Reasons Why Top Democrats Refuse to Talk About "The Memo"

[Dr Fate]

By "Top Democrats" we are talking about Dean, Kerry, Hillary, Reid, Obama- high profile, quotable household named Democratic "leaders." NOT Conyers-et al, who are virtually unknown outside of DU and Air America.

I've tried to list all the various reasons for this that I have read here on DU.

[AUYellowDog]

1. I think

that they are going to wait it out. I think that they'll start off weakening the Republicans with the :nuke: option and then kill them with Downing Street. That seems the most logical reason to me.

[CWebster]

4. Yeah right

It is either they got a secret strategy or they are choosing their battles wisely.

So predictable. How many years has it been already?

[Warren Stupidity]

it is a very clever secret strategy

after the fristian-fascists have established one party rule and after the military is completely under the control of the American Taliban, and after the courts are packed with radical religious fascists, and after every mainstream media outlet has been rathered into submission THEN, and only then will OUR CLEVER TRAP HAVE BEEN SPRUNG.

This bullshit is not going to end until we are all out in the streets with our lives on the line. Then, for each of us, it will end, one way or another.

[Dr Fate]

8. Waiting for what- for Rove to come up with good counter attacks?

Or waiting until we are in another fake war?

[Al-CIAda]

12. I'm still waiting for Kerry to reveal his secret plan to call out the

STOLEN ELECTION.

[Dr Fate]

15. I'll give him a pass on that one. Just mention "The Memo."

And it's not just about kerry- none of the top DEMS seem interested in helping us spread the truth about this.

[bearfan454]

54. Aint that the truth ! n/t

[Kolesar]

69. Whatever

Nevermind

[LynneSin]

73. Actually, I have to agree with that - Dean spoke about focus

He said the biggest problem with the democratic party was in the past they got too out of focus with too many issues and ended up not doing justice for any of them.

The biggest 2 items on our plate is Socialy Security and the Nuclear Option. I think the democrats are doing well and they all seem to be united against dismantling Social Security AND eliminating the filibuster. And the amazing thing is the republicans are starting to fall apart on both of these issues with the more moderate republicans already coming out against these items. I also like the fact that there are some moderate republicans starting to use the fact that there is enough of them to create a caucus that could altar the Frist plan.

I think once the Filibuster is done on Tuesday then this might be a good time to bring the memo into focus provided that we can get solid proof that this is a real memo and not another Rathergate

[Dr Fate]

78. THis is THE most important issue. More important than SS or filibusters.

If Bush starts another fake war, do you really think anyone is going to be talking about SS, Healthcare, Micheal Bolton, etc?

If we dont stop them, it is perpetual war- and all other issues will be 3rd string or non-existent. It will be just like the days after 9-11 right up to Iraq- but perpetually. We have time to stop it- but we have to act soon.

I hope they take it on after the filibuster as you say.

[LynneSin]

79. That's why I ultimately polled about authenticating the memo first

Seriously, we've been screwed by this stuff before BIG TIME! I hardly doubt that Dean and the democrats are totally ignoring it. But if we're going after it we need to be sure 100% that this thing is real. If not that memo could be a major hurt in our party!

[Imagevision]

83. But I thought every vote would be counted Mr. Kerry??

We got shafted from the get-go!! Stealing the election via computer manipulation, disenfranchisement etc. So what's all this bullshit about democracy?

Bush and Hitler, they're close.

[katinmn]

2. They think it's another Rathergate/Newsweek and let's not

forget CNN thing (the exec who said military were targeting reporters and then retracted or resigned).

I think they are afraid to be targeted by Rove's Media Machine.

[Dr Fate]

3. You mean the media machine that is SO nice to them already?

Yeah- good point- lets stay on their good side. ;)

[CWebster]

6. Right-well, what good are they then

if they are too ascareded to do their job?

