I don't think we will win this way.

[madfloridian]

Our Democrats are allowing the blame to shift from them to the intelligence community, and none appear that willing to take responsibility for their vote on this war.

I gather they are not going to even try to hold Bush responsible? That is the way I read the report. Sounds like...well, now we can just back off and not be responsible...and we won't blame the administration. See, that way they don't have to take responsibility.

Last night when Larry King asked Teresa Kerry what she thought of the war. She said it was a "tragedy." I wish she had stopped there, because she was right. Then they both went on to explain how the info was misleading, it was the wrong way to go to war...I wish she had stopped with "tragedy."

I don't think giving in on this major issue will make us look very strong.

Oh, but I forgot, we are in the minority. Wonder why. And I forgot, we are after the swing vote only because all the grassroots will vote Democratic anyway. Sorry, I forgot about that.

[trumad]

1. Who's in the minority?

[madfloridian]

3. Oh, come on, the Democrats are in the minority in Congress.

That is what we say whenever they don't make a stand. I am just upset over the report this morning. Bush lied, didn't he? Or did I just think so.

[ProfessorPlum]

2. somehow I don't think the intelligence community

which is well-represented in Kerry's campaign, is going to just roll over and take the blame for this fiasco. They know where the bodies are buried, and the feces is just beginning to hit the fan. Let the finger pointing begin!

[mstrsplinter326]

5. Isn't the CIA chief appointed by bush??

Cause any of *'s cohorts will roll over and take one for the team.

We need to focus on the fact that Bush's "Office of Special Plans" was the real proponent of the WMD information and that Bush created that office to tell him what he needed to hear.

[ProfessorPlum]

8. The last one was not

Tenet was appointed by Clinton, and was kept on by Bush. Though he has been covering *'s butt through all of this, now that he is out they will try to make him the fall guy.

Check out this very intelligent post on Tenet as fall guy: http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2004_05_30_digbysblog_archive.html#108637327453746106

[mstrsplinter326]

14. Tenet resigned, right?

The link didn't work right... no biggie, is the acting CIA chief appointed by tenet until bushco finds someone or how does that work?

[ProfessorPlum]

17. Link works for me - sorry for the trouble

I think Bush makes an appointment which is then approved by the Senate, but I don't know for sure.

[mstrsplinter326]

21. So he prob. wont get a chance to appoint a new director

by november, if were lucky. thanks for the info!

[ProfessorPlum]

23. I think he is looking at Lehmann, who's on the 911 commission

That guy's a hack. I don't know more than that.

[troublemaker]

4. Swing voters don't differentiate like that; they are results oriented

They don't think in partisan terms; a fuck-up is a fuck-up and the ruling party gets blamed.

[madfloridian]

9. Are you willing to bet your country on that?

There is a chance they will not blame the ruling party. Sometimes when everyone is saying the same things, they just don't vote. That will leave Bush's base to vote, and guess who they will vote for???

[troublemaker]

15. WTF?

Are you trying to be unhappy for the fun of it?

I didn't write the Senate Intelligence Comittee report. I can think of no mechanism whereby my correct understanding of the behavior of American swing voters involves betting on anything. Would it help matters if I adopt an incorrect understanding of voting behavior?

[madfloridian]

20. See? Just call me unhappy. That should really discredit me.

:hi:

[freetobegay]

Instead of always showing faults

How about being optimistic? Makes a world of difference!

I'll say it again, some people really need to get over the primaries!

[madfloridian]

7. This has nothing to do with the primaries. This is my country, too.

Dean is parroting the language as well, so it has nothing to do with it. I find your saying that to me a slam on my intelligence, and an attempt to put me down.

I am talking about all our Democrats here, not just the ticket. You need to be aware that not everyone is fooled by the "I was fooled" rhetoric.

[freetobegay]

10. I know I am looking forward to winning in November

I know we are going to win in November. despite certain people. If you think thats a slam on your intelligence, thats your business.


Damn the torpedoes & full steam ahead, anyone one not on board get the hell out of the way!

[madfloridian]

16. You can not just say we will win because you want it to be that way.

I am so sad that you think life is like that. In what I have seen lately in our very conservative area, people are disgusted with the whole congress. I am referring to Democrats and Republicans and Independents, and people who do not even have a party.

They are sick at heart that no one is taking responsibility for this horrible event. The ones who are not upset are for the war and have no agenda but Bush and God.

I think we have a strong ticket, but the whole damn party is giving up and letting Bush off the hook on this. I am sorry, but that is wrong.

