How Kerry (and Edwards) should answer on the Iraq vote

[troublemaker]

I understand why the question is ticklish but it shouldn't be so difficult question to answer. I suggest this explanation for Kerry, Edwards and anyone else in Congress who happens to need it.

QUESTIONER: Senator Kerry, would you have voted the same way on the war, knowing what we know today?

SENATOR KERRY: That's an excellent question, and one that all of us serving in Congress have had to ask ourselves... particularly in light of some recent developments.

That fall, fall of 2002, President Bush was making preparations to confront Iraq in the United Nations and he came to Congress and asked us to authorize the use of force as a last resort because it would give America the strongest hand when we went to the UN. And I must say that the President's strategy worked very well at first. It was not at all certain that Saddam would ever let the UN inspectors back in, but he did. There were some small disputes along the way, but in general the inspectors in Iraq were allowed to search where and when they wanted to. In fact, as you'll recall, the inspectors found that one type of missile Saddam was building violated UN agreements and the inspectors started dismantling those missiles... they were dismantling those missiles only days before we went to war.

So the whole process was a great success for America, for us in Congress, for President Bush, and a success for the United Nations... for our allies. We got the inspectors back into Iraq without violence. And we were now getting really solid information about Iraq's weapons programs... much better information than we had been getting for years. It was something to be proud of.

Now here's the part historians will be talking about for a long time to come; for reasons none of us yet fully understand this administration just couldn't take yes for an answer... it was as if they felt compelled to find a way to turn a brilliant diplomatic victory into a tragic mistake. Rather than letting the inspectors disarm Iraq the Bush administration ordered the inspectors back out of Iraq and started a war. There was no reason for it... nothing had happened to require it. They just did it.

You know my colleagues on the Senate Intelligence committee have recently found... and it was a unanimous finding, Republicans and Democrats alike... not one single one of President Bush's justifications for this war has turned out to be true. No weapons of mass destruction, no connection to Osama Bin Laden... A failure like that makes America's work in the world all that much harder. It makes it harder for us to do good in the world and it makes it harder for us to keep ourselves safe here at home.

Why did President Bush start this war? Only he really knows the answer to that.

So, back to your question, would I vote the same way today? The answer is no. These last 20 months have taught us all a lot about President Bush's character... his judgment. It was unthinkable to those of us serving in Congress that any American President would succeed in getting the UN inspectors back into Iraq, and then would invade the country anyway. It made no sense. It flew in the face of every promise the President had made to Congress... had made to the American people.

If I'm fortunate enough to become President there may come a time when I will have to ask Congress to extend me their trust just as this President asked my colleagues and me for our trust. And if that happens, I can promise everyone watching tonight that I will not abuse that trust.

So what's off about this; since they are not employing this line of explanation, why not? (I'm a realist--I expect them to use what works.) Too hawkish? Too dovish? Too candid? Too negative?

[mzmolly]

1. I LOVE IT! Absolutely perfect. Send this to the campaign quickly.

It's the absolute truth!

[emulatorloo]

2. How about this alternative?

Puts the blame squarely on Bush, but provides no easy FlipFlop sound bites for next Bush Hate Ad.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/10/politics/campaign/11TEXT.html?pagewanted=1

Q.What if the vote were today?

KERRY: Look, the vote is not today and that's it. I agree completely with Senator Edwards. It's a waste of time. It's not what this is about. We voted the way we voted based on the information in front of us, based on that moment in time. And it was the right vote at that time based on that information. Period. And this president not only abused the intelligence and the information, for which he is responsible, not just Mr. Tenet - not just the vice president, not Secretary Rumsfeld - the president. You know, Harry Truman's sign didn't say, "The buck stops at the Pentagon," or "The buck stops at the intelligence agency," and the fact is that we authorized the president to use force in a responsible way, and I have said for months, you know, I have said it to you, I have said it across the country: this president abused the authority that he was given, by abusing his own promises to the country as to how he would build a coalition and how he would go to war.

Q.Did he mislead you, did he mislead Congress, you, and the American people?

KERRY: Over a period of time, there were a number of misleading statements made by the president. He certainly misled America about nuclear involvement. And he misled America about the types of weapons that were there, and he misled America about how he would go about using the authority he was given. "Going to war as a last resort" means something to me. The president did not go to war as a last resort, period. Moreover it's the responsibility of a president, if you are going to go to war, having said we're going to do all that's necessary, to do all that's necessary. He didn't. Because he had no plan for winning the peace. It is utterly extraordinary the level of miscalculation of this administration, as to what they would find in Iraq and what was going to be necessary. They discarded their own professional military evaluations, from General Shinseki and others, they disrespected professional military careers, turned their backs on their own State Department's plans, and arrogantly believed. . . . And they were wrong. And soldiers lost their lives because they were wrong. And America's paying -billions of dollars because they were wrong, and allies are not with us because they were wrong. I think there is no greater responsibility of the president of the United States.

[troublemaker]

3. I don't like the implication that they were fooled

or that is was ever a correct vote given any set of information.

If one was conscious that they were judging Bush's fitness it was a terrible vote. That's why he needs to spin it as trying to help Bush... rooting for Bush to succeed.

He says all that, but the tone is defensive. When I read this in the NYT it read a little like someone complaining about getting burned in a crooked poker game.

I was thinking What Would Clinton Do? He would be philosophical about it. I think it's important to admit to an error in judgment in trusting Bush, and to seek empathy with the voters saying essentially, "He got us all, didn't he?" Not angry, but more "sadder but wiser."

And the most forgivable reason for a mistake (to a swing voter) is patriotism.(That would have been a terrible argument in the primaries, but I think it's correct in the general election.)

[emulatorloo]

6. "Correct Vote"

If the principle is non-proliferation of weapons, then the principle is correct whether or not Bush trumped up the evidence in this particular case.

People don't want Bad People to have Bad Weapons. That doesn't change because one President abused his trust.

People, including Senators, ought to be able to trust the President not to lie, exaggerate, etc when contemplating war.

People, including Senators, need to be able to trust the Sec of Defence when he says he will do everything possible to exhaust diplomacy and let the inspectors finish their job.

I don't expect John Kerry to put on Sack Cloth and Ashes and talk about his "mistaken vote" just to provide Rush Limbaugh a quote to replay out of context, or to provide an out of context quote for the next Bush Ad.

[mike_c]

4. gag....

I certainly hope he can find the cajones to do better than this....

[Droopy]

5. Very eloquent, but

I think this is what Kerry is already saying in not so many words. Basically, I trusted Bush to do the right thing and he didn't.

[BillZBubb]

7. For a troublemaker, you sure wrote a great piece!

That is the BEST response I've seen.