Two misconceptions

[hyphenate]

Everyone is talking about how Hillary voted "yes" on the IWR, but nearly everyone fails to remember that the vote on that was only several days after the SOTU address in January, 2003, and Bush had lied in that SOTU address, saying they (meaning the CIA, supposedly) had evidence of WMD in Iraq. Some people called Bush's bluff, but it's perfectly understandable that many voted for the IWR because they were at that time unaware of Bush being a pathological liar. So anyone being pissed off about that vote had better remember that fact, and stop trying to make it sound as though everyone who voted yes is a warmonger.

The second thing is Obama reminding people that he didn't vote for the IWR--well, fucking DUH, of course he didn't, because he was only elected in 2004!!

It pisses me off that people try to manipulate the real facts and practice the sin of omission when it comes to covering their asses. A lie is one thing, like Bush trying to pretend he "served his country" during the Vietnam era, and leaving out facts is another--both of them are allowing the truth to be rendered inconsequential and muddying the waters deliberately.

There is far more political ignorance in our country than there was 100 years ago, and that's a shame. Some groups, like blacks and women, tried very hard to get the right to vote and participate in the democratic process, but nowadays, such rights are taken too much for granted, and most people vote completely uninformed, based only on a series of sound bites from commercials they have seen on the boob tube. Anyone who respects the right to vote and respects our history are in a minority, and our kids are not learning many of the things they need to learn in our world. But that's another whole argument.

Facts are facts, and we need to make sure that we acknowledge those facts, even if it doesn't change our minds about our chosen candidates. We cannot have healthy arguments with misconceptions keeping the truth from us.

[Ravy]

1. The IWR vote was before the SOTU in 2003. nt

[H2O Man]

3. Okay. Three misconceptions. n/t

[blogslut]

7. you made me laugh

Stop it right now! This is serious business. Serious cat sez so!

[nightrider767]

10. Holy Shit!

That is one serious cat!

Damnn!!!

[blogslut]

14. Better serious than emo

:)

[Ivote]

11. That's My BUBBA! n/t

[blogslut]

15. Your Bubba is very serious!!!!11!

That is hugh! ;)

[lapfog_1]

8. Four misconceptions.

While it is true that Obama was not in the Senate at the time of the IWR, there are (on video) contemporaneous speeches of his which make his position on the upcoming war very clear. "It is a stupid war"

[Armstead]

2. Please -- Months before the IWR vote it was clear what Bush's intentions were

He wanted to go to war from the very beginning.

It didn't require an advanced degree in psychology or political science or anything else to understand that.

All anyone had to do was to listen to his speeches.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

19. Congress was bombarded with anti-war messages from the electorate.

The nascent form of dissent, e-mail and blog-generated phone calls and petitions, was just as equally ignored as the old form of dissent.

[JimGinPA]

4. Facts ARE Facts...

Obama spoke out against the war before the invasion & Hillary refuses to acknowledge that she has ever been wrong about anything - just like the chimp won't.

[Eric J in MN]

5. Senate voted on the IWR on October 11, 2002 by 77-23.

http://dkosopedia.com/wiki/Iraq_War_Resolution

[housewolf]

9. That's right - October, 2002

I remember it well, it was a horrible time. And then Paul Wellstone was killed in a plane crash just a couple weeks later. Boooooooo......

:cry: :cry: :cry:

[NYCGirl]

6. You fail to mention that there was an NIE that Clinton failed to read.

More:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-boyce/the-iran-nie-the-iraq-ni_b_77080.html

Bob Graham read it and said:

"Friends, I encourage you to read the classified intelligence reports which are much sharper than what is available in declassified form.... We are going to be increasing the threat level against the people of the United States. Blood is going to be on your hands."

He was one who voted against the IWR.

[stahbrett]

12. She had no time to read it - she was busy using experience to work on solutions for day one

:D

[Ivote]

13. The Question Now Is "How Do We Get Over 300,000 Americans Out Safely?

I Think it's going to be a bloodbath no matter who is President

[pdxmom]

16. I'm sorry, but I knew that Bush was a pathological liar and couldn't be

trusted and that he would take us into a war in Iraq as soon as possible. I expect our Democratic nominee to be at least as smart as me.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

17. Agree about Obama not being in the Senate

but disagree with the notion that people in Congress couldn't figure out Bush was lying about WMDs and what was going on in Iraq. Heck, I knew the truth and I live in the Ozarks! In fact, a whole bunch of us here knew the truth, and demonstrated about it. What was interesting were the counter-demonstrators. Know that they said? That we were going to Iraq to steal their oil because we needed it, and that Bush was the Second Coming of Christ and that this would hasten the Rapture. No lie. None of the counter protesters (who got close enough to spit on us before the sheriff intervened) said anything about believing Saddam was a threat. Now I find that very interesting, considering the times and where I live.