[ccarter84]

5. It can't be a Rove thing, he's crafty, but

He (*edit Rove) wouldn't be too smart to try and screwover our main ally during his party's election in Britain, and second...atleast as far as I know, british media is a few steps higher on the class level than our poor excuse for media

[Warren Stupidity]

7. it is a combination

1) they are afraid to be painted as unpatriotic and/or get trapped in the rovian disinformation web.

2) many of them supported the war, bought the bullshit or continue to subscribe to regular bullshit deliveries, and are currently in the 'well we can't pull out now' rational for why we are killing iraqis in large numbers.

[Dr Fate]

10. I see- they think telling the truth is unpatriotic.

Hmmm- I guess I could learn understand that.

[Kolesar]

13. yeah, I think you got it--I must note one thing

Per your (2), Dean and Obama had no IWR vote and were vocal antiwar candidates. Dean has to measure his words and not discuss policy, so what is Obama's excuse? Maybe he is simply intimidated by the whole process.

[Dr Fate]

16. I dont understand why Dean should not have an opinion on this.

As it is, he has not even mentioned it in passing.

How about he take 15 seconds out of his busy schedule and say: "I'm concerend about this memo- I think this may warrant an under-oath investigation."

[Kolesar]

24. He has been directed and/or agreed to not "discuss policy"

It all seems odd to me. Where does the line between policy and procedure exist? What about the responsibility of rallying the party? I don't know the answers to these questions.

[Dr Fate]

25. He discusses policy everyday. Social Security, jobs, filibuster, etc.

And asking why this memo is not being investigated is not technically discussing policy- it's prompting Bush to discuss HIS policy.

[Kolesar]

26. No contrary arguement here! ... eom

[Al-CIAda]

9. Complicity is running away with it.

And rightly so.

[wyldwolf]

49. hey! I would LOVE to see...

...a link, source, anything reputable that shows Dems were complicit.

[Marnieworld]

11. Where's the "They're a bunch of spineless pussies" choice?

What are they waiting for? An audio tape? A video tape? What exactly?

[Al-CIAda]

14. Their checks from the corporations.

[killbotfactory]

17. Everyone in DC knows Bush wanted his fucking war ages ago

It's an open secret no one wants to touch for some reason.

With the Bush mafia in power, who the hell knows why.

[emulatorloo]

18. Because, Sadly, The memo is not the 'Smoking Gun' we want it to be

there is too much wiggle room for Bush admin in the memo.

It is somebody's notes from a meeting. It is somebody summarizing what somebody else is saying what Bush's policy is. Way too removed. Too much room for the Bush admin to say - "oh that is just their interpretation, and they are mistaken."

It is not even notes on a meeting w Bush ala O'Neill or Richard Clarke who actually reported on meetings with Bush admin wanting to incade Iraq from the get-go -- and top Dems certainly talked about Paul O'Neill and Richard Clarke.

OTOH I understand there are MORE DOCUMENTS TO COME which may have some directly damning stuff.

[Dr Fate]

19. Why not make THEM split those hairs instead of doing it for them.

Do you really think Republicans on TV defensively saying what you just said will help them at all?

If this is really why top DEMS cant even MENTION it in passing, then I think its a bad reason.

Having the Bush admin on TV for a news cycle or two or three making excuses about this will not help them- it will plant more seeds. At best, the whole thing could blow up.

The DEMS could say "Unless Bush is hiding somthing, he should go under oath and clear all this up."

[NYCGirl]

30. You are absolutely correct on that. NT

[Dr Fate]

37. So let THEM spend all week splitting hairs over whether they lied or not.

And then keep asking "Fine- so you would be willing to say this under oath, right?"

"We KNOW the WMDs do not exist- this memo seems to match that reality. Until we see some WMDs, these excuses don't add up as well as the memo does."

And it took about 15 seconds to say that. How long does it take to rebut it?

[LittleClarkie]

38. Part of me keeps thinking

that this is evidence of something we already all knew, even the leaders.

I'm wondering if they're thinking it's beside the point. Yeah, we have solid evidence of what they've already been saying, which is that we were misled into this war, but still it doesn't change anything. We're still there now, and since the election, many don't feel we can leave.

