Knowing what you know now, would you have voted yes for IWR

[Mick Knox]

Or maybe even what you knew then, would you have voted to give chimpy the authority to go to war?

[cynatnite]

1. Scarborough Country w/Joe Trippi

I never wanted this damn war and watching Scarborough, I'm hating that turd that's trying to defend Kerry on his statement. That thing just won't go away.

With this kind of help, we don't need. Trippi sounds like an idiot. They couldn't have found someone else??

Cyn:)

[buycitgo]

4. he is not very eloquent, or apparently up on media's role in this

he was on WGN radio late friday night, talking about the campaign, the role of money, Dean's personality

he refused to consider the idea that the media ruined Dean's campaign, insisting that the death knell came when Gore endorsed him, causing all eight others to concentrate their fire on him

this may have had something to do with it.....he was there, of course

BUT the media turned on a dime, as soon as he started talking about the dangers inherent in a society subjected to massive media concentration

I talked to him about this, and he thinks the media are being pretty FAIR to Kerry! so there you go

[buycitgo]

2. LOL!

couldn't frame it any better!

Kerry answered the only way he could

but somebody is going to ask him if he would have invaded

has he answered THAT question yet?

what's he going to/what did he say?

hope it was NO!!!!

better be

more importantly, he'd BETTER have an instant judo response, and turn it back on the pugs, like why did they DECEIVE us with all the mushroom cloud allusions?

that was unforgivable, cause they KNEW there was NO evidence at ALL of reconstituted Nukes. NONE at all

NONE.....there was evidence that they HAD done nothing, like destroyed BUILDINGS that they claimed were in USE. remember those IAEA photos they LIED about?

[2Design]

3. No never would have voted for it. I knew it was false then as it is

now. I knew Bush lied before he ever sat in the president seat.

[Mick Knox]

5. Everyone knew it..

well except a few people I guess... and a bunch of chickenhawk wingnuts of course.

[AntiCoup2K4]

6. Wow.... the DLC apologists haven't ripped this to shreds yet?

They must have all gone to bed already.

[Mick Knox]

7. you aint kidden..

I have my flame retardent suit on and everything. :)

[buycitgo]

8. they HAVE, but the gasbags are NOT buying it

they keep twisting his words, and don't ACCEPT what he said, insisting it's VERY bad for Kerry

they don't mention that it's VERY VERY VERY bad to start a two hundred billion dollar war, with no end in sight, based on a fundament of huge, gaping, moaning, groaning LIES

wouldn't it be nice if they'd address that, instead of parsing EVERY word Kerry says to a faretheewell?

[Mick Knox]

9. One thing I KNEW

when they were taking that vote, I KNEW it was a vote for war. This whole MB knew. I knew that. I knew we were going to war with Iraq. I had no illusions.

Maybe I'm just smarter than the average seasoned senator.. but I damn well knew what that vote was and anyone who thought differently needs their head examined.

[Egnever]

10. Damn right!

It is just amazing to me that people who were posting on this board at that time can even try to twist it any other way. I understand a desire to beat bush but when you start repeating republican talkingpoints in order to justify that horrible vote it goes too far.

[demwing]

11. I must need my head examined! I'm the Lone Vote for Kerry!

Teddy Roosevelt once said that diplomacy meant we should talk softly but carry a big stick. In my view, Kerry's vote amounted to little more than providing Bush with his big stick. Nothing about that changes the fact that Bush chose to ignore the first half of Roosevelt's advise.

The fault lies with Bush, not with Kerry. Bush failed to honor his responsibiilty. Please remember that.

[Old and In the Way]

12. Librul just posted this on another thread

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/2002100...

ROFL The banner tag looks more like a directive than a description!

Anyway, this is the speech Bush gave just before the IWR vote. In re-reading it, I'm reminded of how I felt then. It seemed a pretty safe bet we were going in. It was too strongly worded to think otherwise, IMO.

BUT!!!! Here's a few little nuggets from what Bush said about using the military:

There is no easy or risk-free course of action. Some have argued we should wait -- and that's an option. In my view, it's the riskiest of all options, because the longer we wait, the stronger and bolder Saddam Hussein will become. We could wait and hope that Saddam does not give weapons to terrorists, or develop a nuclear weapon to blackmail the world. But I'm convinced that is a hope against all evidence. As Americans, we want peace -- we work and sacrifice for peace. But there can be no peace if our security depends on the will and whims of a ruthless and aggressive dictator. I'm not willing to stake one American life on trusting Saddam Hussein.

