Are All The Anti-Kerry Folk Here, Anti-Hillary As Well?

[THUNDER HANDS]

Kerry seems to be getting the brunt of the heat over the Iraq resolution and (obviously) I feel this is a little unwarranted.

I am curious to find out, though, if the anti-Kerry posters would feel the same way about Hillary Clinton if she were to jump into the race.

Or, for that matter, if Hillary decides to run in 2008 or 2012.

How long will you hold this one (IMO, fairly meaningless) resolution vote over these Dems' heads?

If Hillary goes on the ticket in 2008 or beyond, are you (you being the anti-Kerry person) going to fire up and go "no way I'm voting for her, even if she could be the first woman president, years ago she voted to..."

Well?

[ibegurpard]

1. I think Hillary would catch plenty of flack for it as well.

She already has. The fact that she's not running is certainly keeping the heat off of her on that issue. Who knows whether it will be an issue if she runs later on? It will depend on what happens between now and then.

[hedda_foil]

2. YUP!

[Andy_Stephenson]

43. Hillarty with her votes on Homeland Gestapo

War and patriot act...lost mine...as did any rep or senator that voted for them. That is my personal line in the sand...I will not cross.

[RichM]

3. Oh, so you want to call the Resolution Vote "meaningless," do you?

First, I'll answer your questions, then I'll comment on calling that vote meaningless.

Yes, I'm anti-Kerry, and equally anti-Hillary.

How long will I hold their Iraq votes against them? Permanently. Betrayal, hypocrisy & cowardice are serious "flaws" in so-called political leaders.

Re your trying to affix the label "meaningless" to what was arguably the most fateful & significant Congressional vote of recent years: you demonstrate nicely that Democrats have (generally speaking & with a handful of very honorable exceptions) no principles, and no coherent political analysis. When I see a Democrat trying to downplay the significance of "Yes" votes on the Iraq resolution, I feel a blend of pity & despair. Bush hung his so-called "doctrine of pre-emptive war" out there for months. Any Democrat who failed to denounce it & oppose it at every turn -- let alone vote for it on evidence we all knew was phony at the time -- is a disgrace. If the Democratic Party doesn't use its entire strength to oppose criminal outrages like that, they can & should go right to hell.

[bryant69]

6. What happens after the Democratic Party goes to hell?

The Republicans get to run everything forever? That doesn't sound like the happiest of endings.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[THUNDER HANDS]

7. why I think it's meaningless

I knew this would probably upset someone, so here's my rationale for why I called it "meaningless."

Because:

(a) it was bound to pass anyway.

(b) it was designed to make Democrats look like pacifist wimps.

(c) Bush was going to war regardless.

People were going to die needlessly in this war. But the blood is on the hands of those who thought it up and carried it out. Not on the Democrats who voted 'yes' whose 'no' votes would have made no difference.

And if Kerry's 'yes-but' helps get him to the White House, then it was more than worth it.

Next time he'll be in a position to actually stop a war from taking place by not starting one in the first place.

[JVS]

13. Point (A) is incorrect

It was bound to pass in the house, but in the Senate it could have been defeated. Republican senator Chafee voted against it and if the Democratic senators had all united against it there would have been 51 votes against the resolution.

[THUNDER HANDS]

17. um...no

You're telling me that DINO senators like Zell Miller, et all would have stood up to Bush?

There were quite a few Dem senators who voted for the resolution, not just Kerry or Hillary.

[JVS]

19. So you are defending Kerry's not standing up to Bush by pointing...

out that there are DINOs in the party that wouldn't stand up to Bush. Do you see the irony here?

[RichM]

23. I guess the idea is that the presence of some DINO's justifies

EVERYONE being a DINO! Then it's nobody's fault -- you can just point your finger at the DINO in front of you! LOL!

[JVS]

25. Really. Did any of our senators have mothers and fathers that said...

"If everyone else jumped off a bridge would you do it too?"

[THUNDER HANDS]

24. it's not irony...it's coincidence

They didn't have the votes.

End. Of. Story.

If Kerry's vote was the deciding factor, which it wasn't even close to being, then I'd agree with you.

Do I think Kerry's vote was part political calculation - sure do.

Do I fault him for that?