This whole polls seems like more circular firing squad stuff to me. It's one thing to say our leaders are wrong. It's another to belittle them.

[Dr Fate]

41. I'm not the one who refuses to talk about the memo.

I'm tired of being accused of being a "DEM basher" because I want top DEMs to stand up and take 15 seconds to put Bush on the spot about his lies.

Conyers, regular old Democrats on the street and others were not afraid to talk about it. Other DEMS are.

Blaming other rank & file Democrats is a temporary excuse at best- but ride it if you must.

Personally, I'm tired of BEGGING Democrats to talk about the things that concern many of us the most.

[leyton]

20. Question - how does publicizing the memo help us?

We only get so much air time for our side, so why should we spend it on publicizing the memo? We have to look ahead to 2006 and 2008, and I don't think the war will be nearly as relevant then as it was in 2002 and 2004. Bush is on his way out, and as for Congress, a number of our own voted for the war resolution and in targeting Republicans but not Democrats on that issue we look hypocritical. Social security, the budget, the filibuster - far more potent issues, and also ones where there is still time for the country to do the right thing.

[Dr Fate]

21. It only takes about 15 seconds to mention it.

I'm not even talking about them hammering it as an issue at this point (although I think they should.)

I'm just wondering why they apprently dont have an opinion about it. How about a simple "This raises concerns- I wish this would be investigated further."

And a war that is costing us BILLIONS is a pretty "potent" issue if you ask most folks at the water cooler or in the grocery line. Especially at a time when more & more folks are realizing they have been had.

What would it do if it became a household scandal? It would whittle away at GOP "moral" and political capital via "Scandal fatigue."

It would provide a talking point for ANY issue: "We cant trust these guys- they lied to us."

[ieoeja]

22. Other - are you interpreting "fix" correctly?

First time I read it I thought that fixing the data meant packaging it, cleaning it up, making the connections, etc. After reading the comments on DU, I went back and re-read it. I could easily read "fix" as "rig" the way DUers read it. But only when I wanted to read it that way.

It still comes up as innocuous if I read it for myself. And if that is how the administration played it, I think most people would believe them.

[Dr Fate]

23. Make them split those hairs. Ask them to say it "under oath."

It takes about 15 seconds to say "Okay- so you would not mind going under oath and saying that-right?"

"By the way- where are the WMDs?-the fact that they never turned up seems to match this memo more than what you are saying."

Will the people buy the excuse you crafted for the the GOP? Most polls show that people think he lied- "The Memo" will add fuel to that fire.

I takes 15 seconds for top Democrats to mention the memo- it will take a lot more than that for the GOP to explain their way out of it.

[LittleClarkie]

27. You forgot "Other"

Other:
The Pottery Barn. We broke it. Regardless of whether we're supposed to be there, we want to fix it. That's why the Dems will sometimes call for MORE troups, not less. But the neocons insist on war on the cheap.

Other:
The Ed Schultz. They bought the false bill of goods in the first place with the misplaced idea that somebody should pay for attacking us. To admit the policy is wrong is to admit our part in it. This one is shaky, as it applies to the American people more than our Democrats.

Other:
Some, like Kerry, really do think we need to fight terror. So they believe in the cause, but not the FUBAR that is Iraq. And they don't know what to do about that.

[Dr Fate]

31. Telling the truth about Bush's lies does not hurt Democrats.

Starting a national dialouge over whether Bush lied does not hurt Democrats.

Admitting that you wanted to trust Bush- but now you realize you should not have, is somthing most Americans can identify with. Many Americans who "supported" the war also, now realize they were lied to.

Further- pointing out that we cant trust Bush ("the man who lied his way into a war that costs us billions") on ANY issue is somthing worth hammering home- it could help us on all issues.

"This is the guy who lied about why we are at WAR- we cant put ANYTHING past him, can we?"

We need to tell the TRUTH about Bush- we are not the ones who lied.