<snip>
Iraq is a land rich in culture, resources, and talent. Freed from the weight of oppression, Iraq's people will be able to share in the progress and prosperity of our time. If military action is necessary, the United States and our allies will help the Iraqi people rebuild their economy, and create the institutions of liberty in a unified Iraq at peace with its neighbors.

Later this week, the United States Congress will vote on this matter. I have asked Congress to authorize the use of America's military, if it proves necessary, to enforce U.N. Security Council demands. Approving this resolution does not mean that military action is imminent or unavoidable. The resolution will tell the United Nations, and all nations, that America speaks with one voice and is determined to make the demands of the civilized world mean something. Congress will also be sending a message to the dictator in Iraq: that his only chance -- his only choice is full compliance, and the time remaining for that choice is limited.

Members of Congress are nearing an historic vote. I'm confident they will fully consider the facts, and their duties.


So Bush lied and damaged the Office of President. It saddens me that people will distort Kerry's vote when the real problem is that this pResident put his narrow interests ahead of this country's.

[Egnever]

13. Distort his vote how?

It was clear as a bell to you that if this vote passed we were going to war. But somehow kerry didnt know?

heres another speech from a man who wasnt fooled.

I believe in this beautiful country. I have studied its roots and gloried in the wisdom of its magnificent Constitution. I have marveled at the wisdom of its founders and framers. Generation after generation of Americans has understood the lofty ideals that underlie our great Republic. I have been inspired by the story of their sacrifice and their strength.

But, today I weep for my country. I have watched the events of recent months with a heavy, heavy heart. No more is the image of America one of strong, yet benevolent peacekeeper. The image of America has changed. Around the globe, our friends mistrust us, our word is disputed, our intentions are questioned.

Instead of reasoning with those with whom we disagree, we demand obedience or threaten recrimination. Instead of isolating Saddam Hussein, we seem to have isolated ourselves. We proclaim a new doctrine of preemption which is understood by few and feared by many. We say that the United States has the right to turn its firepower on any corner of the globe which might be suspect in the war on terrorism. We assert that right without the sanction of any international body. As a result, the world has become a much more dangerous place.

We flaunt our superpower status with arrogance. We treat UN Security Council members like ingrates who offend our princely dignity by lifting their heads from the carpet. Valuable alliances are split. After war has ended, the United States will have to rebuild much more than the country of Iraq. We will have to rebuild America's image around the globe.

The case this Administration tries to make to justify its fixation with war is tainted by charges of falsified documents and circumstantial evidence. We cannot convince the world of the necessity of this war for one simple reason. This is a war of choice.

There is no credible information to connect Saddam Hussein to 9/11. The twin towers fell because a world-wide terrorist group, Al Qaeda, with cells in over 60 nations, struck at our wealth and our influence by turning our own planes into missiles, one of which would likely have slammed into the dome of this beautiful Capitol except for the brave sacrifice of the passengers on board.

The brutality seen on September 11th and in other terrorist attacks we have witnessed around the globe are the violent and desperate efforts by extremists to stop the daily encroachment of western values upon their cultures. That is what we fight. It is a force not confined to borders. It is a shadowy entity with many faces, many names, and many addresses.

But, this Administration has directed all of the anger, fear, and grief which emerged from the ashes of the twin towers and the twisted metal of the Pentagon towards a tangible villain, one we can see and hate and attack. And villain he is. But, he is the wrong villain. And this is the wrong war. If we attack Saddam Hussein, we will probably drive him from power. But, the zeal of our friends to assist our global war on terrorism may have already taken flight.

The general unease surrounding this war is not just due to "orange alert." There is a pervasive sense of rush and risk and too many questions unanswered. How long will we be in Iraq? What will be the cost? What is the ultimate mission? How great is the danger at home? A pall has fallen over the Senate Chamber. We avoid our solemn duty to debate the one topic on the minds of all Americans, even while scores of thousands of our sons and daughters faithfully do their duty in Iraq.

What is happening to this country? When did we become a nation which ignores and berates our friends? When did we decide to risk undermining international order by adopting a radical and doctrinaire approach to using our awesome military might? How can we abandon diplomatic efforts when the turmoil in the world cries out for diplomacy?

