in Washington really want to end this war and do so under the best conditions they can think of? Why is everything a political calculation? Can't anything ever be taken at face value and a moment of conscience acknowledged and applauded for the profound event it is?

[MH1]

49. Oh, I agree!

I guess I didn't make that clear.

But my point is, once you talk about "undercutting", it is certainly more logical to make the opposite claim that AmericaBlog makes. Of course, "logical" and "AmericaBlog" hardly belong in the same sentence, except with a strong negative in there too.

[TayTay]

66. I didn't respond to you, but to the general poisonous atmosphere

that dictates that if two people are working toward roughly the same goal, they must be in opposition. This is just plain silly. It needlessly divides allies. I don't see the point in that.

[INdemo]

15. Listen to the complete context of what John Kerry said

The Republicans for so long have taken what John Kerry has said OUT OF CONTEXT and used it so effectively even DEMOCRATS believe them .......The hell of it is they are good at it...So again read or listen to John Kerry's complete statement,,, (and I don't mean read it from some right wing toilet tissue)

[Strathos]

16. Yes, Kerry GO AWAY GO AWAY GO AWAY

I think he's a bigger idiot than the shrub.

He should just go spend his money and shut the fuck up.

[INdemo]

32. You Just Gotta

Quit listening to Rush

[babylonsister]

45. Turn off Fox and clear your mind! nt

[LSK]

68. EDUCATE YOURSELF

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=5177000&mesg_id=5177000

[OldLeftieLawyer]

24. Fuck John Kerry, too

More bullshit from someone who should know better.

A "plan," Senator? A fucking "plan"? And how many die while you're busy deciding exactly what that "plan" might be?

Feingold, Hackett, Murtha - REAL guys with REAL backbones.

Fuck John Kerry, too. And his "plan."

How can they DARE to turn their backs on Jack Murtha? I guess their yellow stripes down the middle show beter that way ............

[Mass]

27. Turn his back on Murtha??? Get a life!!! I am pretty sure you dont

have the slightest idea what Kerry said about Murtha, and that is because the idiot who wrote the post does not either.

Kerry was NOT turning his back on Murtha, on the contrary.

But for some, Kerry bashing is obviously more important than the truth.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

29. Did you see his interview?

I did.

"Get a life"?

Get some comprehension. I supported Kerry in more ways than you'll ever know, and what he's doing now is reprehensible.

Don't you ever dare try to put down someone else's informed opinion with that kind of bullshit, not here, not anywhere. Get some information, and then behave.

Welcome to DU IgnoreLand.

[Mass]

33. Same here.

[TayTay]

35. That was a legitimate question.

We saw the same interview. You came to a different conclusion. Someone asked you to explain. You basically said that if that person didn't see what you saw they are unworthy of your attention.

Is this how we build support to make change, by shutting off debate and telling people on our side who disagree with us to go away and shut up. This is going to be a mighty small coalition. What a shame!

[OldLeftieLawyer]

52. No,

I just respond to rudeness by ignoring the rude person.

That person no longer gets my attention. Whatever that person had to say is of no interest to me because that person is ill-mannered, and, I, personally, don't hold with that kind of behavior.

You may leap and bound to all the conclusions you wish. It changes nothing for me.

[karynnj]

62. In fairness, look back at your post that she was responding too

It was pretty far out there and in my opinion far ruder than hers.
She was obviously frustrated because the op distorted Kerry's comments. Particularly on Hardball, Kerry's comments on Murtha were very positive. Kerry does say, respecfully that he prefers his own plan. He is in no way dissing him.

Kerry is neither a warmonger or a coward - both of which you imply.

Incidently here is Kerry's statement this morning. Maybe you should acknowledge that it is you who was posting angry comments that hurt other Democrats?

“I won’t stand for the ‘swift boating’ of Jack Murtha. It disgusts me that a bunch of guys who have never put on the uniform of their country venomously turn their guns on a Marine who came home from Vietnam with a Bronze Star and two Purple Hearts. No matter what J.D. Hayworth says, there is no sterner stuff than the backbone and courage that defines Jack Murtha’s character and conscience.

