John Kerry Demands US Troop Pullout

[kerrygoddess]

John Kerry Demands US Troop Pullout
June 14th, 2006 @ 12:57 pm

Rick Klein of the Boston Globe, reports today on John Kerry’s speech Tuesday at the Take Back America Conference, in Washington, D.C..

Senator John F. Kerry is placing himself at the center of congressional action over the war in Iraq this week with a crisply worded resolution to require President Bush to withdraw almost all US troops by the end of this year.

Klein notes that Kerry’s measure has exposed him to attacks from “Republicans and some Democrats, as critics rushed to tag the plan as a “cut-and-run” strategy,” however, it has “also has made him a rallying point for antiwar activists.”

The “cut-and-run” reference, obviously refers to the statement made by Karl Rove on Monday in NH, when Rove “specifically targeted Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry and Pennsylvania Rep. John Murtha.” Kerry spokesman David Wade issued a statement yesterday righteously smacking down Karl Rove’s attack on Kerry and Murtha:

“The closest Karl Rove ever came to combat was these last months spent worrying his cellmates might rough him up in prison. This porcine political operative can’t cut and run from the truth any longer. When it came to Iraq, this Administration chose to cut and run from sound intelligence and good diplomacy, cut and run from the best military advice, cut and run from their responsibility to give our troops body armor, and in November, Americans will cut and run from this Republican Congress.”

In a discussion here, on Monday, I stated in response to a Republican talking point dropped in our comments about “cutting and running,” that:

“it seems to me that Bush CUT & RUN, when he failed to get Osama bin Lost in Tora Bora. One of the greatest failures of Bush’s war on terrorism was when Bush dropped the ball on Terrorist #1, when they had him cornered in Tora Bora.”

{snip}

Klein notes that Republican’s have been on the defensive over Kerry’s stance on Iraq, throwing out all the traditional right-wing talking points.

Kerry said he is tuning out Republican criticism as “scare tactics” designed to avoid a real discussion of the Bush administration’s war position.

“It’s time to stand up and make clear to them we’re not going to get pushed around,” he said in the interview.

In his speech, Kerry attacked the war’s architects as “armchair warriors whose front line is an air-conditioned conference room,” and dropped in a pointed reference to Bush’s not having fought in Vietnam.

“I understand fully that Iraq is not Vietnam; after all, President Bush is even there today,” Kerry said. Bush served in the Air National Guard during the Vietnam era, which allowed him to avoid being deployed to Vietnam.

Bush is the master of “cut and run,” as he proved when he dropped the ball in Tora Bora and failed to capture Osama bin Lost. Republican’s never question that massive failure on Bush’s part, nor do they question the fact that their “fearless leader” showed early in life that he had also mastered “tucking tail and pulling up” when he served in the Air National Guard during Vietnam and somehow managed to wind up AWOL.

The NY Times reports today that a survey finds that the “Global Image of the U.S. Is Worsening.”

As the war in Iraq continues for a fourth year, the global image of America has slipped further, even among people in some countries closely allied with the United States, a new opinion poll has found.

{snip}

The Bush administration has alienated America with it’s lies and failed policies. It’s time for the Bush administration to step up to the plate and follow the lead of a true leader — John Kerry. Kerry has the right idea on what the next steps are for Iraq — it’s time to set a plan in motion to withdraw our troops. Bring ‘Em Home.

FULL POST & LINKS - http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=3309

[EVDebs]

1. Operation Rat-Hole just got another $66 BILLION to keep rolling along

http://news.findlaw.com/ap/p/56/06-06-2006/de78002b2fcb4ee8.htm

[kerrygoddess]

2. Better Link? N/T

[EVDebs]

7. Try this...

Scroll down to "House passes $94.5 billion for Iraq war, hurricane relief" on the first link;

otherwise try

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/1153AP_Congress_Iraq_Katrina.html

Sorry for the links problem.

[paineinthearse]

10. Is this S.2766?

Bill number, please.

[EVDebs]

15. HR 1268

An act making Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief, for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2005, and for other purposes.

http://appropriations.house.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&PressRelease_id=629&Month=6&Year=2006

I don't know if the '14 Permanent Bases' are a part of this appropriation or not...see post below mentioning how these bases fuel the insurgency and attacks on US troops.

