Will your feelings about Kerry change if he votes to confirm Condi?

[MoonRiver]

Poll question: Will your feelings about Kerry change if he votes to confirm Condi?

I'm just curious about where the line in the sand will finally be drawn regarding Kerry's behavior. Nuff said.

[The Backlash Cometh]

1. I think it would be a step in the right direction in

legitimizing his campaign speeches claiming that we can't take another four years of Bush.

[babylonsister]

2. I think Mr. Kerry will be picking his battles carefully. nt

[TayTay]

I don't think he's going to vote for her

and maybe not for Gonzales either. After all, what are the Rethugs going to do, question his patriotism? Spread lies about his service record? Demean his wife? Been there, done that, still here.

Seriously, he's got nothing to lose by not endorsing the The Idiot King's nominees. The Dems have to show * that they are not going to rubber stamp approval for him. I think they are paying some attention to the base and the fact that the Dem base hates these people.

[MoonRiver]

14. I really, really hope you are correct.

Nothing would make my spirit sing more than having Kerry and our Dem leaders in general stand up to the cartel. I would be so delighted to be proven wrong.

[TayTay]

61. Sing, now

Told ya! I just didn't have the smell of a yes. And so it goes, now we'll see on Gonzales.

[babylonsister]

63. LOL! Good instincts, TT.

I just didn't want to set myself up for more disappointment, oh me of little faith. I'm SO GLAD, and I am singing!

[TayTay]

67. Well, the signs were all there

He put out that petition yesterday to get rid of Rumsfeld. It isn't that far a jump to say, these Rethugs are awful, I'm not voting for the worst of them. No heavy lifting involved in this particular reading of the tea leaves.

[autorank]

3. Votes for Condi, he's out of my lexicon forever! Can't imagine he'd do it

[blm]

4. Let's turn against the man who exposed more government corruption than any

lawmaker in modern history. Let's all turn against the man who helped to end three wars. Let's turn against the man who warned this nation about global terrorism 4 years before 9-11.

Brilliant. Very productive. Notice the Republicans never turn against their standard bearers. Nope, they glorify them no matter what, because it STRENGTHENS their party which gets them to their goals.

Only a truly brilliant lefty could possibly encourage others to turn against great Democrats like Kerry. Truly brilliant in a David Horowitz kind of way.

BTW....you had NO CATEGORY for those of us who are devoted to GOOD GOVERNANCE and those lawmakers who do their best to get there. Somehow, the simplistic cheerleading view made its way to your poll.

[Goldeneye]

6. I'm glad someone gets it.

[ginnyinWI]

11. thankyou blm

you are a voice of sanity and reason amid a sea of s**t.

I trust Kerry to do what's right for America. That's about the size of it, for me. He knows far more than I do about how things work. That's why we put guys like him in office.


Seeing him on TV today, it is so obvious that he is overqualified for his current job!

[Pastiche423]

24. Did you see/hear

his speech just prior to his IWR vote?

[ginnyinWI]

70. I saw it later--yes. n/t

[JohnKleeb]

16. yep

[Leilani]

blm, I'm not picking a fight

but asking a question:

You always include in your posts that Kerry is the "man who exposed more government corruption than any lawmaker in modern history"

Now, that's a pretty encompassing statement. Could you cite some details to this claim?

And, if this is such a large part of Kerry's resume, why did he not campaign on this issue?

[blm]

22. He investigated and exposed IranContra, BCCI and illegal wars in Central

America. The information uncovered in those investigations is astounding.

Almost everything we know about the BFEE today was uncovered in those investigations.

Apparently Bob Shrum focused group and determined that most average Americans couldn't "get" BCCI. I say he was wrong and must have had an incredibly dumb group. Post 9-11, people "get" that the funding of terrorism is a bad thing. BIG mistake in my book.

[Leilani]

23. Thanks for your reply

I knew about those hearings, & thought it should have been part of his resume during the campaign.

I thought maybe there was something I didn't know about.

[blm]

26. Unfortunately most of today's so-called journalists don't even know about

those investigations and have little understanding of their significance to today's matters. Today's Iraq policy and the events of 9-11 both are rooted deeply in BCCI.

TV reporters today do very little reporting. They just show up to read what their producers tell them to read after corporate censors have their say.

[AntiCoup2K4]

27. Broken record

For all his alleged "exposure of government corruption", the same exact corrupt assholes are still there, and now their corruption rivals that of HITLER, and Judas fucking IsKerryot wouldn't even challenge the election that they stole from HIM, and he knew goddamn well they stole it.

I'm tired of making excuses for John Kerry's Internationalist House of Waffles. :grr:

And the rest of the spineless fucking cowards too, for that matter.

