But I'm not a Democrat - so why would I register as one? that makes no sense. Democrats caved to pressure...but it didn't make a difference as you acknowledge. So how are they accountable for the Iraqi mess? Bush was driving the initiative - he used what happened on 9/11 to do it. Now that the country knows better - it's too late. That's politics. But let's acknowledge something - if Gore was president things might be different. How so? 1. Gore wouldn't have invaded Iraq. 2. If Gore was in power, the Clinton/Gore team could respond to the Cole attack, and might have had a chance to disrupt Al Qaeda enough to have prevented 9/11 3. Gore would not have divided the world 3. Gore, by not wasting resources on iraq, would have been better able to deter N. Korea from testing a bomb. 4. Gore would not have implemented no child left behind, leaving our education system in better shape. 5. Without the drain of Iraq - our economy would be in better shape. 6. With less instability in the world, and a continuation of the middle east peace process, oil prices would be lower and our economy would be in better shape. 7. Iran would be less bold about nuclear weapons development 8. The world would be focused on issues such as global warming and Aids and economic development - lowering the hate and inspiring less terrorists wanting to attack america 9. Our country would not be as divided 10. we'd have a smaller deficit - once again being a stimulas to our economy Hmmmm......I bet there's a lot of Floridians who wish the could have that vote back from 2000.
Uh, so the right Democrat would win? You already said you wanted the Democrats to win. If you registered as a Democrat you could vote for one that didn't do the same thing the Republicans did. I said the Republicans might have pushed through the authorization anyway. I never said the Democrats couldn't have a made a difference, I just think that may be too much to speculate on (for example, had the Democrats taken on the intervention wholesale, it could have made a difference). Nor does that remove their culpability anyway. That's like Himmler saying he wasn't culpable for the Holocaust because Hitler would have done it regardless. Not sure how many times you want me to re-explain this. Either the Democrats were duped by Dubya when its their job to oversee these types of actions, or they were too concerned with their own careers to object, or they were for the intervention. In any of those cases they are not fit to continue running the country anymore than Republicans who voted for the intervention. After all, Republicans more than likely fit into one of those three categories as well. So if you want either to create a change in leadership OR to visit retribution on those responisible then you'd vote against either Democrats or Republicans who didn't oppose the intervention. Every single objection that has merit now was raised before the intervention. While I can somewhat accept a citizen who catches snippets of news on TV as having been duped, I refuse to consider that an acceptable standard for a freakin Congressman. They have access to raw intelligence (they are, in fact, responsible for intelligence oversight) and to the military and every other functioning compartment of the government. It is their JOB to delve into the data to get the facts. It is their enumerated DUTY to oversee military action considered by the President as laid out specifically in the War Powers Act. If they were duped then they need to be out. If they bought into the intervention then what is the difference between them and Republican? Actually you don't 'know' any of those things. In fact, most of them are probably just flat out wrong.
Hayes, don't draw too much from the post you're referring to. I definitely think many Democrats who voted for Bush's resolution were afraid of being attacked during their reelection campaign for being weak on "terror and national security." That's certainly what I think, and I wasn't trying to be cute or anything. For those congressmen and women, they bear a certain amount of responsibilty for getting into this mess. I also think many of those who voted for it believed Bush would stop short of war, at least until the inspectors had had a thorough chance of looking for WMDs. That what Bush was doing was an increase of pressure on Saddam to allow unfettered inspections. I think some assumed that Saddam had just hidden his WMDs cleverly enough that more inspections were needed. I also think everyone was surprised that he ended up not having any. They expected Bush to have a broad coalition before going into any "serious" conflict. That Bush would go through the UN before making such a decision far more than he did. Why would they think those things? The GOP and Bush/Rove had had great success playing the "terror-national security" card against the Democratic Party. In my opinion, without merit, but it was successful as a campaign tactic. It should have been countered better if Democrats had had better leadership, but there you go. The vote for the resolution was a poltical tactic, for many, IMO, in response to the GOP political tactic. Distasteful? Sure, but a great deal of politics is just that, regardless of party. Also, unlike you, I don't think they had access to as much information that could have disproven the need for intervention as might be believed. To a degree, they, as well as the American people, certainly, were duped. Colin Powell was duped. Why should voters vote against those Democrats if they want a new direction? The actions of most of them were either in reaction to GOP political tactics, or a reaction to the information they had, and their own interpretation of that information. In short, they had a host of facts, many false, tossed at them by the Administration, and depending on the congressperson, believed some of it, but not enough to vote for it, believed some of it, had doubts, but voted for it because of what they saw as political necessity (the heart of my point) and/or because they believed Bush to be more cautious than he proved to be. And, of course, some of them simply believed Bush and what they were shown... enough to make to make the vote worthwhile from their perspective. Hell, I could go on in this vein all day, but the fact remains that a huge mistake was made, the Administration and the GOP bear the overwhelming responsibility for that mistake, and they will pay for it, finally, in November. Voting against a Democrat now, for voting for that resolution, would be as stupid as voting for Ralph Nadir for President in 2000, if you really wanted Nadir's policies to have the best chance of being followed. In this instance, if you really want change, you vote against the party overwhemingly responsible for the mess the country finds itself in... the GOP. I hope that came out right. I have had killer headaches lately. Stupid cataracts. Keep D&D Civil.
I understand where you are coming from but what is the difference between voting for a republican or voting for a democrat who was behind the war? Remember that if you want to affect the rep.dem ratio control in congress you could still have voted for a democratic challenger to a democrat in congress, and then vote for that new democrat in the general election. thus removing either an incompetant or knowingly culpable party to the intervention and still change the democratic/repub balance in congress. i disagree about congressional access to intelligence etc. they are responsible for OVERSIGHT on intelligence and the military and everything else. also why does a democrat get a pass for being a fool but a republican doesn't? it's just as likely that a republican senator looked at the same information his democratic collegue got and made the same conclusion, right? sorry about your headaches.
Ha! You ain't helpin'. Chew on this! Nine ex-Republicans run as Dems in Kansas Political crossover striking in bedrock Bush territory By Peter Slevin The Washington Post http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=119078 I had already seen the story, but Achilleus started a thread about it. Republicans deserting their own party, and becoming Democrats. The sky is falling! Bwahahahahaha!!!!! Keeep D&D Civil.