“You know why the Republicans are engaged in the lowest form of smear and fear politics? Because they’re afraid of actually debating a senior congressman who has advised presidents of both parties on military matters. They’re afraid to debate a decorated veteran who lives and breathes the concerns of our troops, not the empty slogans of an Administration that sent our brave troops to war without body armor. They’re terrified of actually leveling with the American people about the way they misled America into war, and admitting they have no clear plan to finish the job and get our troops home. Whether you agree with Jack Murtha’s policy or not is irrelevant. The truth is there is a better course for our troops and for America in Iraq, and I am going to keep fighting until we take that course for the good of our country.

“Instead of letting his cronies run their mouths, the President for once should stop his allies from doing to Jack Murtha what he set them loose to do to John McCain in South Carolina and Max Cleland in Georgia. The President should finally find the courage to debate the real issue instead of destroying anyone who speaks truth to power as they see it. It’s time for Americans to stand up, fight back, and make it clear it’s unacceptable to do this to any leader of any party anywhere in our country.”

[OldLeftieLawyer]

64. My comments

'hurt other Democrats"??

Jesus, grow a skin and get back to me. This is precisely the whining weenie behavior that has turned my beloved Democrats into doormats.

Kerry did not back Murtha. He weaseled, and got himself all busy with diplomatic language. I hold no truck with that, not while people are being killed.

My comments are mine. If you're concerned with rudeness or that the OP should have been more polite, you can't play in my sandbox.

I'm much more interested in smart, tough people who aren't weenies.

[karynnj]

74. You brought up rudeness first - not I and you sir ARE RUDE

You also have the honor of being the very first person I put on ignore because I see no sign of intelligence in your reasons. Kerry's comments were very positive and supportive of Murtha - but he feels that his own plan is better. Not weaseling in the least - a good strong position - but not yours or Murtha's. That said I can imagine that Kerry and Murtha likely have respect for each other, understand where each is coming from and would be more likely to work together than against each other.

[still_one]

37. Kerry says the same fuzzy crap all the time

NO HARD TIMETABLES

That is what happened in Viet Nam

Hey, anyone believe that you can stablize a civil war, then be my guest and be the first to sign up

[bornskeptic]

50. But you praise Hackett (post 19),

who says the same thing?

Iraq: Paul says he can't envision permanent bases in Iraq. From what he saw in his tour of duty there, there are absolutely no plans or preparations for long-term settlements. And although he is in favor of getting out, he doesn't like the timetable idea -- with an interesting twist I hadn't thought of before: "I think eventually all of our soldiers will be redeployed back home. It could happen by the end of next year, but the timetables -- especially those being suggested by members of Congress who've never been in the armed forces -- are wrong. What's the significance of, say, June 31st? Maybe the marines will be ready to leave and maybe they won't. It's too arbitrary. It could happen on December 31st. You never know what situations will arise, so the strict timetables are meaningless."

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/11/16/151533/21

So where is the difference?

[still_one]

78. we are in the middle of a civil war

there is no graceful way to exit, it is already lost, Hackett has so much said that

so when an extremely hawkish congressman comes out against the war, they are so busy pushing their own plans and political aspirations, instead of just saying what Russ Feingold and others said, it is a welcome addition

I will tell you now, Kerry in his campaign called for more U.S. troops, Clinton called for more U.S. troops, mccain calls for more U.S. troops, and they are all just plan wrong, because when it comes right down to it this war was based on a lie, without good intentions, and it is doomed to fail, and everyday we stay there we will lose more, just like Viet Nam

Tell me who the enemy is? The Shiites are the elected government. They will eventually align themseleves with Iran. The Sunnis will fight the Shiites, the Kurd want independence, and are Sunni, but they identify with their geography more than with their religion. The Turks do NOT want Kurdish independence. The majority of the Muslim world is Sunni, and they will help their Sunni brothers in Iraq. Not only are we in the middle of a civil war, but a religious war between Muslims that we have no idea about

