With this admission of his mistake I can at least think about voting for Edwards. Hillary, Kerry and Biden should do the same. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/11/AR2005111101623_pf.html The Right Way in Iraq By John Edwards Sunday, November 13, 2005; B07 I was wrong. Almost three years ago we went into Iraq to remove what we were told -- and what many of us believed and argued -- was a threat to America. But in fact we now know that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction when our forces invaded Iraq in 2003. The intelligence was deeply flawed and, in some cases, manipulated to fit a political agenda. It was a mistake to vote for this war in 2002. I take responsibility for that mistake. It has been hard to say these words because those who didn't make a mistake -- the men and women of our armed forces and their families -- have performed heroically and paid a dear price. The world desperately needs moral leadership from America, and the foundation for moral leadership is telling the truth. While we can't change the past, we need to accept responsibility, because a key part of restoring America's moral leadership is acknowledging when we've made mistakes or been proven wrong -- and showing that we have the creativity and guts to make it right. The argument for going to war with Iraq was based on intelligence that we now know was inaccurate. The information the American people were hearing from the president -- and that I was being given by our intelligence community -- wasn't the whole story. Had I known this at the time, I never would have voted for this war. George Bush won't accept responsibility for his mistakes. Along with Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, he has made horrible mistakes at almost every step: failed diplomacy; not going in with enough troops; not giving our forces the equipment they need; not having a plan for peace. Because of these failures, Iraq is a mess and has become a far greater threat than it ever was. It is now a haven for terrorists, and our presence there is draining the goodwill our country once enjoyed, diminishing our global standing. It has made fighting the global war against terrorist organizations more difficult, not less. The urgent question isn't how we got here but what we do now. We have to give our troops a way to end their mission honorably. That means leaving behind a success, not a failure. What is success? I don't think it is Iraq as a Jeffersonian democracy. I think it is an Iraq that is relatively stable, largely self-sufficient, comparatively open and free, and in control of its own destiny. A plan for success needs to focus on three interlocking objectives: reducing the American presence, building Iraq's capacity and getting other countries to meet their responsibilities to help. First, we need to remove the image of an imperialist America from the landscape of Iraq. American contractors who have taken unfair advantage of the turmoil in Iraq need to leave Iraq. If that means Halliburton subsidiary KBR, then KBR should go. Such departures, and the return of the work to Iraqi businesses, would be a real statement about our hopes for the new nation. We also need to show Iraq and the world that we will not stay there forever. We've reached the point where the large number of our troops in Iraq hurts, not helps, our goals. Therefore, early next year, after the Iraqi elections, when a new government has been created, we should begin redeployment of a significant number of troops out of Iraq. This should be the beginning of a gradual process to reduce our presence and change the shape of our military's deployment in Iraq. Most of these troops should come from National Guard or Reserve forces. That will still leave us with enough military capability, combined with better-trained Iraqis, to fight terrorists and continue to help the Iraqis develop a stable country. Second, this redeployment should work in concert with a more effective training program for Iraqi forces. We should implement a clear plan for training and hard deadlines for certain benchmarks to be met. To increase incentives, we should implement a schedule showing that, as we certify Iraqi troops as trained and equipped, a proportional number of U.S. troops will be withdrawn. Third, we must launch a serious diplomatic process that brings the world into this effort. We should bring Iraq's neighbors and our key European allies into a diplomatic process to get Iraq on its feet. The president needs to create a unified international front. Too many mistakes have already been made for this to be easy. Yet we must take these steps to succeed. The American people, the Iraqi people and -- most important -- our troops who have died or been injured there, and those who are fighting there today, deserve nothing less. America's leaders -- all of us -- need to accept the responsibility we each carry for how we got to this place. More than 2,000 Americans have lost their lives in this war, and more than 150,000 are fighting there today. They and their families deserve honesty from our country's leaders. And they also deserve a clear plan for a way out.