Why can this President not seem to see that America's true power lies not in its will to intimidate, but in its ability to inspire?

War appears inevitable. But, I continue to hope that the cloud will lift. Perhaps Saddam will yet turn tail and run. Perhaps reason will somehow still prevail. I along with millions of Americans will pray for the safety of our troops, for the innocent civilians in Iraq, and for the security of our homeland. May God continue to bless the United States of America in the troubled days ahead, and may we somehow recapture the vision which for the present eludes us.

http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/wariniraq/robertbyrdhiraq31903.htm

[Old and In the Way]

14. Very eloquent and very true.

And Byrd didn't run for President, did he?

[Egnever]

15. I think he passed the age limit

But my respect for him grows with every speech.

Even if he was a kkk member in his youth :P

[Old and In the Way]

16. Indeed. And while we can debate the IWR, I think we can agree

that we sure miss Jerry!

[Egnever]

17. Yup !

[Pastiche423]

18. Every morning the Senate was in session

in the six weeks leading up to the vote, I, a committed night owl, arose at 6:30 am to hear this great statesman speak.

So many times, I asked, why is he alone? Why aren't the other senators there beside him? Why aren't they listening?

As I would find out on October 11, 2002, 22 other senators were listening. Those 22 other senators had done their homework. They knew, as many of us did, that the war was a war of choice.

It was a choice of whether our sons and daughters and innocent Iraqis would live or die for a lie.

Twenty three senators and one hundred thirty three representatives voted nay on the BILL TITLE: To Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq ("War Resolution Act of 2002").

One hundred fifty six lawmakers voted against sending our sons and daughters to their possible deaths. One hundred fifty six lawmakers voted against the murder of innocent Iraqis. One hundred fifty six lawmakers chose life for these people, in lieu of political expendiency.

Senator John Kerry voted aye.

P.S. I am one of Senator Robert C. Byrd's heros and damn proud of it!

[Egnever]

19. Beautifully said

Worthy of the the eloquence of Mr. Byrd himself.

[Xipe Totec]

20. This is why I do not trust polls

It's all about how the question is posed.

This thread belongs in the lounge for its entertainment value, but not in campaign 2004 where it creates unecessary dissension.

:argh:

[Pastiche423]

21. No "creation" of unnecessary dissension

is needed.

Any dissension was created on October 11, 2002.

[Xipe Totec]

23. Please Tell Me How this post

fixes anything that happened on October 11, 2002.

I missed the point. Sorry. :shrug:


I much rather talk about Monkey-boy's latest antics, like this one:




"Gee, who could have imagined a plane flying into a building?"

[Pastiche423]

25. Fixes?

There is only one person that can "fix" what happened on October 11, 2002.

Unfortunately, he does not appear to want to "fix" it.

[Xipe Totec]

26. You Win. All Is Lost

Guess I'll stay home, or vote for the other guy.

If I punish Kerry by doing that, will that be a satisfactory solution?

[Pastiche423]

27. You do what you think is best in November

As for myself, it is not punishment I seek.

What I seek is righting wrongs.

[Xipe Totec]

30. Is There Another Way?

I understand the anger felt by those who disagree with Kerry's position on IWR.

What I don't understand is the benefit of venting that anger in such a public way.

I know you are very Angry, and it pains me. Righting wrongs is a noble cause. I respect you for it. I just think there is a more constructive way to channel that anger. If we want to prevail we must chose our battles carefully so that we may live to fight another day.

Let this issue go. For the moment, unseating George Bush is the single most important milestone for all of us. If we hope to right this ship, if we want to regain control of our party, we must close ranks behind our candidate. We must win the White House first. If we lose there, we lose the Supreme Court for a generation. If the Republicans stack the court, there's no way we will ever be able to hold ANYBODY accountable for the Iraq war crimes.

So please, let us disagree on the IWR and still remain friends?

[Pastiche423]

32. Is there a battle more just

than the battle between life and death?

As long as I draw a breath, I will not let this issue go.

[Xipe Totec]

33. Nothing More Important Than Life Or Death

I just don't understand how your position translates into lives saved.

Tell me how holding on to this (IWR) issue translates into life, and letting go represents death?

[Pastiche423]

38. My "position" is that the aye vote represented death

And as recent history has shown, my "position" was and is correct.