This is why bush I, brent scrowcroft, and every person who understood the middle east say the danger of over throwing Hussein. There was a balance there that we have disrupted. This imbalance will now be resolved through civil war. Remember the war between Iran and Iraq. It lasted almost a decade, and hundreds of thousands of people were killed

We cannot be part of this without making it worse

[INdemo]

44. Regardless of who the Democrat

Nominee was in 2004.the Democrats were destined to lose..the Republicans had mapped a strategy making it impossible for them to lose the election..Why....Well mostly corrupt election officials,and of course Diebold..For the Democrats to win it would have uncovered all the corruption that had taken place and most of the Bush administration would have been locked away and the key thrown away.. We have two parties..The Democrats and the Corupublicans.......

[Strathos]

57. Kerry couldn't even defend himself against the rethugs

Why should we think he's going to do anything worth listening to now.

He was a pawn. He was the least likely to win an election, that's why he was chosen. He was the least likely and yet when he started winning, the rethugs told him to back off, don't protest and be a good little boy and he might get to stay in politics.

You shouldn't be in politics if you're not willing to fight for what you want.

[second edition]

60. Get over it. Oh, and I don't recall Kerry never fighting for what

he wanted. He is just smart enough and wise enough to know when to fight and when to hold back-unlike you of course.

[Name removed]

76. Deleted message

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

[karynnj]

61. Kerry was the strongest of the 2004 candidates

With everything stacked against him he nearly won. He certainly didn't back down out of fear of the Republicans - he fought until the day of elections.

He didn't have enough votes - there still is no proof that is legally admissable - and it's more than a year later. (MCM should realize that while proof by deduction or proof by induction would be valid, proof by intimidation - listing all knowns, then saying "therefore" ---- is not valid.)

[Mass]

72. The idiot referred to the americablog post, in case it is not clear

[still_one]

28. Here is what Feingold said

http://feingold.senate.gov/~feingold/statements/05/11/20051117.html

[OldLeftieLawyer]

34. Respectfully done,

and not distancing himself from Murtha. A nice, middle-of-the-road stance, but at least it's friendly.

What do they think will happen in another year, besides hundreds - no, probably thousands - of American soldiers dying over there for no good reason, and more billions being pounded down an Iraqi rathole?

Murtha is right. Get them out now. Sy Hersh and Scott Ritter say the same thing.

This is pure Vietnam bullshit all over again. I can't believe I'm living through it again.

[still_one]

38. you and I are on the same page

I remember the arguing over a round verses a square table in Paris during the Viet Nam peace talks while people died

[OldLeftieLawyer]

40. This is EXACTLY what crossed my mind

as I was writing here. But, I thought the reference too arcane for this forum.

I recall them arguing, as well, about the color of the felt covering on the table, or something like that. While people died.

Thank you.

[Jim__]

41. Respectfully disagreeing with someone is not "dissing" him.

Kerry respectfully disagreed.

[skipos]

46. Yes, respectfully disagreeing with someone is not "dissing" him.

I am far from a Kerry 08 person, but sweet Jesus people, it is OK for Dems to disagree with eachother.

[Strathos]

77. Yes, it's okay for them to disagree

But to not separate themselves from Bush and to keep supporting this was is the fuel the rethugnicans need. Why give them anything. Kerry should keep his mouth shut if he doesn't agree and at least present a position of unity.

[Strathos]

79. It seems that some on here are more worried about

politically correctness than actually saying what needs to be said.

As long as we cowar in the shadows and are worried about what people will think of our opinions, we'll be the minority.

[robbedvoter]

69. No, it's dissing US - the American public who agrees with Murtha

Clark jumped in and said, "I'll tell you who's with John Murtha and it's the American public... The real issue is this: We're in Iraq now. We've got to put the right policies in place... To succeed in Iraq, you've got to deal with Iraq's neighbors - Syria and Iran."
http://www.newshounds.us/2005/11/18/sean_hannity_tries_to_blame_democrats_for_iraq_war_problems.php#more

[Jai4WKC08]

47. Please don't play into the Republican game

Don't let them divide us.

