You have got to read this post. It concerns Kerry & Feingold's amendment!

[wisteria]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1472240

I am contacting Reid now about this bullsh*t. They are trying to hide it from the public.

[fedupinBushcountry]

1. This is disgusting

As the Senate prepared for what promises to be a sharp debate starting on Wednesday about whether to begin pulling troops from Iraq, the Democratic leadership wants its members to rally behind a proposal that calls for some troops to move out by the end of this year but does not set a fixed date for complete withdrawal. Mr. Kerry has insisted on setting a date, for American combat troops to pull out in 12 months, saying anything less is too cautious.

In drawing up a schedule for the Wednesday session, the Democratic leadership has arranged for its plan to be debated first, pushing Mr. Kerry and his proposal into the evening, too late for the nightly television news, to starve it of some attention.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/21/washington/21kerry.ht...

[TayTay]

2. Hey, I think we got ourselves a genuine shitstorm!

Wow! The Rethugs want to use Sen. Kerry as a punching bag and the Dems find him 'uncomfortable.' Geez, he must have broken the rules of the Senate and is actually saying something worth hearing.

Bravo Senator. Go get 'em. I hope this backfires and people tune in tomorrow night to hear the debate. Gee, the Dem caucus doesn't want anyone to say anything that might rock the boat. Cuz they know how to win, as the last 3 cycles show. :sarcasm:

For Gawd's sake Harry, grow a spine. Let the debate sound in the Senate. Let Democrats propose something that isn't "Well, ahm, if it's not too much trouble, we have noticed that Iraq is, ahm, somewhat untidy these days and we would like someone to begin to perhaps think about maybe doing some preliminary debate about maybe thinking about not being there for too, too long. If that's okay with you. Not that we want to say anything unfriendly or make you think that we aren't really, really tough badasses. It's just that we don't want to get our hair mused this early in the game. We have this powder that we need to keep dry and all that."

What a bunch of wussies. I'm glad I couldn't hear Harry Reid last week. He lied when he mentioned withdrawal. He obviously just meant it as a sop to the progressives for that day only.

EDIT: I have made contributions to the DSCC before. I will not do so again. There is no unsubscribe button on the DSCC site. I have to wait for the email to come in again. When it does, they are going to get an earful from me and a promise that I will not make any more contributions to such a wimpy organization. All my future contributions will go through Sen. Kerry cuz I know he 'wants to fight' and not cower in fright in the corner.

[wisteria]

6. Absolutely, I am giving to Kerry only and the DNC grassroots.

I don't trust any of the leadership. This is just a shame for Kerry. This is a real smear campaign and it will be picked up by the Repubs. They will ridicule Kerry saying no one supports his "Kooky" plan then they will restate the Dem's have no plan and are divided.

They are so stupid, all they had to do is show some support for his plan and that in itself would have confused the Republicans. They expect the Dem's to be disorganized and we prove them right all the time. You know what, if our party doesn't 't start looking like leaders we will never regain the White House.

Again, I think we can measure the amount of displeasure with Kerry, by the nastiness and misconceptions played out in this smear piece. Now, it has move to television. CNN did a segment where it was mentioned that Kerry was asked to wisely withdraw his amendment and refused. This then the suggestion that Kerry makes the party look bad on this.

I knew something was coming, things have been to quite over this. Who would have though they would stoop to this level? Every misconception about Kerry was put in that piece. Too many to address them all.

[wisteria]

13. So how many votes do you think Kerry's amendment will get?

Reading this piece, it would seem the majority of the Senate doesn't like him or his amendment and is banishing him.

[rox63]

34. The Progressive kinda-sorta shows Kerry some love

Except for the part at the end where they say he ran a bad campaign, and they diss his earlier stance on the war. But up until that point, this article is decent:
http://progressive.org/mag_wx062106

[jillan]

3. No matter what happens in November, I am hoping we

get new leadership in both the house and the Senate.

I would love to see Kerry (or Feingold) the head of the Senate, and
Murtha the head of the House. Things would happen with the right leadership, whether or not we
are in the majority.

[Blaukraut]

4. Dodd winking behind Kerry's back?

Say what?? If that's true, he is one two-faced prick. I'm so mad right now I could punch someone. Here is to hoping that all those wimps who can't stand up to Rove and his foul mouth get what they deserve; be replaced at the earliest convenience with Dem senators who actually DO WHAT WE, THE PEOPLE WHO ELECT THEM, WANT!! Sorry for shouting, but this is utter crap :mad:

[Democrafty]

5. Yes. It's hilarious, war.

:banghead:

Unbelievable.

[globalvillage]

7. I'm not too sure I believe half of what this person wrote.

Maybe just me.
I also thing the repubs pushing their policy lunch to Wed was planned to make the Kerry amendment late in the day.
There are too many things unsourced in this article to take it too seriously. I think she picked a couple statements and made up the rest.
I wonder if she was there to witness the 'winking'.