A little.

Am I going to hold it against him for life?

Hell no.

[JVS]

28. It's Irony

You are saying that it is OK for your candidate to act like a DINO. Why not just vote for Lieberman? At least he believes in the wars he starts.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

34. No, you are saying it.

No, you are saying it. When you argue with the words you put in other people's mouths, it is a form of masturbation.

[JVS]

35. Well he can correct my interpretation of his words at any time.

But he hasn't yet, and I find it weak to point at Miller to excuse Kerry

[THUNDER HANDS]

39. this is what I meant

There are Democrats who COULDN'T vote against the resolution...for political reasons.

Thus, preventing any mathematical way that the resolution could have failed.

Kerry might have been playing politics, but I have faith in him that if he did, he did it with the best of intentions.

IE - getting himself in the White House and ousting the Baffoon in Chief.

If it does help him get into the White House, then it was worth it.

[JVS]

40. Can you accept the fact that what he did...

for the sake of getting him into the whitehouse might prevent him from getting the nomination?

[THUNDER HANDS]

41. if it happens it happens

There are risks you have to take sometimes.

Do you think this was an EASY decision for Kerry?

He read the writing on the wall. He knew this was going to happen whether he voted 'no' or not.

He has to live with the consequences. I just wish more Dems could see things the way I do and root for both Kerry AND Dean because both would make the best presidents out of the Fellowship of Nine running right now.

[Andy_Stephenson]

44. So 10,000 Iraqi Dead and well over 300 American dead

is a fair price to pay so Kerry can capture the White House? Is that what I hear you saying?

[Pastiche423]

45. That's what it sounds like to me

He can wash the blood off of his hands, can't he? :eyes:

[THUNDER HANDS]

51. blood is not on HIS hands

it's on Bush's and Cheney's and Wolfowitz's, et all.

Saying that Bush and Kerry are morally equivilent is just outrageous.

Kerry didn't think up this scheme. He didn't plan it, authorize it or send the troops out there.

He voted for a resolution authorizing the president to go to the UN.

I'm still waiting for someone to show me Kerry's vote on a declaration of war.

Oh wait, there was none.

[Andy_Stephenson]

53. Here...let me educate you.

Taken from the resolution itself. Oh and if guns, tanks, planes, bombs, troops, etc etc etc are being used...I posit, it is a war.


"(a) AUTHORIZATION -- The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to -- (looks like a blank check to me)

(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and

(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.

(b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION -- In connection with the exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall, prior to such exercise or as soon thereafter as may be feasible, but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that --

(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and

(2) acting pursuant to this resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorists attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

[RichM]

20. Try & rebut this: The Dems' "Yes" votes gave Bush political cover, &

made it easier for him & his flunkies in the media to convince the public that the war had at least some degree of legitimacy.

The entire strategy of terrifying the public with horror stories about "Saddam's WMD" and the "imminent threat" he posed, was greatly strengthened by the fact that MOST Dem Senators, MANY Dem Reps, and MOST of the front-tier Dem presidential candidates, all went along with the administration's contentions.

Don't you think the war would have been a far tougher sell if ALL Congressional Democrats would not only have OPPOSED it, but loudly & frequently DENOUNCED it as being wholly based on fabrications & lies?

[THUNDER HANDS]

27. a tougher sell?

Sure.

But why place all the blame at the feet of Kerry?

He is, IMO, the best shot this party has of defeating Bush, and he's more liberal than any other legit candidate.

And how much were you willing to wager last year that we wouldn't find ANY WMD's at all?

[JVS]

29. Maybe because he is the one trying to become president

If he were running for senator in Georgia, like Zell Miller does every 6 years, I could understand his support of the war out of political reasons. But he is running for the Democratic candidacy in the 2004 presidential election. And since many Democrats are anti-war it looks like he misjudged the desire of his constituents.

Edited the state to make it more real life

[RichM]

31. I don't place all the blame on Kerry. I blame Hillary, & every single Dem

that voted for that atrocity -- though more blame goes to the more prominent party members.

Kerry is not more liberal than any other "legit" candidate. There's nothing whatever about Kucinich that is not "legit." And I don't really see what's not "legit" about Sharpton, either. You must mean something more like "current frontrunner."