Edwards is a day late and an election short. I applaud his mea culpa, but I don't want him running in '08. He had his chance on the ticket and did a disappearing act that would make Houdini proud. We need new people, who come across as having ideas that will be a departure from the hideous reality of the Bush Administration and provide answers to the host of problems the country had pre-Bush, and the far worse ones Bush caused. Edwards would make a good cabinet member for the next Democratic President, the one being elected in '08. Something in health and human services or labor is right up his alley. Warner of Virginia has at least the experience Edwards has, but without the baggage. Hillary has Bill... enough said. Biden is someone I admire, but I don't know if he's got it in him for a Presidential run. Delaware is damn close to New York and Virginia, so the second spot on the ticket doesn't look promising for him, unless it's the 2nd spot for someone from the West or the Midwest. I wish he were Senate Majority leader, but that's getting a bit ahead of ourselves, and there is Reid occupying the chair. Having said what I did, it is a bold move, finally, by a prominent Democratic leader that shows a path beyond the mire produced by voting for this idiotic adventure of Bush's, even if they were mislead. Edwards has shown the way and taken the first step. It's past time for others to do the same, in their own way. Good for you, Senator Edwards. There must have been some reason I voted for you in the Texas primary. I hoped you'd show me something. You're way late, but you finally did. Keep D&D Civil.
Didn't Biden have some plagarism issue or something? I don't recall exactly what sunk his last run but IIRC its the kind of thing that would keep you from running again.
Yeah, he did. I'm not sure what he's planning to do about that, but it's his stubbornness on Iraq that makes me resistant to him. And I wouldn't want him leading the Senate Dems either (as Deckard would). Reid's doing a surprisingly bang-up job. I also think Deckard's too hard on Edwards. In the second spot on a ticket, you take orders from the campaign by and large. We have no idea how much of Edwards' disappointing showing in 04 was his fault. Remember, this is the campaign that sat quiet about the Swift Boaters for a month. On the plus side for Edwards, he had the best stump speech of the pack last time around. And his pet issue, poverty, is en vogue again post-Katrina. I thought it was very bold of him to focus on poverty in America -- maybe the most important issue of all -- when no one seemed to care about it. It was his support of the Iraq war that I couldn't get with. I applaud him finally manning up and admitting his mistake. If only Bush would do the same.
Good for Edwards. This is the right thing for him to do. He isn't my favorite candidate that I've heard as a possibility, but this does help him stay in the game. I still like Russ Feingold an awful lot.
I forgot about Biden's problem Hayes mentioned. Don't know how he can handle that, and don't remember just how damning it was, but everything from the past in a presidential run is magnified. As for Biden as Majority leader... that was an off the cuff comment brought about more because of Reid's utter lack of on-screen charisma, not from what he's saying and doing. I'm damn glad he's got a sack. I just wish he came across better on the tube, which is, sadly, such a big deal in our media driven society. If Edward's performance in '04 was due to taking marching orders from the Kerry campaign, then it provides even more damning evidence as to how incompetent Kerry is. It's also a handy excuse that I'm not buying, yet. Yes, I'm hard on Edwards, just as I'm hard on all those up to their necks in that fiasco. We need some new blood. Keep D&D Civil.
I couldn't remember exactly what it was so I looked it up: 'Biden was quickly becoming the “most famous political plagiarist of our time”, as Thomas Mallon describes the unfortunate Delaware senator.' "Plagiarism can have catastrophic consequences for one's career as a student and even later on in life—and the higher one's ambition takes one, the higher the stakes. In 1987, for instance, Senator Joe Biden, who was seeking the Democratic presidential nomination, was accused of plagiarizing passages in speeches and interviews from the oratory of a British politician, Neil Kinnock." "It turned out Biden had also borrowed passages from old campaign speeches by Robert Kennedy and had inflated his academic record. But oratory has a long tradition of borrowing and even "heavy lifting," as speechwriters call it, so Biden stayed alive in the presidential race. The last straw, however, came when it turned out that twenty years earlier Biden had received a failing grade in a law school course for plagiarizing a legal article (he'd given a single footnote while lifting five full pages from the article). Biden said he'd been unaware of the appropriate standards for legal briefs, but the public was unimpressed. His campaign collapsed and he withdrew from the race."
That's it. The guy really impresses me when he "finds his voice," but he is not Presidential material. Keep D&D Civil.
Think of how low the bar has been set by GWB. Biden is an alter boy compared to GWB. BTW Americans appear to prefer candidates who have been governor of a state. Senators have a track record of Congressional votes, which can be morphed into anything the opponent wants.