[Generator]

28. I honestly don't know

But my idea which the Dems need to realize is (if they every wake the fuck up and realize the pure evil they are against) is throw whatever shit at them and hope it sticks. WHO cares? They have nothing to lose. The only thing they have to lose is their pathetic jobs and really what good are those jobs if they cannot accomplish a damn thing? Get a private sector job-Dems-those pay more anyway.

And down the line someone said that it doesn't look that damming. But it clearly states that Britian knew in July of 2002 that war was a DONE DEAL. Fit the intelligence to the plan of attack.

It's like saying I know I'm going to cheat on my husband-I can't prove he's cheated on me-but that's my rationale-now go find the info to support it. And they did BY MAKING IT UP-relying on forgeries ( Joe Wilson and Niger) it's all connnected-relying on false informats like "curveball" and knowing damn well-COLIN POWELL- that the evidence wasn't there. The tubes weren't to make uranium. Lie after lie after lie and they all knew it.

And the bigger point is-if a President whose most sacred duty is the BOY WHO CRIED WOLF-why would anyone ever trust him in foreign policy again? The American need to know that a liar as commander in chief is a direct danger to them. The Dems have to play as nasty as they can. They have nothing to lose.

If Dean doesn't mention this on meet the press and goes on about abortion or whatever I will have given up on him too. There are people dying right this minute-Americans for these lies-that is the biggest issue this country faces besides the economy and everybody knows it. So drop the social issues crap, Dean. Now is not the time.

We have traitors to national defense in the White House.

[Chicago Democrat]

29. An excellent question.

Well thought out...



Generally they are afraid. VERY AFRAID.

[paulk]

32. it's possible they're more focused on other things

that they feel are more important. Like the on going Senate debate on the "nuclear option", which is IMHO (and perhaps their's) the greatest threat to our democracy in 200 or so years.

The Bolton thing also comes to mind - you know, the kind of stuff legislators have to actually deal with.

[Dr Fate]

33. They say over and over that Bolton helped fudge intelligence.

The memo seems to be directly related to that.

Seems like they could take 15 extra seconds and mention the memo along with these other things that are also important.

Call me crazy, but in a free country, having a President start a war based on lies is a pretty darn big issue- arguably BIGGER than anything else.

Are we really saying that a hoax that started a war that is costing us billions of dollars is not worth mentioning- much less discussing in detail?

Do we really think "Bolton" will be an issue for Swing voters in 2006 or 2008? "The war" certainly will be.

[paulk]

36. re: what I'm saying is that they're doing their jobs

there are only so many hours in a day - so many issues a politician can deal with at a time.

Politicians don't control the news - they can only react to it, just like everyone else. What good would it do for a "leader" to speak up now when this story barely makes page 15 (in my local paper anyway).

The story is out there - Conyer's letter (signed by 88 Dems) is out there. If this thing grows legs, then we'll see... but, it's really in the hands of the media.

[Dr Fate]

39. It takes FIFTEEN SECONDS to mention "the memo."

So many hours in a day? It takes 15 seconds to mention it.

In the media's hands? So we are now counting on the Republican owned media to say what our leaders should say? Now I see why we lose elections.

it's not the job of Dean or elected leaders to talk about why we are in a war that costs billions???? That is O'Reilly(R) & Judy Woodruff's(R) job????

IF it grows legs? How about putting some legs on it oursleves!!!! If the top DEMS would talk about it- it would fool the RW echo chamber into defending it.

If they were ALL talking about it, it would BE news-especially if they made blunt accusations and used "hot" language.

"How DARE Dean "scream" about this fake memo!!! HOW DARE Hillary of all people demand Bush go under oath!!!"

If you are counting on the media to make this a story, you may as well count on Karl Rove to do it.

AMAZING.

[Doctor_J]

42. exactly

EVERY TIME A TV LIGHT GOES ON, mention the Downing Meeting Minutes, and then move on to something else.

BTW< I voted for Anthrax. I think the BFEE is going to get very violent before they let Junior go down.