[Xipe Totec]

39. I Accept Your Point, But That is The Past

My question is how does rehashing the (IWR) vote result in lives saved from now on?

Rehashing IWR weakens support for Kerry and helps Bush. If Bush is elected, it will be seen as an endorsement of his foreign policy and a green light to keep going into Iran perhaps, or Syria, and then on to Korea. How many lives will be lost then? Will the satisfaction of having been right before compensate for the lives that will be lost in the next four years? Does a Bush win advance the cause of life over death?

If it does not, then we must support Kerry as the Democratic candidate, and we must support him not only in the presidential election but also in the congressional and Senatorial races. without a majority in the legislature there is no way to open the necessary investigations into the atrocities conducted by the administration. That is why Bush has gotten away with so much; all that congress has to do is look the other way.

Believe it or not, I do understand your position. I too was very disappointed that the IWR passed, and very angry at the Democrats that voted for the resolution. I was devastated when the invasion of Iraq occurred and hold this administration responsible for the death and destruction that ensued. And although my heart is broken my mind is clear. I know that given a choice between Kerry and Bush, Kerry still represents the best hope for a peaceful world for all of us. I do not trust him blindly, but I do think he deserves a chance to prove himself.


:dem:

(edited for spelling)

[Pastiche423]

40. The result of that vote

is the present. It will also be the future unless we pull our troops out.

[Xipe Totec]

41. Fine, Pull The Troops Out

How do we improve our chances to pull the troops out?

Explain to me how we improve our chances of getting the troops out of Iraq by belaboring the Iraq War Resolution to the point that it peels away support for Kerry and helps Bush get elected?

I support the goal of bringing the troops home. It's the methods that I'm having trouble fathoming.

[Pastiche423]

42. That is a question

I believe, you should ask kerry, not me.

[Qutzupalotl]

35. I like your photo and caption.

I hope you will post it in the lounge also, if you haven't already.

You make good points here.

[Xipe Totec]

37. Thanks! Just Trying To Lighten The Mood

And trying to get the firing squad circle to aim outward again. That way we can all aim for our separate goals and not kill each other in the process.

No wonder the Republicans have it so easy. All they have to do is herd sheeple while the DNC is trying to herd cats:

Beautifull, proud, individualistic, and clawed. Tough to get them all going in the same direction without getting scratched.

Feel free to post the pic in the lounge, or I'll do it tonight when I get home.

:dem:

(edited for syntax)

[West Coast Democrat]

22. Kerry is trying to be sensitive to the troops in Iraq

There's no easy way for Kerry to answer the question. Regardless of whether one ever supported the idea of going to war in the first place, or whether we could turn back time--the fact remains, there are troops putting their lives at risk right now.

The important thing is not to think about it from your personal perspective, but from Kerry's perspective. Any way he answers the question, he'll be criticized from Republicans. They'll say, oh...you would rather Saddam still be in power? or...so, you don't support what the troops are doing, etc.

[Larkspur]

43. No, he just doesn't want to be the "man to tell the last man..

that he died for a mistake."

[aikidoodler]

24. lengthy memes

The problem with Kerry's nuanced explanation of the IWR vote is simply that it's too complicated for the sound bite addicted public to digest. I think short and simple is, unfortunately, the most effective approach. I've been trying to come up with a Readers Digest version meme. The best I've come up with is this:

The IWR authorized Bush to act as a police officer, not as judge, jury and executioner.

This is somewhat cliche-ridden. Anyone have anything cleverer?

[kiahzero]

28. Threat of force was necessary for inspections to work

What's more, even without a resolution, Bush could have gone in if he wanted to, and not asked for authorization for 60 days. By 60 days, the government of Iraq was already destroyed, and we were committed to rebuilding.

[Cuban_Liberal]

29. "Do you still beat your wife?"

Talk about a push poll!

:eyes:

[paulk]

31. I would have voted against it , then and now

and Bush still would have invaded.

I'm not running for president, either.

[Qutzupalotl]

34. The president needs to respond quickly in time of war.

I wouldn't give that authority to Bush, but maybe Kerry was thinking ahead.

[Larkspur]

36. Only a dork, a DLC operative, or a Likkudite sponsored congresscritter

would have missed bush's war drums for a political stunt to throw the Dems off balance and win Congress.

[ulysses]

44. that would be "no".

Wouldn't have voted for it knowing what I knew then, either.