[freetobegay]

19. Thats just your opinion

I happen to have a different one.

[madfloridian]

22. You are oh so free to have your own opinion. Let me speak mine.

:hi:

[MaggieSwanson]

42. I'm with you one hundred percent, madfloridian

My opinion: Dems are afriad to go after * and company lest the finger be pointed right back at Kerry and Edwards, both supporters of the IWR and USAPATRIOT Act.

More's the pity.

We have to be a stronger party than that, though! This war is a major reason why people hate the * administration. By not addressing the situaion, we become just as bad as they are...remember the old credo "Silence is Complicity"?

Thank you for your post.

Peace,

Maggie

[jobycom]

25. The "I was fooled" rhetoric

A lot of misleading evidence about the IWR has been spread around since the invasion. Some people knew what Bush was up to, and saw the IWR as a way to head it off, not as permission to invade.

Remember, Bush was claiming at the time that he had the authority to invade at any time without consulting Congress or the UN. Remember that the Supreme Court had already proven it would not enforce the law when it came to Bush. And remember that Congress was controlled by Republicans who would not stop Bush.

For some, the IWR was an attempt to place limits on Bush. It made him consult the UN, and it gave him guidelines he had to follow. It wasn't much, an it was a compromise bill, but many of the Democrats who voted for it saw it as the best they could do. Bush would want Congressional approval, and the Republican Congress would like to have Bush consult them before going to war, and the Democrats used those desires to work some restrictions on Bush into law.

The fact that ultimately Bush overcame those restrictions doesn't mean that those Dems who voted for it were voting for war. Some were-- Gephardt, Biden, Lieberman, etc. But some, and from what I've seen of Kerry I believe he was one, were trying to place restrictions on Bush. Sadly, I don't think Edwards's motives were pure on this one.

That's complicated to explain to people, so many of these politicians just go along with the "We were fooled" rhetoric. But their intentions were more noble, for some, than that.

And for the record, I didn't think and I don't think they should have voted for the IWR, and I have a lot more respect for those who voted against it.

[Malva Zebrina]

6. wanna know something? Truth is never the wrong way to go

spin and attempts to cover up the real message, will backfire.

In the end, the person doing so, will be despised because he will constantly have to be defended the spin--as we see Bush tumbling down now.

I cannot stand it much--and, like some poster said here on DU recently, politics and the discussion of the same, may not be for me if I am to think that something other than the truth is just fine and dandy as long as we win. If I am to think that because a man speaks truth, he is "not electable" as some here have said of Kucinich, and of Dean, then the entire system is indeed cheneyedup.

As it is, I have a great deal of difficulty pulling the lever or whatever it is now, (in my area we still use paper and pencil and voting is a real social event where neighbor meets neighbor and gets all the latest gossip of the day)for anyone who is attempting to spin or avoid the real issues.

my two cents

[TexasSissy]

11. That is Kerry's position on the IW. He's been resolute in that

from the beginning. That's just the way it is. As Clinton said, regardless of how we got there, we are there now, and it is in America's interest that Iraq is successful in becoming a free, representative country.

When Teresa said the information was misleading, I think she was including the White House in that. Kerry has repeatedly said that the WH has mislead the country in rushing into war and not using diplomacy to its fullest extent and not truly seeking international coalition. Kerry also said that the WH was (I forget his word) in that it assured Congress that the sources for the intelligence about Iraq were sound (he and others of Congress were not allowed to know the sources), when in fact, the sources were known by everyone to be unreliable, he said.

Kerry's not shy in his criticism of the * and his cohorts. But he is not flat out against using force to get rid of Saddam. He never has been. Even if he felt that way in retrospect, he couldn't say it...it'd be the ultimate flip flop. But I don't think he does feel that way.

I'm okay with that.

[jobycom]

12. I agree with that, though I don't think that's been Kerry's problem

I think Kerry has been critical of Bush on the invasion. But I agree that if Democrats soft-peddle their disagreements, the people will just as easily forgive the Republicans for making "a mistake" based on "bad intelligence," as they will vote the Repubs out.

But Rockefeller's comments were pretty direct. He blamed Bush, and he made it clear he disagreed with the report's claim that ONLY the CIA was respobnsible.

Not all of the Democrats have rolled over, but you won't get that impression from the media.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

13. Are you saying the Republican-authored report touts the Republican line?

Duh.

[madfloridian]

18. Where are the Democrats? What do you think Rockefeller is?

See, you just made my point about the minority thingy.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

33. I made your point?

WTF is your point then?