[Dr Fate]

43. All you have to say is "This raises concerns. It should be investigated.."

"If the Republicans refuse to pursue an "under oath" investigation of this, we will know they are hiding somthing, wont we, Wolf?"

That takes approx. 15 seconds to say.

[paulk]

82. HOW do we put legs on it?

Democrats say things all the time that are directly critical of Bush and his policies. They end up on the cutting room floor.

There are bigger fish to fry - social security, the filibuster -

You've been posting variations on this thread for weeks now... people have tried over and over to explain to you how the media works - you ignore them and start another thread on "why don't the Democrats say this or that?" "Why don't the Democrats do this or do that?" Well maybe they don't because it DOESN'T WORK. Maybe they actually have a bit more experience dealing with the media than you.

The Democrats are focused on REAL things - things that will have a huge impact and that they just may be able to sway public opinion on. Things like, again, the filibuster. Social Security. What's the point of talking about this now? Ninety percent of the people won't even know what you're talking about. This has to be on the public screen before people will pay attention. If Democrats start talking about something no one knows about they'll be ignored, or worse, disbelieved.

[KoKo]

85. The question is: Do Dems support the "Doctrine of Pre-Emptive Strike?"

because that's the "Bush Doctrine" and it's a new Foreign Policy for the US. That's where the debated needs to be. As it stands now, because they refuse to discuss the Memo or where are the WMD, they are supporting this "Doctrine" without question. Every House and Senate member who voted for Iraq Resolution knew what they were doing. It's the ones who voted against it who knew that supporting IWR was supporting the New Bush Doctrine. They took our country down a road to hell with that and will now allow others in the world to follow suit by bombing wherever they feel it's necessary to protect themselves from US.

That's the discussion they don't want to have. They don't want us to know that this PNAC Doctrine will guide our foreign policy for decades.
:shrug:

[Radical Activist]

34. Because they supported the war.

They can't bring up the memo without admitting that they were foolishly taken it. That's the same reason Kerry wasn't an effective nominee. He couldn't criticize the reasons for the war in Iraq without looking like a fool for believing Bush or being a flip flopper. We need people who have courage. It pays off in the long run.

[Dr Fate]

35. It's time to come clean: "I should not have trusted Bush. I admit it."

"Most Americans also trusted Bush and they too realize they made a mistake. If Bush's defense is that we should not have trusted him, then I accept that charge- believe me, it wont happen again."

That is all they have to say- home run.

[pilgrimsoul]

40. Yep - all it takes is seven little words

I trusted my President...but he LIED.

[bvar22]

44. That would be the MOST POWERFUL and unifying...

...statement that a Democrat could possible make. The MEMO PROVES that bush* was lying every time he said that Congress had the SAME intelligence he (bush*) had and still voted for the WAR!

Simply, "I TRUSTED the President. He lied to me and to the World."(FULL STOP)
They don't need to elaborate, explain, expand, modify, provide nuance, or apologize.

[Dr Fate]

45. And most Americans IDENTIFY with that. Lots of folks trusted Bush.

Plenty of those coveted "swing voters" also "trusted Bush" but now know they were sold a bill of goods.

[Radical Activist]

66. Yep. Is that so hard?

We don't need to follow Bush's example of never admitting you were wrong.

[Stinky The Clown]

46. There is NO GOOD FUCKING REASON not to talk about this

Not one. None. No reason.

Oh yeah ..... there's one ...... balls.

Or lack thereof.

Now, I'm not calling for their collective heads on platters at a party meeting's buffet table ....... but it just goes to show how chickenshit they can sometimes be.

[Dr Fate]

48. But it does not stop us from crafting excuses.

We dont need excuses as to why we cant kick ass- we just need to kick some ass.

Excuses dont help- and neither does calling those who REFUSE to accept excuses "DEM bashers" or a "Circular firing squad."

Please, DO bring this up at your next DEM meeting.