[fedupinBushcountry]

9. What I heard on the Senate floor

The Levin amendment will go for debate sometime after 11 a.m. for 5 hours and then the Kerry amendment, I did not hear a time for that.

[Inuca]

33. Damn!

A personal "damn!" in addition to the other ones. I have guests this afternnon/evening and will not be able to follow. Hope there will be a replay at some time or at least that you guys will post a lot about what happens so I can catch up tomorrow.

[karynnj]

10. The NYT coverage has been like this

at least since the beginning of 2004. They have never ever given him a single break.

[fedupinBushcountry]

11. Tomorrow

will tell how true this story is.

[wisteria]

19. This piece was in the Washington section, but I do remember another

nasty piece in the editorial section that attacked him for his filibuster of Alito. That, after they came out a couple of days before and called for the dem's to get tough. Maybe it isn't the "right" Dem getting tough. Maybe they allowed this piece because it embarrasses someone else.

[karynnj]

24. They were even more obvious on Alito

Here's what they did:
1) Wednesday: The NYT had a very good, strong editorial on the need to stop Alito by filibuster. Kerry and Kennedy reportedly made strong pleas to the Democratic caucus to filibuster. Comments from this floated throughout the internet. Kerry spoke against Alito in a Senate speech. The Kerrys left at the end of the day for Davos, Kerry put out the first internet post.

2) Thursday - Frist called for the cloture vote on Monday.

3)Friday: The NYT wrote the snarky article that hit Kerry with every RW crack and absolutely ridiculed the effort. (The internet story was slightly toned down in the paper.) Kerry returned and spoke in the Senate again.

4) Monday: Cloture vote - we lost Kerry gave a brilliant speech that McConnell wouldn't let him finish.

5) Wednesday - The SAME author of the Friday article wrote how the vote on Alito, where 44 people voted against him showed that the Democrats could have won and that the fact that they didn't showed how weak they were - it could have been a victory.

I agree with you - they wanted a certain Senator to lead it and everyone would have followed. (One question might be if the problem was that it was Kerry and they would have commended everyone else.)

[wisteria]

15. Oh, you are right.

Unfortunately, most people reading this piece will not recognize the inaccuracies and the smears for what they are. I would love to know who is behind this.

[fedupinBushcountry]

8. It is utter crap

I'm waiting to see those who harp "I voted against the IWR" diss Kerry. Also are these Dems also against Murtha, what a bunch of wimps. I'm with you I am so angry at this little game, damn't this is about our troops and getting them out of harms way. Do they care more about politics then the troops, very sad. :mad:

[globalvillage]

12. This article is better.

<snip>
But recent polls indicate the 2004 presidential runner-up might have the political wind at his back this time. Americans support a timetable for withdrawal by a 52-42 margin, according to a Pew Research Center for the People & the Press poll of 1,501 Americans taken from last Wednesday to Monday.

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-ushill0621,0,7877252.story?coll=ny-leadnationalnews-headlines


Even though it says Dems are divided, it still shows we're closer to what the public wants than the repubs.

[wisteria]

16. Thanks for some positives.

I really think people want to see a debate on the merits of staying versus leaving Iraq and taking another direction.

[ProSense]

14. Well, I'm

sick of and embarrassed by the lot of them. They are beginning to seem smug and condescending!

[Blaukraut]

17. "Possible White House hopefuls unite on Iraq"

What a difference phrasing makes! I feel a LITTLE better now. Not much, but a little. Nice article, no snark, very fair.
(Credit for finding it goes to Cal04. He/she posted it in GDP.)



By LIZ SIDOTI, Associated Press Writer
1 hour, 36 minutes ago



WASHINGTON - Two potential 2008 presidential candidates appealed Tuesday for the Senate to support their call to withdraw U.S. combat troops from Iraq "by a hard and fast deadline," a position putting them at odds with most of their fellow Democrats.

ADVERTISEMENT

"Our country desperately needs a new vision for strengthening our national security, and it starts by redeploying U.S. forces out of Iraq," Sens. John Kerry of Massachusetts and Russ Feingold of Wisconsin wrote in an e-mail sent to 3 million people nationwide.

"It's time for every member of the Senate to send an important message that we must change course," the senators wrote, imploring recipients to "take a stand against the senseless 'stay the course' Bush policy" and tell their senators to vote with the two Democrats.