"Related Bills: H.RES.151, H.RES.258, H.R.418, S.CON.RES.31 " for follow up...

[EVDebs]

27. YES , but Sections. 1031 thru 1044 scare the hell outta me on that bill !

S.2766
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Placed on Calendar in Senate)
http://thomas.loc.gov/

Will try to locate the bill from this article:

U.S. Senate rebuffs Bush on war budgeting
http://today.reuters.com/investing/financeArticle.aspx?type=bondsNews&storyID=2006-06-14T224216Z_01_N14267878_RTRIDST_0_IRAQ-CONGRESS-USA.XML

It looks like this is the bill:

""S.Amdt. 4242 to S. 2766 (National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 )""
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=2&vote=00170

You're right on the money ! The House is rubberstamping these emergency funding bills and this amendment seems to require more direct budgeting. Sen McCain still has to answer for his support of this war, he wants our troops there for "10, 20 years"

""When asked this week on CNN how long the U.S. military is likely to remain in Iraq, Senator John McCain replied "probably" 10 or 20 years. "That's not so bad," he said, adding, "We've been in Korea for 50 years. We've been in West Germany for 50 years."""

http://www.frostcloud.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-2565.html

[AtomicKitten]

3. I was apprehensive about his mea culpa on his IWR vote.

But this is excellent news and good on him.

[kerrygoddess]

4. He's been saying this since

October 2005!

[AtomicKitten]

5. not in such clear, forceful, overt terms

JK has the gift of circuitous equivocation.

Lewis Black said of Kerry: "I was listening to a speech of Kerry's wondering if I had enough bread crumbs to find my way back."

[karynnj]

8. He also has come out with some of the crispest comments

compared to others. Check his Senate web site - the press part has all his released statements. It's been my experience that his are more colorful, pointed and well written than any other politician. The problem is that supporters of other Democrats are picking up the Rove smears. Kerry has had a well deserved reputation of eloquence since the 70s. (Think how many lines you remember from his 1971 speech.)

What was long, complicated or confushing about:
I regret it profoundly - which he said on MTP in April. (where he also said it was the vote he would most want to take back. - also clear and strong considering he had a 20 plus year voting record.

[MH1]

16. Eh, disagree - strongly.

First off, I wouldn't want a president selected by Lewis Black if that's how he really feels about Kerry's speaking style. I guess he finds Bush easier to understand, and he considers that relevant?

And anyway, I've listened to A LOT of speeches by Kerry and only rarely found him difficult to follow. Essentially, no more often than almost any other politician.

As for the "gift of circuitous equivocation" - bullshit. Just bullshit. As someone who knows him well said to me recently - Kerry's biggest weakness politically, it's that "he's too honest." The long explanations and so-called "nuance" comes from the REALITY that NOTHING IS SIMPLE, and in his honesty Kerry sometimes explains more than the simplistic American mind and short American attention span can handle. Nuance and over-explanation is NOT equivocation. It's only intellectual laziness to assign "equivocation" to what is instead an effort at complete and honest explanation.

Now, let's think about that for a sec. Americans claim they hate politicians because they're all dishonest. Yet they get a chance to elect a guy who's honest to a fault, and they can't handle it.

What does it say about our society that a politician's "biggest political weakness" can be that "he's too honest"?

:banghead:

[AtomicKitten]

18. Well, you are entitled to your opinion and I to mine.

I, however, will be more gracious than to call bullshit on yours.

on edit: There are many that share my opinion, and it has nothing to do with intellectual laziness - nice dig, though - but rather honest perception.

Being a fan sometimes clouds reality.

[karynnj]

24. Who is calling whom a "fan"

I have seen comments you've written about Gore that fit into the fan category. Your original comment was not in the least gracious, nor was the snarky "fan" comment. Her answer was MORE gracious than yours.

You know as well as I do that Black (and you) were repeating a RW theme attacking a Kerry strength. Kerry is articulate and eloquent. He has a gift of explaining complicated issues without talking down to people. You know the slurs the RW said about Gore that became CW, they were unfair and untrue. Consider the same thing was done to Kerry.