FWIW, I was thoroughly convinced last fall that we'd find no WMD's (assuming they weren't planted by US forces). I never even considered the possibility that Bush wasn't lying.

[sangha]

37. Everyone but Bush*.......nt

.

[Eloriel]

15. Couldn't have said it better myself

Tho I might add one word:
Betrayal, hypocrisy & cowardice -- and TREASON. Figurative treason if not actual (legal) treason.

For me, Hillary has the added burden that I've never liked her and do NOT want to see her run for President at all, anyway, even aside from the war vote. I tried literally for years to like her -- all the way until maybe sometime last year. I finally gave up, especially as her DLC "record" in the Senate grew.

Bah!

But yes, the war vote would be enough for me too.

Eloriel

[Egnever]

54. Well said!

And you point out everything that is wrong with the democratic party as it stands right now.

I am right with you anyone that voted for that act is politically dead to me.

[mitchtv]

4. I think that Sen kerry should find some time

to come and help Gov Davis in Calif. and or Bustamante . It will help Californians get to know him. Bill and Hillary are said to be planning to help.It would behove him to learn a little Spanish too.It is not difficult.

[blm]

10. His campaign has been

quietly working for Davis for quite awhile and Kerry has spoken out several times. The press won't report it.

Lehane has been with Davis now for about two months, I believe.

[sujan]

5. I dont see the correlation but I am both

[efhmc]

8. Libermann is the only Dem person I am anti.

He had absolutely nothing to offer.

[xxqqqzme]

9. 'fairly meaningless'????

'fairly meaningless'??? Wow, never heard it described like that B4! The senators abrogating their constitutionally defined duty 2 the lying, devious, corrupted, rat-bastard, white house squatter neither deserve nor should even have the balls 2 ask 4 our support. The gall, the arrogance! Meaningless??? I marched, along w/ millions globally, because I knew it was all lies & mirrors; and my only source was the internet and my powers of deduction. I would think all those democratic senators joining in the war drum beat, had access to better & more complete information than I. Forget - not likely. Other than 12/12/00, I have never felt so abandoned politically; that my voice, along w/ of 100s of 1000s other voices, made absolutely no difference. I do not treat that vote as meaningless!

[THUNDER HANDS]

14. hey, I marched too buddy

I marched against Bush

NOT KERRY
NOT HILLARY
NOT EVEN FREAKIN' LIEBERMAN

I marched against those who conceptualized this war and the folks who lied to bring about it's passage.

But harping on that resolution is a ticket to nowhere. The war was going to go on without it.

It was NOT, I repeat, NOT, a declaration of war.

[robbedvoter]

32. I marched against the war - not bush at the time

The war doesn't seem to bother you enough - you know, lives lost and all that messy stuff - a bit bigger that the whole political thingy. I was always finding excuses for Dems - always understood the need to negociate and find compromise - especially being in the minority. BUT NOT ON WAR. One doesn't compromise on human lives - that's where my inderstanding ends.

[imhotep]

11. yup

Hillary would be even worse than Kerry.
She can single handedly motivate millions of republicans.

[rucky]

12. Rethinking Kerry from a strategic standpoint...

I've never been anti- either one of those Senators, but I'm rethinking my view that the Iraq resolution is a deal-braker for my support. It's not because I agree that vote was "fairly meaningless" at all, tho.

Think about it this way: The candidate that comes in with the "I was against it all along" approach doesn't have the same relatability to the voters as an "I was duped, too" message does.

Kerry should play that up in his campaign, because it magnifys the deceptiveness of the Bushlies, when even somebody of Kerry's caliber fell for them. Most Americans can relate because they fell for it as well (as many continue to do). From that standpoint, Kerry could make a more presuave arguement against Bushlies than some other candidate who was against it all along. Those voters probably wouldn't appreciate any implication that they were stupid for supporting the war. Freepers also can't voice any doubts about Kerry's willingness to go to war in general.

I'm not sure how Kerry is handling the Iraq vote attack, but it would win many points, character-wise, if he voices any feelings of betrayl that he may have.

I'm rooting for Dean, BTW...

[Eloriel]

18. Why, shoot yeah

Let's just forget principle, not to mention the Constitution and international law.