I am pointing out that the Republican's wrote a report that supports their line.



WTF is your point? -- that we are in the minority, therefore we don't get to write the report?



While true, this is so obvious that I don't see why it is worth repeating.


I gather they are not going to even try to hold Bush responsible?

No, the Republicans are not going to even try to hold Bush responsible.



Is there some other point you are trying to make that I'm not seeing?

[madfloridian]

36. Truth and honesty.

In my second post in this thread I said that anytime the Democrats give in to them, fail to stand up, they just say they are in the minority and can't do anything.

Well, they could stand up and say this is just wrong. I am blasting Dean on this as well.....he is caving in on this war vote thing to make peace.

I think they should all apologize to the families of the dead soldiers and make it clear why they voted.

If you choose to get upset with me over that, then ok.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

41. LOL

If you choose to get upset with me over that, then ok.


I promise to never get upset over anything you say or do. OK? However I reserve my right to disagree with you as vehemently or as forcefully as I wish. OK?


Well, they could stand up and say this is just wrong.

But Sen. Jay Rockefeller, the committee's ranking Democrat, did criticize the report for failing to address the "intense pressure" he believes the Bush administration applied to the intelligence community.

<snip>

"Tragically, Rockefeller added, "the intelligence failures set forth in this report will affect our national security for generations to come." He mentioned diminished U.S. credibility, America's record low standing in the world, and a deep and growing hatred of Americans in the Muslim world.

Rockefeller expressed "genuine frustration...that virtually everything that has to do with the administration" has been "relegated to phase two" and will be discussed at another time.

The second part of the committee's investigation will focus on the "interaction or the pressure or the shaping of intelligence" by the Bush administration, Rockefeller said. It was clear to all of us that the Bush administration had made up its mind to go to war, Rockefeller said, and he said he believes that such a "predetermination" influenced the intelligence community.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=%5CNation%5Carchive%5C200407%5CNAT20040709b.html

[madfloridian]

44. It is not funny to me.

Rockefeller also said this, so there is another side. I don't mind if someone disagrees with me, I just think LOL about this is out of line.
http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm?objectID=3E7EF84A-9123-4AAF-859CDA45E5FA86C7

SNIP...""There is simply no question that mistakes leading up to the war in Iraq rank among the most devastating losses and intelligence failures in the history of the nation," said Senator Jay Rockefeller, a West Virginia Democrat and Vice Chairman of the committee."

Feel free to dislike it when I ask for our Democrats to stand up for what is right. I am used to the implications that I don't like to be disagreed with. Certain words are used about me when I post something about our Dems speaking out. Like not being upbeat? Or being negative? Hey, last poll I saw in our paper this morning, Bush was still leading and the wingnuts were out in force in letters.

Several people use certain terms when I speak out. Whiner, martyr, clueless, sensitive. Many of these came from the right wing talking points. I did say it was ok for you to get upset with me, didn't I?

[Name removed]

50. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

56. Why should I care what other people call you?

Several people use certain terms when I speak out. Whiner, martyr, clueless, sensitive.

Who gives a fuck? You'll have to take it up with them. I am only responsible for my actions. And my action has been to prove that you are wrong and that you mischaracterized Rockefeller.


The fact is, what you said was not true. And I have shown your characterization to be false.


I did say it was ok for you to get upset with me, didn't I?

That is what I am laughing at. Your pathetic attempts to turn this into some sort of personal issue. It's not personal. It's simply that you are wrong.

[AP]

24. Voters perceive Republicans as stronger on national security even today --

-- even after everything that has be revealed so far.

The Democrats have a fine line to walk. The key to winning the eleciton is to make sure that the issues on which they're the strongest are the ones everyone think are the most important on election day.

If they use a lot of time and energy crticizing the Republicans on the war -- thus indicating that it is the most important issue -- they will lose if they have not also convinced voters that Democrats are stronger than Repubicans on national security by election day.

Arguing that you wouldn't have defended American interests when they are perceived to be threatened is not the best way to argue that you're better on national security. Sadly, lots of Americans in red states probably feel that because there've been no more 9/11s Bush did the right thing.

[madfloridian]

28. Got it. I understand now.

:hi:

[madfloridian]

26. Ok, so we all agree that Bush is best off the hook? DU knew better.

I am gathering that from the responses. Does anyone remember the threads here at DU before the war....long before the war? I do. We knew better even then.

This has nothing to do with Dean or the primaries or anything except the truth. Honesty and the truth are still ok, you know.