Personally, I don't particularly care for the man and think that he's full of empty platitudes, but in my personal experience in discussing him with people, he seems to have the personality qualities that make people get excited. I realize this is incredibly cynical, but I am convinced that the difference in modern electoral races comes down to a vote between personalities and likeability. Of course people vote on issues, but they tend to cancel each other out. The swing and undecided voters make up their minds on "gut feeling". The only modern (TV era) election that doesn't seem to follow are the two Nixon victories, but I was still crapping in my diapers when Nixon was president and so may be missing some dynamic that would make people comfortable with Nixon over his opponents. People seem to vote on whose personality they would be most willing to follow, not on platforms. Most of the uncharismatic presidents won over less charismatic opponents.
I, too appreciate it whenever anyone admits a mistake and I understand that it is hard to admit a mistake that involved 2,000 dead American soldiers and countless dead Iraqi civilians. I appreciate it but it is not enough to get my endorsement. As for the hawks, Edwards certainly will get more of my support right now than Hillary or Biden will but big deal... There are too many qualified people who did not make the same mistakes. Too many qualified people who had the courage to vote against or speak out against the war when it was not so politically popular to do so. My endorsement still goes proudly to Al Gore. Which way does the wind blow today Johnny? I expect more out of a president. (I am still waiting patiently for the apology for voting for the Patriot Act)
Gore is certainly someone who has found his voice. It's a damn shame he didn't find it when he was running for office. We wouldn't be going through the nightmare of Bush's failed presidency. Considering that Bush is the nadir reached by the office to date, Gore would have had to have been an improvement. It's a real bummer. Keep D&D Civil.
Just say no to Hillary, Kerry and Edwards in 2008. If that is the best three that the Democrats have to offer, then I just might vote Libertarian in 2008.
ditto Well...about not wanting Hillary, Kerry or Edwards. But I think I'd probably vote green instead of lib.
Published on Monday, November 14, 2005 by the Madison Capital Times (Wisconsin) McGovern for President Editorial The man whose candidacy for the presidency this newspaper enthusiastically championed in 1971 and 1972 returns to Madison today to deliver a distinguished lecture, and it is with great pride and pleasure that we welcome George McGovern back to the city that had the wisdom to want him - as opposed to Richard Nixon - as its president. McGovern will deliver the University of Wisconsin Law School's Robert W. Kastenmeier Lecture at 7:30 p.m. in the Wisconsin Union Theater, 800 Langdon St. And he has chosen an appropriate theme: "The Iraq War: Lessons From the Past." McGovern's 1972 presidential candidacy held out the promise of a rapid withdrawal of U.S. forces from the quagmire that was Vietnam. As a decorated World War II veteran - a bomber pilot - and a historian who served in both the U.S. House and the Senate for the better part of two decades, McGovern knew that ending the war and getting this country's troops out of harm's way was not merely wise but also patriotic. Unfortunately, the 1972 campaign saw the beginning of a politics of personal destruction that warped the electoral process beyond recognition. McGovern's wisdom and patriotism were attacked by Nixon's dirty tricksters and media that portrayed the heroic World War II veteran as a wide-eyed pacifist. McGovern lost badly. As a result, thousands of additional American soldiers and tens of thousands of additional Vietnamese civilians died needlessly. More than 30 years later, the American political process has degenerated to an even more troubling place than it was in 1972. In the 2004 campaign, a Vietnam War veteran, John Kerry, was portrayed as soft on national defense and unpatriotic, while a man whose family used its political connections to ensure that he would not serve in Vietnam, George Bush, was presented as the great defender of America's security in a troubled world. A year later, the United States is sinking deeper into the quagmire that is Iraq. And there are still too few wise voices calling for the only appropriate action: the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. Indeed, as McGovern arrives in Madison, President Bush is once more attempting to "sell" the case for a war that was founded on lies about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction that never posed a threat. McGovern, who from the start has been a wise and consistent critic of the Bush administration's misguided policies regarding the Middle East, has much to offer the current debate. He is a military veteran who knows the horrors of war, and who recognizes well that there are times when Americans must fight. He is, as well, a political veteran who recognizes that when an unnecessary war is spinning out of control, it is right to open a debate about how to end it. His wisdom is needed now more than ever. It has been a long time since we were privileged to endorse his candidacy for the presidency. But we are not inclined to withdraw it quite yet. Indeed, were it left to this newspaper, we would gladly replace George Bush, a man who avoided serving his country in a time of war but has few qualms about sending others to die for it, with George McGovern, a man who proudly served when his country called but who has always recognized that the call must be made only when it is absolutely necessary. So we issue our endorsement once more: McGovern for president. http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1114-28.htm