[welshTerrier2]

47. I honestly don't know ...

i think it's important to recognize, as your question does, that we need to differentiate between the action (i.e. failing to talk about the memo) and the motivation for the action (i.e. the various poll options you provided) ...

i would happily join any chorus criticizing the Dems you mentioned for failing to take the necessary action ... it's outrageous that we are called upon to fight for those who refuse to fight to end the criminal occupation of Iraq and refuse to cry out against the suffering of the Iraqi people at the hands of a foreign policy most Democrats continue to endorse ...

as to their motivation, i have no crystal ball ... it is easy to see that most elected Democrats are tied much too closely to their large corporate contributors ... and it's easy to see that elected Democrats rarely focus on the stranglehold that big money has on our Democratic institutions ... still, even given this, i cannot confidently say that the intent of most elected Democrats is evil ... i don't rule it out; i just don't have enough evidence to rule it in ...

if i were forced to defend their actions on the memo (well, actually their inaction), and on the occupation, and trust me i would not be at all comfortable doing either, perhaps i would suggest that they just don't think fighting the neo-cons on the foreign policy front will be politically viable ... frankly, it's a pretty pathetic defense ... in fact, it's an unacceptable defense ... but, if true, it does move them from the category of "intended evil" to one of using very poor judgment ...

so, for now, i'll remain undecided and not choose one of the poll options you provided ...

[Dr Fate]

50. Fair enough. Admittedly, the poll options are much needed comic relief.

The point is that they have yet to do speak up- and some of us wonder if they ever will.

[donkeyotay]

51. I trusted my president... but he lied

It's going to be a bitch getting back and forth from Washington on the bus...

[trudyco]

53. I want this used in the 2006 compaign

We trusted our President... but he LIED.

End the one party system. Vote for Democrats.

[morgan2]

52. I'd say its mostly they don't want to admit they were

so easily duped. For the most part the whole party jumped on the WMD bandwagon with Bush, including Bill Clinton who also would have known about all the intelligence on WMDs.

[LuPeRcALiO]

55. could just be that there's not an election this year

so what would it accomplish, exactly?

(just my guess, not saying they shouldn't to it!!)

[Dr Fate]

56. It might stop Bush from starting another fake war, for starters.

It could also be handy-dandy thing to bring up when Bush asks for a few more BILLION dollars to prop up his fake war.

And if we have to wait until an election year before we discuss important issues, then why discuss ANY issue???

Sheesh. Iraq is a CURRENT issue that affects us NOW.

If we "wait" until 2006, that gives rove plenty of time to come up with counter-hoaxes. We "waited" to bring up AWOL and we were SWIFTBOATED as a result.

Waiting to bring this up later is not smart. If that really is the reason, then we are screwed.

[LuPeRcALiO]

57. I agree with you

Unfortunately the only Dem to call for an immediate troop withdrawal was Kennedy, back in January, and he got no support whatsoever from other Dems. So eventually he shut up.

If they hung Kennedy out to dry, who's going to go out on a limb on this one? He or she would get cut to pieces and nobody would bother helping out. Sad but true. Ditto the rest of the BushCo foreign policy.

[Dr Fate]

59. I never suggested a withdrawal. I suggest we tell the truth about Bush.

And the reasons we are in Iraq.

[LuPeRcALiO]

60. okay

but when did telling the truth get anybody anywhere? Kerry said over and over during the campaign that Bush "misled us into Iraq," and look where it got him.

[Dr Fate]

62. That was then. This is now. MUM on the memo concerning Kerry.

The issue has yet to be fully investigated or resolved. Bush has yet to answer any of the tough questions. Kerry should have said "lied" instead of "misled" as well- it would have baited the media into repeating the charge more.

Now Kerry has PROOF to back up what he said during the election- so I would love for him to talk about it.

Come on- are we really going to continue to let Bush & the media define reality- are we just going to stop trying????

Sooner or later "the truth" can get through- but you have to TELL IT first.

[LuPeRcALiO]

63. I hear ya, but realistically, it's, well,

kinda pointless. The campaign is over for one thing, and for another, it wouldn't change anybody's mind.