[blm]

33. Tough. If you and others would have followed that message throughout

the general election, then the media and the GOP would have had a harder time saying the Dems were only ABB and had no enthusiasm for Kerry. Instead, they picked up on the bullshit messages delivered on a silver platter by self-righteous purists caught up in the vanity of their own short-term thinking and easily spun it against Kerry.

You call it a broken record and I call it a never changing truth. The day you prove me wrong, that Kerry is NOT a history-making lawmaker who investigated and exposed important matters of government corruption, that will be the day I stop saying he is.

[AntiCoup2K4]

35. How the Hell can it be "the truth"???

Since Kerry supposedly "exposed" the Bush Criminal Empire, they have been legitimately elected once, and stolen 2 elections, one from your boy himself.

And the BCE keeps on rolling towards Armegeddon. Only now John Boy is voting FOR all of their fascist crap. He'll vote for Torture Boy and Condi too. Some fucking hero you got, huh?

[blm]

41. It's true and the congressional record backs it up...and

where the congressional record stops you can check the National Security Archives for corroboration.

You can't change the facts of history. You want to characterize Kerry as someone whose investigations were insignificant and useless. Prove it by using historical facts. How do YOU know what you know about the Bushes and their cronies? It had to come from somewhere.

[AntiCoup2K4]

44. Again, WHY THE HELL DIDN'T KERRY DO SOMETHING WITH THIS INFO??

I had all the same facts Kerry did. I've been investigating these fucking pigs since the obvious Iranian hostage fraud of January 20, 1981.

Difference is, I'm not a US Senator, or a millionaire, so my options are limited. Kerry held back. Why is that? Could the fact that he's a "brother" in Skull & Bones have something to do with it? Or perhaps you weren't aware that Bonesmen swear an oath which takes precedence over EVERY other oath, pledge, promise, or whatever. Even an oath to defend the Constitution.

[blm]

59. Kerry never held back. He worked to get the info out to the public while

Bush1 and his cronies were working to get it classified as national security secrets. Damn few Democrats in Congress would back Kerry. He was treated like a pariah. What happened to him was worse than what Cynthia McKinney went through, and all the while he refused to drop the investigation.

You make claims that Kerry didn't do anything, yet there are well-researched books that prove you are incredibly wrong in your assessment.

Why don't you seek out some real information to aid your analysis? Try Robert Parry. He was a top investigative journalist on the story.

[leftynyc]

68. And now that he's said he'll vote AGAINST Condi

what garbage will you spew. And just for fun, can you write a sentence without swearing?

[emulatorloo]

37. Kool! Right-wing talking points! my favorite EOM

[AntiCoup2K4]

42. Are you calling me a right winger?

I believe that's a violation of DU rules.

Not to mention a fucking ridiculous thought.

Or do you actually believe that Kerry is the Lone Ranger that will bring down the BCE with one single silver bullet?

And if so, why didn't he do so in 1987 and spared us thousands of lives and at least 2 economic disasters? Not to mention the shredding of the Constitution - which he voted for, BTW.

Nice work, John Boy.

[emulatorloo]

46. You've internalized right-wing talking points and are regurgitating them

I am sure your credentials are impeccable. . .nonetheless, you are repeating right-wing talking points about Kerry and Dems.

[AntiCoup2K4]

52. How is it a "right wing talking point" to state the fact....

...that BLM's fairy tale of Prince John F. Charming saving the planet from the BCE simply is not true? If it were true, there would be no Patriot Act, no 3000 dead in NYC, and no 1400 dead in Iraq, because these things would not have happenned, if the Bush Criminal Empire were in prison where they belong.

Instead, Kerry let them walk. Since then, the BCE has served two full terms in the White House, and are beginning a third. And weren't even elected to the last two. Yet BLM continues to spread this fiction, despite the obvious and very dark reality that surrounds us.

That's not a right wing talking point. It's merely the awful truth. Kerry may have had the knowledge, but he failed to act on it. And now he votes to enable their agenda. You don't have to watch FAUX news to realize that.

[emulatorloo]

57. Skull and Bonz?

Florid conspiracy fantasies about frat boys don't strengthen your argument either. People who end of powerful often go to Yale. Doesn't mean every Yalie likes each other. . .

[AntiCoup2K4]

58. Lots of people go to Yale. But only a few of them are S&B

Clinton was not S&B. Dean was not S&B. Holy Joe was not S&B. Kerry was.

[emulatorloo]

72. Neither was Barbara Bush - she turned them down for Spade & Chalice

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/gossip/story/157498p-138306c.html

Kinda interesting thread on yale frats and societies:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=1473547

[KittyWampus]

28. The Kamikaze Contigent On DU Continues Is Onslaught.

We must destroy the Democratic Party to save it.

Democrats who refuse to shoot their wad prematurely and on demand are traitors.