Did you really have any difficulty understanding yesterday's speech? I had trouble parsing your first post. What were you apprehensive about? Why insert Latin when it doesn't mean the same thing - Kerry said his vote was "wrong", Mea culpa is an admission of quilt or culpability. You can be wrong without being quilty - which would imply that Kerry knew his vote was wrong and did it anyway. "good on him" is pretty slangy.

[AtomicKitten]

25. I hope you aren't in sales.

Because you would suck at it.

Up thread I expressed a compliment toward JK that was the FIRST time I have warmed up to him since his failure to fight the Swift Boat Liars in 2004. Rather than fanning that flame of positivity as most savvy politicos would do, you pounced on me. Instead of building on a positive attitude albeit tentative, you have stomped on any potential interest I might have shown Kerry as a possible contender in 2008.

Your obsequious, proprietary attitude toward a public figure, expecting that all should adore his peccadilloes as you do, has totally put me off. That is precisely the OPPOSITE of what should be your intention and your technique. You should encourage tentative interest, not stomp on it when it doesn't meet your standards.

It is so lame to interject this personal BS into politics, getting pissy with people that don't love your candidate, choosing up sides based on whom you support. That is the epitome of a closed mind and seriously stunted human relationships. Rather than trying to persuade others through respectful debate, you have formed yourself an exclusive fan club with a secret handshake. Feh.

Look hard at my comments about Gore. Someone made a snarky comment eluding to Gore being a fat ass. My response: "He's just big-boned." I made light of it. You might want to take note of that technique.

Mark this moment as the moment you officially influenced a voter to NOT support your candidate. A tag-team effort. Well done.

[karynnj]

31. I doubt you are good at sales either - and I would hope that

you will choose you candidate on that candidate's merits - as I will. I never had the least interest in sales and would find that field utterly boring. My background is Mathematics and Economics, which many people would find boring.

Kerry's peccadilloes?? You were negatively commenting on the way he speaks - I was simply pointing out that if you look at his comments they are clear and not convoluted. My only comment on Gore was to point out - intentionally without specifics - that there are Gore negatives that were RW talking points that were amplified through the media. In 2000, I was happy to vote for Gore though I personally didn't like his talking style - because it wouldn't impact the type of President he would be.

I was responding to your obnoxious attack on someone else. I could of course say that that attack makes me positive that I will never support Al Gore, but that is asinine. Whether I support Gore will depend on whose running. You, by the way, have made so many snarky Kerry comments that I seriously doubt you would support Kerry if Gore pulled out. Oh, by the way, there is a research forum thread listing all of the ways Kerry did fight the SBVT. It's pretty hard to fight back effectively when the media doesn't show your responses.

[LittleClarkie]

21. That's so true. I've often thought that about Kerry

Too honest. He wants to tell you how he got to a position and let you see his thinking along the way. And sometimes instead of telling you what you want to hear, you get the qualified answer instead. In other words he's trying to be more honest than some folks wanna hear at times. They want the simple answers so they can just go on their merry way.

[AtomicKitten]

26. or they want answers that you don't have to pack a lunch for to hear

Not sound bytes, but concise dialog. Like Bill Clinton was the master at. Kerry talks Senate speak, oratories. Not designed for the campaign trail. It has nothing to do with truth. And it has nothing to do with people being stupid or disinterested, although it would be so very snotty of us to think that wouldn't it? That would make us so superior, wouldn't it? Some people are successful politicians because they know how to speak to the common man, some are not.

[LittleClarkie]

28. Not when he's pissed off

and not when he's relaxing in a pub having a beer with you.

I wouldn't mind packing a lunch. But then again, if he were president, he wouldn't have to explain it. He could just do it.

And there was a time when a certain Vice President was accused of similar things.

[AtomicKitten]

29. yeah, he was

and I'm not going to cry about it and accuse you of being stupid or mean for saying so.

See how that works?

[LittleClarkie]

32. You're stupid and mean! WAH!

What the...?

See how what works. Find a post where I say you, or anyone else, was stupid or mean.

What are you referring to?

I merely pointed out that when Kerry is either pissed off, or among friends, he's a different person.

And that Gore had similar problems connecting. But of course he seems to have overcome them. I see Kerry as being on his way to doing the same. At least his sentences have gotten shorter.