Half the country still believes Saddam caused 9/11 (okay, maybe it's changed by now, but I doubt it). Do you really think a "Downing Street Memo" is going to mean jack to anyone who doesn't already know the score?

[Dr Fate]

64. Actually, more people than ever believe we were decieved.

And actually, EVERYONE except a few freepers knows that the WMDs are NOWHERE to be found. The memo backs that up. Any excuses the GOP/media come up with does NOT match that well-known reality.

Telling the truth is NOT pointless. NEVER.

At this point, you are making desperate excuses.We have nothing to lose by telling the truth- lets TRY it. It just might sway some folks- we dont know until we try. It takes 15 freaking seconds to at least MENTION it.

Why dont you want them to just at least MENTION it???

We have everything to lose if we let facists continue to start fake wars- we have nothing to lose by speaking the truth.

[LuPeRcALiO]

65. hey, I want them to mention it

I'm just saying don't bet the farm on it. :shrug:

[Dr Fate]

71. No I would never make that bet. I've been burned too many times already.

Make a bet that DEMS will stand up to Bush/media instead of being cowards? I lost that bet last year already.

I'm no high-roller when it comes to that.

[TayTay]

68. Well, he did mention this somewhat yesterday

Personally, I believe there would be a lot more outrage in the Nation and in the media if the value of truth had not been so diminished over the last years. We have a budget that comes trillions of dollars short of counting every dollar we plan to spend, but, oh no, there is no accountability. We have a budget that doesn't even count the interest on the debt. Find me an accountant in a business in America who doesn't put the interest on the debt that they owe in the accounting, and they would be fired. We do not do it. No accountability.

We have had a Medicare actuary who was forced at risk of losing his job to lie about what the costs would be of a prescription drug bill and lie to the Congress. No accountability. We have had falsified numbers in Iraq, on everything from the cost of the war to the number of troops that have been trained to the slam dunk on intelligence--no accountability. We have an administration that continues to want to fund fake newscasts paid for by the American people, without disclaimer, and mislead people across America.

In fact, the administration's willingness to consistently abandon the truth I think has done great damage to the American people's willingness to believe anything any of us say. They are less willing to listen. They are less willing to trust or take anything said seriously. -- John Kerry 5/19/05

The media has known this for a long time. But the Judith Millers of the world aided and abetted the buildup to the war. They wanted a war real bad and sold their journalistic souls and their integrity to get it. They are not going to do anything right now that would further remind the American people that they caved in to a lying bunch of warmongers. (What would the stockholders say?)

We had the O'Neill book which specifically said that * and & co were planning this war from the very beginning and used the deaths of thousands of Americans on 9/11 to further their agenda. We have had David Kay and the Duelfer Report tell us that WMD's didn't exist. We had Richard Clarke tell us that the *ies were incompetent and arrogant and wanted a war because of their weird cowboy ethic of 'bring it on.' The media doesn't care. They were embedded in this from the very beginning. They can't turn around now and show some spine. They have too much to lose.

[Dr Fate]

70. No, he did not mention it at all. More vague nuance.

We are never going to learn.

This vague nuance stuff does not impress swing voters like they think it does.

If you believe in everything you just said, then why not just hang it up? If we are to be in perpetual war, any other issue will be over shawdowed- I suppose that is the point.

[NoPasaran]

58. Because they know it won't change a damn thing

All fantasies of the left wing to the contrary.

[Dr Fate]

61. You dont know until you try. And what is so bad about being "left wing?"

And if you think talking about the real reasons we are at war is a "left wing" value- well, I PROUDLY accept that label-even though I'm really more of a moderate!!!

Telling the TRUTH and fighting these bastards is not left or right wing- it's American.

And it very well could change a lot of things- it just might stop NON LEFT WINGERS from starting FAKE WARS again. We dont know until we try- or we could just shrug our shoulders and let these guys get away with lying and murdering, as you suggest.

What do we have to lose by trying anyway?

Thanks for your well thought out excuse- I'll add it to the list for next time.