That's why I don't accept as an excuse from ANYONE in Congress that voted for IWR that they didn't know or understand what was going on.

[Ravy]

18. I don't believe there were many that *knew* there were no WMD.

I am sure there were some skeptical about it, and those numbers grew leaps and bounds between the IWR (after which weapons inspectors were put in) and Bush started getting caught in his many lies, Colin Powell at the UN, etc.

But even though many, many of us were skeptical about the strength of the administration's case, few could say that they *knew* that there were no WMD left in Iraq. The UN Weapons inspectors didn't know it, Saddam's government and administration didn't know it, at least, for the most part.

There were WMD in Iraq at one point. The UNITED STATES gave them to him when he was an ally. He was given the technology to produce them. The weapons inspectors were finding and destroying them up until the point that Saddam kicked them out. Few, if any, *knew* that none remained.

What was painfully obvious, after the IWR, was that Bush and his intelligence agencies had fabricated a lot of evidence.. that we had no *proof* there was WMD.

The weapons inspectors should have been left to do their job. Instead, Bush pulled them out and invaded/occupied.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

21. the point being the UN inspectors were there

Saddam wasn't going to do anything while they were there, and they were really looking hard for things. I know you were around DU about that time-remember all the posts about it? I know one of my signs said, "Let the UN do its job".

Again, what I'd like to really stress though is the fact that NONE of the counter protesters in this little mountain community said ANYTHING about WMDs. What they talked about was getting the oil and getting ready for the Rapture led by Bush, the Second Coming (and that really creeped me out!)

[JTFrog]

20. She voted for war.

http://www.commondreams.org/views07/0303-23.htm

See Hillary Run (from Her Husband's Past on Iraq)
by Scott Ritter

Senator Hillary Clinton wants to become President Hillary Clinton. "I'm in, and I'm in to win," she said, announcing her plans to run for the Democratic nomination for the 2008 Presidential election. Let there be no doubt that Hillary Clinton is about as slippery a species of politician that exists, one who has demonstrated an ability to morph facts into a nebulous blob which blurs the record and distorts the truth. While she has demonstrated this less than flattering ability on a number of issues, nowhere is it so blatant as when dealing with the issue of the ongoing war in Iraq and Hillary Clinton's vote in favor of this war.

This issue won't be resolved even if Hillary Clinton apologizes for her Iraq vote, as other politicians have done, blaming their decision on faulty intelligence on Iraq's WMD capabilities. This is because, like many other Washington politicians at the time, including those now running for president, she had been witness to lies about Iraq's weapons programs to justify attacks on that country by her husband President Bill Clinton and his administration.

"While there is no perfect approach to this thorny dilemma, and while people of good faith and high intelligence can reach diametrically opposed conclusions, I believe the best course is to go to the UN for a strong resolution that scraps the 1998 restrictions on inspections and calls for complete, unlimited inspections with cooperation expected and demanded from Iraq," Senator Clinton said at the time of her vote, in a carefully crafted speech designed to demonstrate her range of knowledge and ability to consider all options. "I know that the Administration wants more, including an explicit authorization to use force, but we may not be able to secure that now, perhaps even later. But if we get a clear requirement for unfettered inspections, I believe the authority to use force to enforce that mandate is inherent in the original 1991 UN resolution, as President Clinton recognized when he launched Operation Desert Fox in 1998."

Hillary would have done well to leave out that last part, the one where her husband, the former President of the United States, used military force as part of a 72-hour bombing campaign ostensibly deemed as a punitive strike in defense of disarmament, but in actuality proved to be a blatant attempt at regime change which used the hyped-up threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction as an excuse for action. Sound familiar? While many Americans today condemn the Bush administration for misleading them with false claims of unsubstantiated threats which resulted in the ongoing debacle we face today in Iraq (count Hillary among this crowd), few have reflected back on the day when the man from Hope, Arkansas sat in the Oval Office and initiated the policies of economic sanctions-based containment and regime change which President Bush later brought to fruition when he ordered the invasion of Iraq in March 2003.

...much more at link

Scott Ritter served as a former Marine Corps officer from 1984 until 1991, and as a UN weapons inspector in Iraq from 1991 until 1998. He is the author of several books, including "Iraq Confidential" and "Target Iran". He also co-authored "War on Iraq" with William Pitt.