I have no illusions about how he sounds sometimes. There were speeches in 2004 even I had trouble listening to.

That's why I'll take Attorney General if I can get it. He could be appointed to that. He'd be qualified for many things in a Dem cabinet actually.

[Nothing Without Hope]

6. Kerry statement on war contrasted with Hillary Clinton's - CHI SUN-TIMES:

http://www.suntimes.com/output/iraq/cst-nws-hill14.html

Crowd jeers Clinton for opposing Iraq deadline

June 14, 2006

BY DEVLIN BARRETT

WASHINGTON -- Anti-war activists at a liberal gathering booed Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton on Tuesday for opposing a set date for pulling U.S. troops from Iraq. Facing down the jeers, Clinton said Democrats need to have ''a difficult conversation'' about the war.

Another potential presidential candidate, Sen. John Kerry, spoke to the "Take Back America" conference later in the day and offered an emphatically anti-war appeal.

Kerry, who was widely criticized as the party's standard-bearer in 2004 for being too cautious in his criticism of the war, said Tuesday that politicians ''cannot have it both ways.''

In remarks that could have been aimed at Clinton, Kerry said: ''It's not enough to argue with the logistics or to argue about the details. ... It is essential to acknowledge that the war itself was a mistake. ... It was wrong, and I was wrong to vote for that Iraqi war resolution.''

(snip)

[karynnj]

11. Reading the quotes from Hillary, she makes no sense

do not think it is a smart strategy, either, for the president to continue with his open-ended commitment, which I think does not put enough pressure on the new Iraqi government,'' said Clinton, before turning to the anti-war liberals' core beef with her.

''Nor do I think it is smart strategy to set a date certain. I do not agree that that is in the best interests,'' said Clinton, prompting loud booing from some at the gathering."


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

She thinks it not smart to be open ended and not smart to set a date. Don't you have to choose one of these? (Even a range essentially defaults to a date because it becomes by the end date.)

[Nothing Without Hope]

30. I agree. IMO, it shows that "making sense" is not her main agenda here.

I don't trust her and consider her a calculating panderer who would be a disaster as a candidate.

[confludemocrat]

34. Gimme a break, Hil sounds like more honest version of JK positions on war

talk about something making no sense, just go back over Kerry's speeches up until now and there are remarkable similarities although she out and out (wrongly obviously) says she thinks it would be wrong to set a deadline for withdrawal while he always beat around the bush on that subject

[karynnj]

36. He is not "beating around the bush" about deadlines

The very title of his April op-ed included the word "deadline". There positions are not the same - Kerry has spent the last 3 months advocating a deadline.
You are amazing. you say:
Hillary "wrongly obviously" says it's wrong to set a deadline.
Kerry recommended SETTING A DEADLINE

If you feel it's wrong not to set a deadline, obviously you want a deadline. Rather than agree with Kerry, you question his honesty in doing what you think is right! Amazing. Is there anything Kerry could do that you would personally commend him on.

[EVDebs]

9. Kerry should be making hay over the 14 permanent bases, which

are the basis for much of the opposition:

""Polls conducted in June 2005 suggest even more anti-occupation sentiment; most alarming to U.S. policymakers is rising support for the insurgency. According to the Boston Globe (10 June 2005): "a recent internal poll conducted for the U.S.-led coalition found that nearly 45 percent of the population supported the insurgent attacks, making accurate intelligence difficult to obtain. Only 15 percent of those polled said they strongly supported the U.S.-led coalition."<16> A later 2005 poll by British intelligence said that 45% of Iraqis support attacks against coalition forces, rising to 65% in some areas, and that 82% are "strongly opposed" to the presence of foreign troops.<17> Demands for U.S. withdrawal have also been signed on by one third of Iraq's Parliament.<18> These results are consistent with a January 2006 poll that found an overall 47% approval for attacks on US-led forces. That figure climbed to 88% among Sunnis. Attacks on Iraqi security forces and civilians, however, were approved of by only 7% and 1% of respondents respectively. 87% favored a U.S. withdrawal, but only 23% believe the U.S. would actually withdraw if asked. 80% believed the U.S. plans permanent bases in Iraq.<25>""

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_insurgency

footnote 25 above is :