[AP]

30. DU'ers would have thought it was wrong no matter what.

Congresspeople were actually seeing lots of (bad) intelligence not available to DUers saying that there was a threat.

If they had blocked Bush, there would have been another 9/11 that would have ensured uninterrupted Republican rule for a half a century, and the Democrats must have known that.

Kerry and Edwards both want to have a serious investigation into why the intelligence is bad and neither want to opperate Iraq as an American colony. That does not help people in Iraq whose lives have been destroyed, but it's going to get Kerry elected and it will stop America from being a fascist country.

[madfloridian]

34. If they want the investigation, then that is very good.

:hi:

BTW, DUer's are/were a pretty intelligent bunch. Were you here before the war? If not, then look back at some older archived threads and get some real enlightening. Near the end of 2002, and very early 2003 were the best telling.

Let's do be honest, though. If they were really fooled by drones flying over our coasts sent by Iraq, then I don't have much sympathy for any of them. That is from Sen. Nelson, the drone thing.

[AP]

37. I suspect that the stuff we do know we know for a reason

I think the Republicans wanted to plant seeds of doubts to encourage protests and outrage and drive a wedge in the left.

I bet the Dems saw a lot of convincing (but false) stuff that the REpublicans never bothered to leak, but would have been leaked had Dems opposed Bush.

I'm not ready to believe that we know more than senators with security clearance (but I'm inclined to believe that what they were told was mostly lies).

[madfloridian]

39. I think you need to read some archives here.

I don't want you to think we were not very smart here. It was pretty obvious to most everyone. Senator Nelson's office had almost 3000 calls against it. Remember the protests of half a million who knew?

Look up about the drones Nelson referred to in making an excuse. And didn't Rockefeller apologize for his vote, and now he is backtracking?

[AP]

43. I repeat what I said.

[Cats Against Frist]

40. I definitely agree with you

and I agree that I am very dismayed that something should be done about this -- and maybe the Plame thing will uncover something else about the rush to war, and the administration's policies.

I don't know what the ANSWER is, though. Truth is fine -- but truth isn't going to get very much podium time in Congress and the WH if the Bush administration is there.

I see this argument -- I've been making this argument. It's not that people don't want the truth and don't want change. The question for me is this: which do I hate worse? Moderate, corporate, slightly conservative, blah America? Or do I hate the idea of the Christian Taliban pissing on our Constiution, the neocons getting war without end, taxes shifted from wealth to work, while the ruling class reels in the money, and we're all going to end up buying from and working at a Megachain discount store -- and a world where I have to be ashamed because of the country of my birth?

Neither party, it seems, wants to put the bit on the consumer/corporate thing, which is my biggest complaint -- but beyond that, I'd rather live in a corporate dominated world where corporations have some sort of responsibility to the community and the country, are regulated, have to pay their taxes, pay fair wages, pay people fairly -- these are all things that Democrats are for.

And I also have to say, about the war, I could get on board with deposing dictators (in some circumstances) if I felt that we had any moral highground to back it up -- and if we took responsiblity for creating the situation, if we had (since we did). If our democratic experiment was flourishing, and egalitarianism, humility, kindness, peace, justice WERE our values. It's not my favorite way to go about things, but I think

As it stands, I believe those are not our values. And I'm not optimistic about our populace. The GOP got to be where they are by leading the fearful and tricking the ignorant. We've been trying to tell the truth for 35 years (and, of course, longer) -- and what does it get us, when it gets us stuff? Small victories. And if you don't think that the last 20 years of increased conservatism isn't a direct result of the the Vietnam era, summer of love hippie counterculture thing -- think again.

We need to take our small victories in the political arena, and change our values at home to represent our liberalism. Raise our children outside the consumer suckhole of shit and low self-esteem.

We embrace this "Hollywood" and yes, they've helped -- but how progressive are they, really? Cult star worship, beauty worship, fame, riches, etc.? It's all part of the same social darwinian baloney.

I really do, agree with you about change -- but I'd like to know what kind of scenario you think would truly get us there -- something broader than "Getting the mainstream dems to pay attention to us." What does this statement mean? And where do you think it's going to get the progressive/liberal movement as a whole?

[HalfManHalfBiscuit]

27. Hell yes we are after the swing vote

The Left is in the bag. Any progressive that does not vote for Kerry is a complete dumbass. Thankfully, there aren't enough dumbass progressives to matter.

[madfloridian]

29. The Left is in the bag? You are kidding, right?

I most certainly hope so.

[AP]

31. Unions got Michigan for Gore-Lieberman in 2000. There's a greater sense...

...of urgency in 2004.

