Edwards has lost a few points with me

[losthope]

In last nights debate Edwards said that he was excepting some of the blame for the war by supporting the vote in the Senate to attack Iraq. I fault him for this in that he should have said he supported the war in Iraq based on the false information
given by the president and his and his staff. I say put the blame where it belongs.

[Beaker]

1. "accepting" the blame...

an exception is a much different thing than an acception.

[AP]

2. and, as usual with Bush, blame falls on Democrats and not

Bush.

I wish I had the good furtune to have my opponents blamed for my actions.

[liberalhistorian]

9. LOL!

You and me both. Damn that "liberal media", anyway!

[sadiesworld]

3. Actually , he gains a few with me.

[belle]

8. Yeah, me too.

It's more than Shrub is ever going to do. And I don't think it's appropriate for him to say "it's ALL my fault," if that's what you're getting at.

[BruinAlum]

4. Boy, the Dem candidates just can't win

Some people here demand the candidates take the blame, and Edwards lost points with you because he did. They can't win either way.

[KittyWampus]

11. Edwards Said Saddam's Threat Wasn't Exaggerated

so frankly, he's just doing his best to make himself look less inept.

[AP]

12. Clinton said SH was huge security risk. And Edwards has said

that there was good intelligence and bad intelligence. He didn't believe the bad intelligence, but he did believe the good intelligence - the same intelligence Clinton said he believed.

I'm so sure the media is playing up the bad intelligence on instructions from Rove to encourage (1) the ouster of Tony Blair, and (2) to encourage Dems to focus only on this issue, and not jobs and the economy.

AFter the conventions, all we'll hear about Iraq (if we hear anything) will be about the good intelligence which Edwards and Clinton say they saw, and we'll all feel that poor Georgie was the victim of an overzealous press.

[spooky3]

14. cite please?

[Lex]

30. What Edwards SAID in

one of the debates is that the threat of TERRORISM, post-911, cannot be exaggerated here at home.

In other words, we have to be vigilant and we cannot poo-poo away any red flags about being attacked here on our own soil.

Edwards was not referring to Saddam or the Iraq War in his statement, but was referring to the larger threat of being attacked. At least that is what I heard that night and I listened to that debate closely.

[philgoblue]

5. Buck stops with JRE

I think he was trying to contrast himself with K, who rambled as usual but wouldn't take any responsibility for the 500 American dead. At least Edwards is a stand up guy and admits his vote helped allow Bush to start the war. Edwards has constantly criticized Bush for not assembling a real international coalition (neither Bush nor Powell EVER went to Europe to win over NATO allies). Still, at the time, one HAD to threaten force in order to convince Saddam to open up to real inspections.

[revcarol]

6. The worst thing was that he said he was NOT misled...

that just going to war to get rid of Saddam was a good thing...

Reference one of those interviews with Tweety or Russert or...someone please look it up, PURTY PLEASE!!

[AP]

7. He said he wasn't misled by the crappy intelligence, because

it was obvioulsy crappy. He said that there was plenty of good intelligence which the media doesn't talk about (because, in my opinion, they're luring Dems into nominating a candidate who focuses on Iraq, after which they'll drop the good intelligence bomb).

He said the good evidence was compelling and he wants to know what the deal with that evidence is.

Clinton said the exact same thing. He said that there was enough good intelligence as of his last intelligence briefing in Jan 2001 to justify an up vote on IWR. He said that a president can't simply say, I chose not to trust my intelligence today, unless there's a VERY GOOD reason not to.

[revcarol]

18. that interview with matthews or russert or whoever

had ABSOLUTELY NO QUALIFIERS in it. He just said."I was not misled."

someone please research this for me.

[AP]

23. He said he wasn't misled because he wasn't fooled by the bad

evidence.

[bowens43]

10. His vote was a mistake and he admitted it.

That's a good thing.

[polpilot]

27. Of course. He couldn't say he was too stupid to figure it out when it was

so evident. I WASN'T mislead. Anyone paying attention with marginal info wasn't MISLEAD. It was/is crystal clear.

[mmonk]

13. What's wrong with accepting accountability?

You rather have someone like bush that doesn't?