New WPO Poll: Iraqi Public Wants Timetable for US Withdrawal, But Thinks US Plans Permanent Bases in Iraq--Half of Iraqis Approve of Attacks on US Forces, Including 9 Out of 10 Sunnis

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/home_page/165.php?nid=&id=&pnt=165&lb=hmpg1

[karynnj]

12. He has often brought the permanent bases up

and is adamently against them. A partial list is:

- In the debates with Bush (and in several other campaign speeches)
- When he gave his Oct 26 speech at Georgetown on his (then) new Iraq plan - where he used the same reason, you give. By disavowing that we want permanent bases, we minimize looking like occupiers
- At a Feb or March SFRC hearing, he questioned Dr Rice on statements that a general had made saying we did not want permanent bases. Rice danced around the question but it was clear they were not ruled out.

[EVDebs]

17. He needs to scream in front of a TV camera....

But even then, with Operation Mockingbird/military'psyops', the MSM still wouldn't show it.

[karynnj]

19. He had a very large audience for the debates

and he spoke about it then. He also has mentioned it on talk shows.

[EVDebs]

20. Why doesn't the MSM pick up this story then ?

It's the crux of the matter. US troops are being shot at and Iraqis don't support our position and presence BECAUSE of the permanent bases...

Iraq war bill deletes US military base prohibition
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060609/pl_nm/security_congress_funding_dc

Republican hypocrisy is getting our soldiers offed. And no on is pointing this out. Lovely. DU, can you hear me ?

[karynnj]

22. I'm not sure

I think some of the larger, more influencial papers such as the NYT and the WP are complicit. Their coverage in the run up to the war was pathetic. I can't figure out if they were used or they agreed with the neo-con ideas. These are all things I would have raised an eye brow, shook my head and left quickly if I heard someone saying this 2 or 3 years ago.

If you think about it, the weirdest thing about the media coverage is how little time you actually saw and heard Kerry - who was out making multiple campaign appearances every day. Only at the convention where he had 3 hours, of which Edwards and Clinton each got one and at the debates did people see Kerry not hidden by their talking heads.

Kerry has gotten more coverage in the last 2 days on Iraq than he has for the last 2 months talking about it - and I suspect that's because the Hillary vs Kerry part of the story interests them.

[EVDebs]

23. Congress was lied to in order to acquire the AUMF votes

for the Iraq War. With the LIHOP/MIHOP questions, we may have been lied to about the 9-11 situation too for that matter (what do you know about Ptech/GoAgile and the wargames of Sept. 11, 2001 ?).

WMDs, what WMDs ? The press didn't even get upset until the DAY AFTER the joke...

"" The audience at Wednesday's 60th annual dinner of the Radio and Television Correspondents' Association obviously thought the quips hilarious - there were laughs all round - but the next morning, in the cold light of day, things looked far less amusing.""

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3570845.stm

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

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

[ProSense]

14. Cheney is that you? Who is Zarqwaui? n/t

[Name removed]

33. Deleted message

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

[karynnj]

35. Kerry is to trying to outflank Hillary for the party's rightish wing????

How do you figure this?? Even if meant leftish, Kerry has always been to the left of Hillary.

Kerry's position has changed with changes on the ground. I really don't understand your view that Kerry's position is timid. He along with Feingold and Murtha and very few others have been on the leading edge of a push to end the war as quickly as possible.

I really don't see why you are repeating Rovian stereotypes - Kerry's positions have had common threads running through them since 2003 - He has always spoken against permanent bases (his comment in the debates was the first time most people had ever heard there was a possibility of permanent bases), use diplomacy (the neighbors and any helpful international group), as quickly as possible hand responsobility to the Iraqis and get out. Other parts - facilitate their attempts to create a government and involve the Iraqis in reconstruction (which gives them a stake in the succes of the government)are no longer relevant.

The specific recommendation was always based on these elements and were based on what Kerry learned from both the military and the Iraqis, as well as the politicians. Do you know the PM of Iraq has requested a timeline?

It looked to me as though people liked his speech - you write as though they all booed and threw things at him after he was exposed as being lame - I suspect you regret that he did reach some people with this speech.

[zulchzulu]

37. Thanks KG!

Sad news today with 2,500 officially dead troops...how can you ask a man (or woman) to die for a mistake...