In what promises to be a highly partisan election-year showdown Wednesday, the GOP-controlled Senate plans to take up the proposal by Kerry and Feingold that would require the Bush administration to withdraw all combat troops from Iraq by July 1, 2007. Redeployment would begin immediately, under the proposal


snip

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060621/ap_on_go_co/us_iraq

[politicasista]

18. This sucks

Even worse is that now some are blaming Kerry for not sticking to the official date and calling him a "waffler" for not sticking to the truth about Iraq instead of the democrats that are making him look bad. :-(

[wisteria]

20. Both Feingold and Kerry agreed to the new date and we all

know it was done to gain more support and make more people feel comfortable with the date. I am certain Kerry would prefer his original date and doesn't hold out to much hope for improvement by June 07.
Don't let it all bother you to much. This was an extremely nasty piece, but in Washington,where this piece originated, nasty crap like this goes on all the time. Kerry was bashed before on the Alito filibuster. He got it from all sides then and the party was once again concerned about how his actions would affect the elections. If Kerry were President, he would be criticized also.

Kerry is right on Iraq. it isn't his fault others are dragging their feet. Unfortunately, this whole war will pay out for as long as the Repubs want it to,until we regain some power. It is just to bad the current leadership in the party doesn't see that now is the time to take on Rove. They are coming from a weak position and we can actually gain some ground if they would only take a strong,bold stand on Iraq.

[politicasista]

21. You're right

I guess I am getting disallusioned with people blaming Kerry for "dividing the party" on Iraq instead of putting the blame where it belongs.

[Mass]

22. This is not a surprise. It is clear that many people are irritated by

the fact that Kerry is ready to act as a leader. They want him to disappear.

Anyway, all this comes to is to avoid embarrassing Hillary. There is no surprise that the three expressing their displeasure at Kerry are Reid (hand-picked by her), Schumer and Dodd.

[Mass]

23. I reread the article. It would appear that the guilty parties are the

other presidential candidates that Kerry is forcing to make a choice (Dodd, Biden, and Hillary - though she is more clever than to say something). Note how everybody else is unnamed and rumor. Typical from the NYTimes reporting.

[karynnj]

25. Great observation

Biden has been so nasty almost since the election. What bothers me about his mischaracterizations is that he is supporting the RW charges against all Democrats. This goes beyond being defensive when it's Kerry, this is a policy issue. Biden could accurately argue why his policy is better - instead he distorts Kerry's position.

I guess by buying the Boston Globe, the NYT inherited their view of Kerry.

[Mass]

26. As you noted earlier, it looks a lot like for the Alito filibuster.

(and Biden and Clinton are now co-sponsor for the Levin amendment).

[wisteria]

31. Well, I am surprised not- Biden and Clinton supporting the Levin

amendment who would have though? They are hiding out behind this amendment hoping they can remain neutral yet still criticize Bush on the war. It is a weak-we stand for nothing amendment that will come back to haunt them. Kerry has this right, but they will never admit it. Would I ever want either of these two as president- absolutely not.

[_dynamicdems]

27. This is very frustrating.

There isn't much you can do about self-interest in the Democratic Party. We have our assholes too and anyone who puts their presidential aspirations ahead of the welfare of troops who are being killed in a senseless war, is a first class asshole.

We can't stop them from being assholes but we can stop giving them money and voting for them. The Senate is not high school and these cliques and power struggles completely turn me off. Apparently, there is a lot of jealousy aimed at Senator Kerry. You can see it in the way they bunch together to make fun of him. This shows a decided lack of leadership. Seriously, would you want someone that behaves this childishly running our country?

I'll never give a red cent to any of them, unless it is through Senator Kerry. Period.

[europegirl4jfk]

28. "Someone else will deal with politics"

Very nasty NYT article but I think what Kerry says here is what really counts - and what resonates with the American people:

"I'm doing what I think is the right thing to do as a policy matter," he said, "for our troops and for the country. Someone else will deal with politics."

[karynnj]

29. You are entirely right

That one comment puts things in perspective. It's clear the writer suggests that the main concern of the others is politics. That is actually disturbing as it casts the other Democrats in a very bad light. This could lead a neutral person to think the Democrats are divided between the kooky Kerry and Feingold and the cynical politicians considering political gain over the lives of soldiers.

Kerry's answer reflects what he said in Boston and elsewhere since then, he can't be a politician who stays quiet when it's known the policy isn't working. I think we will hear Kerry on more talk shows repeating that his comments on the Vietnam wall and poiticians not speaking out. After Kerry's comments, he really couldn't agree to the Reid et al position - it is exactly what he spoke against.

The other weird thing in the article is that she says Feingold was willing to compromise, but that absolutely doesn't show in Feingold's comment where he emphasized that he was the first to call for withdrawal a year ago.

[wisteria]

30. I noticed that too. My thought was the writer did it to provide some

cover for Feingold. After all, the piece was meant to be a total smear of Kerry only.

[karynnj]

32. Or starting the Feingold smear

To all people who support Feingold's position on withdrawal, being willing to remove the withdrawal date would be "showing no spine", "having no principles" ... (we've all read DU dissapointment threads.) From Feingold's own comment in this article and on Dkos show he is proud to have called for a withdrawal date last year and was unlikely to backtrack.

My husband had the same impression as you - it was totally anti-Kerry.