[dionysus]

15. he took responsibility for his actions and that

made him lose points wih you? Huh? He did the right thing, unlike Kerry's long, rambling, non-answer to the same question.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

16. So as President he'd blame the Senate for his failures?!?!!!

Edwards is now done in my book. And I think as VP he's now off Kerry's long list.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

17. wow. I guess I killed this thread

with that painful truth.

[AP]

20. Your criticism is kind of cryptic. Care to elaborate?

[NewYorkerfromMass]

25. I think my first post sums it up. eom

[AP]

26. But if you're not getting responses, I venture to guess it's becasue

it's not clear what you're criticizing.

[SangamonTaylor]

21. There is no blame to be cast.

The responsibility for the war in Iraq rests with no single person. The intelligence was faulty. However, our leaders must make decisions based on the intelligence provided. Further, when that intelligence is proven unreliable, our leaders must take the necessary steps to improve upon our weaknesses.

Edwards realizes that we have committed ourselves to Iraq and we cannot walk away from our responsibilities. Our national security depends on maintaining regional stability in the Middle East. Leaving Iraq less stable than before we went to war would be a serious mistake. With that said, Edwards has a plan to bring the international community back to the table.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

19. kick

[Dhalgren]

22. I am not an Edwards supporter.

I would not actively support anyone who voted for the IWR. That being said, I have much more respect for Edwards than for Kerry on this subject. For Edwards to come out, like an adult, and take responsibility for his own actions make me feel better about him, than some crybaby saying Bush lied to him. Everyone knew Bush was lying, Edwards takes responsibility for going along with it. Much more appealing than someone who admits to being a dupe - or won't admit to being a dupe, depending on the day, or time of day, or group being spoken to, or...you get the idea.

[dansolo]

24. My feelings exactly

John Edwards stated, without any hesitation, that he accepts responsibility for his vote. I can respect that. Kerry avoided answering the question.

[AP]

28. I carried an M-16 in the jungles of Vietnam vs.

My father worked in the mills.

But you still have to answer the questions.

[iamjoy]

29. Edwards Scores Points

Remember after the disaster at Waco? Did Reno and Clinton whine about the ATF this and he said/she said? No. Both said: The buck stops here/I supported that action.

Isn't/Wasn't Senator Edwards on the Senate Intelligence Committee? So, if the intelligence was conflicting, wouldn't he have known? And if the intelligence was conflicting, can we not say "better safe than sorry."?

I don't know the answer to that last question, but I am another one of those glad he takes responsibility for his vote.

[liberalpragmatist]

31. Well, that's what Kerry said (under his 500-word response)

...but though I'm a Kerry supporter, I prefered Edwards' answer. YES, the fuck-up was Bush's, but Congress did play a role, and Edwards was right to accept some responsibility. Kerry should have too; it would have seen more humble and more human; instead, he looked opportunistic and pompous - something he really has to shake.

Kerry should have said this:
"Yes, we all have to be held accountable for our votes. I voted “yes” on the resolution and I accept responsibility for my vote. I accept responsibility for having believed that this President and this administration were going to do what they promised: putting together an international coalition, making full use of diplomacy, and going to war only as a last resort. We have in Washington, a tradition of speaking with one voice on foreign policy. And we have a tradition of presidents respecting the rights of Congress and the American people, and respecting the tradition of being cautious and pragmatic in foreign policy and going to war as a last resort. I regret believing that this White House was that kind of White House, a responsible one, for it was on that basis that I made my vote."

That's why I liked Edwards' response; it was more humble.

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

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

[spooky3]

34. No, he didn't. Please provide a link to support your claim

as per the GD rules. See the other posts in this thread for clarification of what he actually DID say.

Your misstatement of what Edwards said has been corrected earlier.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=246928#247143

Why do you keep repeating it?

[DjTj]

35. Haha

...that's quite a leap there.

First he "basically" linked Saddam and Al-Qaeda, then he's "very happy" we went to war.

I definitely see the logic there. :eyes:

[Padraig18]

33. Unlike Kerry, who accepted NONE?

Edwards just can't win, with some folks...