Let's forget 8 - 20,000 dead Iraqi civilians, thousands of dead (some of them napalmed) Iraqi troops, Depleted Uranium killing Iraqis for millennia to come, and our own nearly 300 dead Americans and more to come, thousands injured and thousands more traumatized by war, and all sent on a mission of pure greed.

After all, NOTHING's more important than political advantage. Absolutely nothing.

Yes. I think you're a Kerry man for sure.

Eloriel

[THUNDER HANDS]

22. in this case

If it helped a Democrat to defeat Bush...yes it is more important.

I'm sorry the war happened. I protested against it. But you couldn't stop what Bush was trying to do.

And did.

You can't undo it.
You can't take it back.

You can only move forward. And if Kerry's stance helps him defeat Bush, so be it.

If his stance helps Howard Dean get the nomination and HE defeats Bush, so be it.

Just as long as Bush is out of office and doesn't start WWIII, I'll be happy.

That, I believe, is the only prinicple that matters.

[rucky]

33. What part of "from a strategic standpoint" did you miss?

ARRRRRGH....I'm not even going to go there.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

36. Kerry is in step with the electorate - but out of step with DU

Kerry is in step with the electorate - but out of step with DU. And you have articulated it nicely.

[Andy_Stephenson]

48. Kerry, if he was really not in GW's pocket...

should know what a liar he is and that he could not be trusted. This statement IMHO is a cop out.

"Kerry should play that up in his campaign, because it magnifys the deceptiveness of the Bushlies, when even somebody of Kerry's caliber fell for them. Most"

[clar]

16. Well,

I'm not anti-Kerry despite disagreeing profoundly with his vote. I don't agree that it was meaningless, and I don't think dems in the Senate, with a few notable exceptions, fought hard enough for alternatives. Having said that, I'm not about to cast aside a man who's served the country and liberal causes well because of a particular vote. As far as Hillary goes, I don't like her. I don't really know what it is about her that bothers me so much, but that's how I feel. It's a visceral thing.

[Eloriel]

21. I have the same problem re Hillary

I've never quite figured it out either. The closest I can come is that I have never felt I've seen "the real Hillary," ever, under any circumstance. I've just never seen any authenticity. Or if I did, I found it sorely lacking. I don't think I've seen any real warmth, either.

Eloriel

[Andy_Stephenson]

50. Kerry has missed more votes than any other Senator.....

how do you know he is liberal if he is always missing votes? Let me add one caveat. He does show up and vote with Bush often.

[robbedvoter]

26. Sadly, yes. I voted for Hillary and was an enthusiastic supporter

But, just like Kerry, she betrayed her constituents - we all asked her to oppose the war. I don't know what were you after, but it's the issues at stake, not personalities (and yeah, Hillary is more alive and interesting than Kerry - but just as non-desirable to me now as whatever)

[Pastiche423]

30. Fairly meaningless?

The (pre-emptive) murder of thousands of innocent lives is fairly meaningless? How can you read the stories of our troops killing innocent men, women and children and call that vote fairly meaningless?

Is your life fairly meaningless? Would you support someone that voted for your death?

What is worse in Kerry's case, is that he still believes he voted correctly.

I can be swayed on some issues, but not on life or death.

IMHO, those that voted for the slaughter, stand shoulder to shoulder w/*.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

38. What should I do when MY Senator is up for reelection? vote republican?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

47. Third party?

I sent a letter to one of my senators (Maria Cantwell) who voted to support BushCo and his war informing her that though I had donated to her election previously, and voted for her, and she could no longer count on my support unless she could explain for, or apologize (publicly) for her sell-out vote.

Her response was a letter that said pretty much the same as Kerry's lame explanations.

Hopefully, she won't run again and let an anti-war liberal take her place. If she does run..It's Green for me.

[THUNDER HANDS]

52. well

I'm sure you're making some Republican somewhere very happy.

[Andy_Stephenson]

49. Find a dem that won't

Enable!

[Upfront]

42. No Matter

Dean is the next president, so who cares.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

46. No to Kerry, no to Hillary.

Both sold out..cheap. And, their mealy mouthed excuse making is pathetic.