Did Kerry refute these words?

[Zhade]

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48708-2004Aug7.html

"Knowing then what he knows today about the lack of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, Kerry still would have voted to authorize the war and "in all probability" would have launched a military attack to oust Hussein by now if he were president, Kerry national security adviser Jamie Rubin said in an interview Saturday."

I was told by another DUer that Rubin apologized for these comments, that he spoke out of turn without Kerry's go-ahead.

I no longer have a star ( :( ) and cannot recall the DUer's name to PM them to request a source on this claim, so I thought I'd throw it out there for the really knowledgeable Kerry fans in the house.

Did Kerry refute this allegation? It's an honest question, not a request for a flame war. Fact is, if you can provide proof that Kerry does not agree with Rubin, and has disagreed with these comments, I'd sleep a lot better at night.

Anyone got the info? It would be appreciated. Thanks!

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

1. donate $10 and get the star back

DU needs your help!

[Zhade]

2. I'm planning on it - just waiting for my next paycheck.

Money, she be tight under da b*shies.

[David Dunham]

3. Yes. Rubin recanted these words.

[Zhade]

4. That's not what I asked.

I'm sorry if I was unclear in my OP - I understand that it's been stated he recanted the words.

What I'm asking for is a source, so I can both read this for myself and share it with others who have the same concerns over Rubin's comments that I do.

I tried Google, to no avail. Do you have a link you can point me to?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

5. heres a source

http://www.theunionleader.com/articles_showa.html?article=42815

Same story was in LA Times on 8/24

[Zhade]

6. Thanks for the link, NSMA!

This part still bothers me:

In an interview Tuesday, Rubin said it is unknowable whether Kerry would have waged the war. "Bush went to war the wrong way," Rubin said. "What we don't know is what would have happened if a president had gone about it the right way."

Under pressure from Bush, Kerry recently said that, knowing then what he knows now about the lack of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons in Iraq, he still would have voted in 2002 to grant Bush the authority to launch the military attack. "But he never would have gone to war the way George Bush did," Rubin said in the statement. "The Bush Cheney campaign continues to misrepresent John Kerry's position because they are trying to cover President Bush's mistakes, from rushing to war without allies, to not equipping our troops properly, to not having a realistic plan to win the peace."

Why? Because the problem with the war was that it was launched at all, not how it was launched.

However, Rubin did retract the "in all probability" portion, and I thank you for assisting my search.

Odd article, though - the title is "GOP operative retracts remark", yet no evidence of Rubin's status as an operative is given (unless I missed it).

Hmmmm.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

13. I know I thought that was odd

The statement DOES bother me too....I don't think one can ADEQUATELY explain that IF other nations ALSO had reason to believe the claims were true we would have gone to war...that's the hardest part to communicate in a sound bite...that IF there were legitimate evidence AFTER the inspections it MIGHT be grounds for war...(not saying I agree with that statement just saying the threat of war IS used as a political tool in these circumstances WHEN they are proven legit which they weren't)

[buycitgo]

15. he never should have answered: just said it's a HYPOTHETICAL

that's it

that's what pugs do EVERY five seconds, and the media drops it, like they did ALL reference to drug/alcohol use in 1999, the MOMENT Bush said he was essSCARED to talk about it

fricking HOES

[IndianaGreen]

9. You are using the rightwing Manchester Union Leader as a source?

nothingshocksmeanymore (1000+ posts) Sun Aug-29-04 03:35 PM
Response to Reply #4

5. heres a source

http://www.theunionleader.com/articles_showa.html?article=42815

Same story was in LA Times on 8/24


tsk, tsk, tsk.

They can't even get their headline straight: "GOP operative retracts remark."

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

10. I said the same fucking story was in the LA Times tsk tsk

I used this source since one needs to register for the LA Times

[IndianaGreen]

12. No need to get nippy

BTW, that's an Al Gore quote from the 2000 election when he phoned Bush to take back his concession.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

14. Snippy was the word..maybe you guys should use that other site to

organize your personal attacks on me a little better and get your quotes straight.

[Zhade]

16. HEY. That's uncalled for.

There's no "organizing" of personal attacks here. I asked an honest question, it's totally out of line for you to suggest anyone on this thread is a Freeper.

We can do better than that. Let's not go down that path, okay? Please?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

20. Not the site I was referencing and the post wasn't to you

IG accused me of using a RW source after I made it clear the same story was in the LA times...I simply posted a source that one would NOT have to register at to see the statement you asked to see in print.

[IndianaGreen]

22. It wasn't an accusation, it was an observation

and a valid one at that. Now, you should know that we are not allowed to discuss other internet boards in DU. That's just a friendly comment.

I don't understand the melodrama for something that simple. If you had used NewsMax as a source, other people would have pointed that out to you. Well, the Manchester Union Leader is more rightwing than NewsMax.