I'm sure the Republicans have far left wedge strategies planned, but they're not going to work.

Bush has been too awful. The far left will stick together and give the party room to win the votes in the middle that they need to win.

[madfloridian]

48. Then we don't need to worry at all.

It will all be fine in the fall.

[AP]

52. What we have to worry about is making sure people in the middle vote K-E

[HalfManHalfBiscuit]

32. The Left is Solidly in the Bag

Any progressive who is now claiming they will not vote for Kerry is lying. They are just looking for attention.

They will vote for Kerry, then claim they didn't, straining for praise from the pseudo-intellectual left. Secret ballot and all.

Drama queens.

[madfloridian]

35. Drama queens? Oh, my goodness, Biscuit.

That is a terrible thing to say. What is wrong with expecting our leaders to be honest? You make it sound like it is old hat or something.

Please do not insult me or anyone because we want the truth and honesty.

[KFC]

45. Kerry/Edwards provide truth and honesty

Can you demonstrate otherwise?

And yes, the liberal "I won't vote for Kerry" crowd are pathetic drama queens. Just aching for attention.

[madfloridian]

49. Whoa! I did not say that! That is not being fair. Drama queens, insult.

Shame for just attacking and presenting an argument that holds no water.

I am none of the things you say. You should be ashamed.

[AP]

38. It's not that they're lying. It's that there aren't many of them.

I expect more solidarity on the left in 2004 than 2000, and despite appearances, there was a ton of solidarity in 2000. The unions won MI and black voters won FL.

90% of voters who preferred Nader over all others voted for someone besides Nader (almost all of them voting Gore). The remaining 10% were mostly in safe states -- and FL should have been a relatively safe state, since 300K voters didn't have their votes counted (or wouldn't able to cast them) for Gore according to Greg Pallast.

I think there will be much more solidarity on the left in 2004.

[sampsonblk]

46. Papa Bush - 1992

That's what he thought. But his base dropped off enough to cost him his job.

IMHO there is no "in the bag" vote. A candidate has to work for each and every vote.

[CWebster]

47. By demanding accountability they implicate themselves.

Pathetic.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

51. You mean like this?

"The fact is that the administration at all levels and to some extent, us, used bad information to bolster its case for war. And we in Congress would not have authorized that war -- we would not have authorized that war with 75 votes -- if we knew then what we know now," Rockefeller said.

Rockefeller said the intelligence mistakes leading up to the war in Iraq "rank among the most devastating losses and intelligence failures in the history of the nation. "Leading up to Sept. 11, our government didn't connect the dots. In Iraq, we were even more culpable, because the dots themselves never existed," he said.

<snip>

Rockefeller expressed "genuine frustration...that virtually everything that has to do with the administration" has been "relegated to phase two" and will be discussed at another time.

The second part of the committee's investigation will focus on the "interaction or the pressure or the shaping of intelligence" by the Bush administration, Rockefeller said. It was clear to all of us that the Bush administration had made up its mind to go to war, Rockefeller said, and he said he believes that such a "predetermination" influenced the intelligence community.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=%5CNation%5Carchive%5C200407%5CNAT20040709b.html

[elifino]

53. On accountability

Where was the Senate, they have oversite responsibility for the CIA

[Mobius]

54. I agree 1000% madfloridian

A lot of posters seem to think it's time to relax, that this is the ticket and everything will be fine now. Maybe it is the ticket, but it will be an uphill battle all the way. To relax is to lose. The repugs will bring every dirty trick out of the book, and this election will be no cakewalk. We will have to fight tooth and nail for every single vote. Because I think the fight will be hard, does not mean I have given up hope. It means that we as voters can't relax for one second. The second we let our guard down it will be all over.

[madfloridian]

55. Thank you for that response.

I think you said it better than I did. Or, maybe the fact that I am a Dean supporter works against me.

I did notice that Kerry spoke on this, and I am glad. I live in the heart of Florida, and I cringe when people take anything for granted.

We have good candidates, but people are starting to let down. That is not good.

[madfloridian]

57. This thread died 8 days ago, it is out of date.

My views are the same, but the news changes daily. I am sorry someone saw fit to drag this up again after 8 days.

[Democat]

58. What do you expect from the current batch of Democrats?

They have proven time and time again that they will not stand up and fight Bush and the right wing.

Let's focus on Kerry and what he is going to do to make the country safer.

We simply can not rely on our elected leaders to help us in this fight anymore - they have already proven that they are weak and willing to lose rather than put up a real fight.