I'm not a big Kerry fan, and don't plan to support him in '08, but he didn't diss Murtha and I doubt Murtha would have a problem with anything he said.

Look, our party leaders have different opinions on the best way to get out of Iraq. We out here in the grassroots have different opinions.

It's ok. It's all good. They and we are all working for the same thing! We all want our troops out as soon as possible with the least possible loss of life, US and Iraqi. We all want the truth exposed on how we've been lied to and manipulated. We all want the Bush bastards out of office and the Repubs out of power.

It's the other guys who don't give a shit about anything but politics and oil profits. It's the other guys that follow lock-step with WH talking points. We are Democrats precisely because we can discuss and debate and even disagree and still respect each other and work together.

Watch the video of Clark on Hannity & Colmes last nite. Watch how the RW idiots (Hannity and Bennett in this case) try to divide us. How they try to pit those of us who believe immediate withdrawal is the best course against those who think otherwise. You think they won't paint us all with the same brush in the end? Take a lesson from Clark on how to respond. Remember who the real enemy is.

DON'T FALL INTO THEIR TRAP.

They want us to turn on each other. The Repubs are going down, they know it, and keeping us divided is their only hope for keeping power.

[Tarheel_Dem]

48. this is one of the most rational responses ever.....

thank you.....

[Norquist Nemesis]

54. Thank you!!! Well said!!!!

:applause:

[second edition]

59. THIS Ameriblog piece IS JUST NONSENSE.AND LIES.

Its purposes is obvious- to discredit John Kerry. This is at least the third posting of this piece I have seen since last night. I for one am tired of these self-important, obnoxious, know it alls who are out to get John Kerry by trying to ruin his reputation and credibility. Franky, I would steer clear of anyone they would so choose to promote.

[karynnj]

63. Kerry is defending Murtha - Kerry's statement

“I won’t stand for the ‘swift boating’ of Jack Murtha. It disgusts me that a bunch of guys who have never put on the uniform of their country venomously turn their guns on a Marine who came home from Vietnam with a Bronze Star and two Purple Hearts. No matter what J.D. Hayworth says, there is no sterner stuff than the backbone and courage that defines Jack Murtha’s character and conscience.

“You know why the Republicans are engaged in the lowest form of smear and fear politics? Because they’re afraid of actually debating a senior congressman who has advised presidents of both parties on military matters. They’re afraid to debate a decorated veteran who lives and breathes the concerns of our troops, not the empty slogans of an Administration that sent our brave troops to war without body armor. They’re terrified of actually leveling with the American people about the way they misled America into war, and admitting they have no clear plan to finish the job and get our troops home. Whether you agree with Jack Murtha’s policy or not is irrelevant. The truth is there is a better course for our troops and for America in Iraq, and I am going to keep fighting until we take that course for the good of our country.

“Instead of letting his cronies run their mouths, the President for once should stop his allies from doing to Jack Murtha what he set them loose to do to John McCain in South Carolina and Max Cleland in Georgia. The President should finally find the courage to debate the real issue instead of destroying anyone who speaks truth to power as they see it. It’s time for Americans to stand up, fight back, and make it clear it’s unacceptable to do this to any leader of any party anywhere in our country.”

[Mass]

65. How does he dare? He should shut up.

:sarcasm:

[LSK]

67. this trash is still going around???

Can we please react to actual quotes and texts from the main parties involved instead of 3rd hand account bloggers with a bone to pick?

[dogday]

80. Kerry lost my vote

Murtha has it. Anyone who stands on the platform of end the war now, has my vote, all others, please just go away....

[second edition]

81. THIS IS A REPEAT- REPACKAGED BUT CONTAINING THE

SAME OLD BAD MEAT. NO, KERRY DID NOT BASH MURTHA.

[politicasista]

82. Don't fall for their trap

It is an attempt to keep dems divided period.