[Zhade]

25. Okay, so you meant The Unmentionable Site?

Either way, I don't think it reasonable to accuse IG of organizing personal attacks (and since I started the thread, and organization requires two or more people, I wanted to make sure that you understood there was no such organizing going on).

As far as I read it, IG made a mistake by not noticing that the site (which I know nothing about, I've never seen it before) was carrying an LA Times piece. IG was hasty in admonishing you, but I think it was just a regrettable mistake, not a planned attack.

Anyway, just wanted to clear that up. I still wonder about that site's headline. It proclaims something with no proof (and if it is a RW source as IG contends, it's even weirder).

[IndianaGreen]

27. Manchester Union Leader was the one that said that Muskie's wife

was an alcoholic. Muskie broke down and cried outside the newspaper. It was a character assassination that the publisher, William Loeb took great pleasure in doing.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

29. Muskie didn't even cry.

It was melting snow on his face according to David Broder:

...Long after the event, David Broder of the Washington Post told me the "crying incident" was a bum rap. He was standing right down front. It was snowing, and, as flakes of snow landed on Ed Muskie's head, they melted and streaked down his face. One reporter decided they were tears "pack mentality" became operative -- and everyone reported that Muskie had cried. Only Broder insists to this day that Muskie did not cry.

http://www.muskiefoundation.org/stories.hyman.html

[IndianaGreen]

17. I merely questioned your source

as you have done many times before to other posters. That is legitimate and in no way can be construed as a personal attack.

I certainly do no understand the venom in your reply.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

21. It's not legitimate when I said the LA Times had the same story

nice try....

[buycitgo]

23. alll you need is love

love

love is all you need

I just bought Rubber Soul, Revolver, and best of from Sgt Pepper through Abbey Road

[IndianaGreen]

24. I am not going to engage in a who-has-the-last-word-contest with you

this is my last word on this topic. It's not about YOU!

[Zhade]

26. IG, in all fairness, I think you jumped on NSMA for nothing.

The story is an LA Times story carried by what you term a RW site (never been there before, so I know zero about it, but I believe you).

You probably didn't see the small "LA Times" line. Honest mistake. No reason for NSMA to claim you're personally attacking her, but at the same time it's only fair to point out that in your haste to shoot down a RW source, NSMA got hit with some unfair shrapnel.

I like both of you guys, and hate to see my thread cause unnecessary strife.

[buycitgo]

7. FIRE that idiot!

I mean it

if he listens to morans like Rubin, is he any different from chimpo?

show some leadership, JK

[Zhade]

8. His advisors do worry me.

Anyone who knows anything about Beers, Holbrooke, Rubin, or Albright - say, guys like Chalmers Johnson who chronicle American imperialism - knows why these guys worry me. A lot.

[buycitgo]

11. yeah....Beers is pretty nuts about the WOD, for example

Holbrooke is about an inch away from being DLC/CRF version of PNAC

albright IS PNAC, right?

Rubin is just a moran who can't think past his tonsils

get RID of him for sure

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

18. Don't forget Richard Morningstar.

Troubling.

[buycitgo]

19. huh?

that's a new one on me

he make fake sausage?

[Zhade]

28. Upon reflection, it occurs to me: I still don't have an answer.

I have Rubin's semi-retraction - not a real retraction, in actuality, as he still argues that the WAY we went to war was wrong, rather than the war itself.

However, I still don't know if Kerry himself disavowed Rubin's comments. So, I'll ask again, in the hopes that a kind DUer will set the record straight: did Kerry refute Rubin's contention that he would have gone to war?

Anyone?

[goodhue]

30. no

Kerry did not refute Rubin

[Southern Patriot]

31. This is Kerry's problem in a nutshell. He refuses to take a

clearcut position and stick with it.

I support Kerry. He HAS to be better than Bush.

But, in this case in particular, he should have either come out against the war in the beginning or started to vociferously criticize Bush when Bush started the mad dash to war.

In either case he could have pointed to his opposition more convincingly. His "protest" vote against "funding the troops in Iraq" for $87 million simply makes him look silly. Repubs don't even have to break a sweat to skewer him with twin memes: flip flopping and "betraying our soldiers in the field by not voting to support them."

Now he's trying to explain it away as "nuanced sophisticated political thinking." Voters who are sick to death of Bush are crying out for Kerry to take clearcut, un-nuanced positions. He did it in 1968. Did his career as a senator squash his conscience and eviscerate his understanding that people need a clarion call--- not a wonkish monologue.

[Zhade]

32. Thanks to all who answered.

I never got the answer I was looking for - that Kerry himself refuted Rubin's words.

I have updated my signature accordingly, as a reminder of the dangerous kinds of imperialistic advisors Kerry has working for him.

I'll be more than happy to change my signature, should anyone come up with evidence that Kerry disagrees with Rubin's allegation that he would have gone to war in Iraq had he been president.

Otherwise, I'm forced to conclude that this statement either doesn't bother Kerry - or that he agrees with it.

Always hoping someone will prove me wrong on this one.