[Donna Zen]

67. My turn

This is an important issue, whether we consider it as cause and effect or as some philosophers would have it, one and the same; because once we separate the specifics in the case, the memo, we are seeing a patterned behavior. Over and over again, scandal rears its head regarding the neocon war, and over and over again, the Democrats with the exception of a glorious few, remain silent.

So what's with that?

Narrowing it down to a single reason poses a problem when there are many players at this table. My take? There are a variety of reasons: someone has led a less than blameless life and someone else can prove it bringing a career ending counter-scandal.

Some Dems agree with the Iraq war and voted for it because of that. They may agree because their friends with fat purses agree, or they may agree because it is politically accepted, or they may agree because they have chosen to be Dems for comfort with the social policies but are very much the neocons when it comes to imperialistic goals.

There are Dems. who lack interest and knowledge when it comes to foreign policy and rely on advisers who convince them that going into war unilaterally makes them look like butt-kickers. There are Dems who come from districts where the war is very popular and are loath to either explain a different view point or lose their day jobs. Some Dems have invested so much time and effort justifying their war vote, that they think any criticism will make them look weak.

Whatever the reason the party has chosen the memo silence because the party leadership has agreed to keep quiet. After all, the entire thing may prove untrue. Better yet from the party point of view, it's bush's war. Besides, as a recent leader of the party said in Denmark, what if it comes out just peachy? Very few Dems probably ever believed that Saddam was a WMD threat.

That's the problem with joining an organization; you buy into opinions even if you disagree with them and even when they are wrong headed.

The solution, if they wanted one, is to mention the memo and demand an explanation/investigation without jumping to conclusions. Why? Because that is the right thing to do. This war effects everything in our country... everything. In 100 years Iraq may be fine, but whatever happens will not change the fact that the president lied to the American people to take them to war.

[Dr Fate]

72. Your last paragraph nails it.

That is all I'm saying- its the right thing to do.

[Donna Zen]

81. A few lines from Florynce Kennedy:

~When a system of oppression has become institutionalized it is unnecessary for individuals to be oppressive.

~I know we’re termites. But if all the termites got together, the house would fall down.

~There’s a difference between Vaselining the rapee and catching the rapist.

^^^^^^^^

Yes, Dr. Fate... it is the right thing to do. When Richard Clarke met with Wes Clark to explain what he knew, and to ask for advice, the General commiserated with Clarke knowing what personal distruction would be heaped upon Clarke. Afterall, they had tried to slime Wes who also told us that the plan for war pre-dated the IWR. Wes told him he had to "tell all" because it wasn't about him, it was for the good of the nation.

That is what is at stake here. Instead we are given grand speeches of Vaselining signifying not too damn much.

[KoKo]

74. Wow! so far your Poll surprised me! Amazing...

Give it a day and if it holds send your results off to the DLC/DNCE. :D

[Ksec]

75. it is surprising , aint it?

[Ksec]

77. I would guess theyre afraid of it.

Fear of the payback by the powerful .

[Dr Fate]

76. That last choice was actually supposed to be a joke!!!

Now I'm not so sure.

[OzarkDem]

80. Repub trolls liked it

A good way to gauge how many are posting here.

There seem to be quite a few here, though they disguise themselves fairly well most of the time.

[Warren Stupidity]

87. oh bullshit

I am not a 'republican troll', and the nearest choice that reflects my opinionn was 'they are in on it'.

John Kerry for example continues to be 'in on it', rejecting any criticism of neocon POLICY, and instead basing his criticism of the war and his failed campaign on objections to the details of the IMPLEMENTATION of that policy. I only pick on John, who I voted for enthusiastically despite his terrible stand on our imperial adventures, because he remains our de facto party leader. Many others in our party continue to be equally compromised on where we have gone since that odd incident in NYC almost four years ago.

Discuss the issues or don't bother posting. Your ad hominem attacks are not productive.

[ProudDad]

84. They all need Oil

for their SUV's.

They had a vested interest in ignoring the truth...

(Most of them, anyway).

[rhett o rick]

86. Once again - They don't want to lose their parking place