[MoonRiver]

29. I think you may be on to something there.

We must at least destroy the DLC to save the Democratic Party. But, then again, the DLC, in effect, IS the Democratic Party.

[KittyWampus]

34. It's Pretty Funny You Would Post That. It Went Right Over Your Head.

[senseandsensibility]

5. Better gear up for it folks

I think he's gonna vote for her.x(

[candy331]

7. Yep ! no doubt about it, his vote is good as already cast.

[comradebillyboy]

8. i expect him to vote for condi

along with all the other pink tutu dems who will also vote for her

it would be wrong to stand for something ya know

[Guaranteed]

9. I won't be pleased.

But, hey, never stopped him before!

[MoonRiver]

10. Lol!

:D

[4MoreYearsOfHell]

12. JK - Do you have our back?

Then speak for us...you have nothing to lose...

[bush_is_wacko]

13. I resent the cheerleader term but ,quite frankly, Kerry and Boxer will

BOTH confirm her. As will everybody else. And I will support that decision.

Condi is much more knowledgeable and qualified in this area than she ever was qualified to be an adviser on National Security. I don't like some of her answers regarding Abu-Girab and torture but she is one of the most knowledgeable people in existence on International matters. I think Kerry and Boxer and Obama, and several other members of the committee, Republican and Democrat alike, have sent her a clear message that if she won't work with them they are going to make her life miserable. They can all greatly benefit from her knowledge and she can greatly benefit from their diplomacy! This is a mutually beneficial relationship and people need to listen to what she is saying every bit as they do "our" guys.

She should have been kicked out as National Security Adviser for sure, but since that never happened, she is an asset to this office. I f she screws up she will be held responsible. She is no longer going to be able to hide behind the President. THIS office KEEPS her accountable!

[MoonRiver]

17. Held responsible??????? L-O- FUCKING-L!

Since WHEN has anybody in the bush cartel been "held responsible"?? One reason they haven't is because our Democratic leadership places its stamp of approval on every one of their nominations and acts of outrage.

[bush_is_wacko]

21. Actually, I agree with you that our party has NOT been as vociferous as

they should have been. I am seeing a different trend here. Both sides of the aisle have asked some pretty difficult questions of her. She has been pretty knowledgeable in her answers. As for holding her accountable. THIS position requires someone to work with THIS particular committee. Do you think Colin Powell shirked that duty? I actually don't. I think he TRIED to perform his duty and wasn't heard by the administration. I think Condi will soon find herself in a similar position. Maybe she'll have to bend over so far she is kissing her - - - goodbye. But she WILL have to work with these people. And these are not the thugs we need to be constantly vigilant against. Most of these on this committee are the Republicans that see a need for bipartisan participation and attempt to live by it. Have you been listening to this hearing?

BTW, I don't think ANY of the questions she's been asked are out of line. And I also think the Republicans have asked pretty hard questions of her. THAT IS THE JOB OF THESE PEOPLE!

[cvoogt]

20. accountable, like Rumsfeld?

she IS more qualified for SOS, the trouble is just that her talents and intelligence are in the service of torture and "illegal" wars. Also, she will be dealing with other nations directly through diplomacy, and there are actually countries that think the Geneva Convention is important ... and they know she worked hard to allow intelligence and defense to use "extreme interrogation techniques." She even got the Lieberman/McCain anti-torture wording stricken from a unanimously approved bill in the Senate, even when that wording was "In General, no prisoner shall be ...." etc. So it was left open to allow exceptions. If she can't agree on that, it is pretty clear there is NO respect for international laws, so where is there common ground for talking with other countries? It's in "our enemy's enemy is our friend" (Pakistan re: Sy Hersh), and unilateral action.

BTW "they can greatly benefit from her diplomacy" sounds strange to me. Shouldn't they/we be benefitting from her diplomacy, her being the future SOS and all that? It'll be her job to be diplomatic, or at least appear so.

[bush_is_wacko]

25. You are missing what I am saying. Listen to the hearings...

There is quite a bit of fight in all members of this committee. They are ALL making it clear to her she will have to deal with them and not her precious! We are going to have this administration to deal with for a while! As for her diplomacy. I agree with you only on the Middle East situation. She is generally well respected elsewhere. I have always before wondered why but it must be her grasp on the situation. LOOK I am not a Condi supporter. I am just looking at this situation realistically

[cvoogt]

60. they're not making it easy for her, indeed

I have been watching the hearings, and they have been making it clear she will need to deal with them, and that they can't be as easily fooled as the public. Obama was right on point when it comes to this.
I guess I don't see by whom she is well-respected ... when looking at her contradictions it becomes very hard to say anything nice about her.

[TheDonkey]

15. Not a slanted opinion poll @ all. Do you work for FOX too

[MoonRiver]

18. No, nor CNN, MSNBC or any other whore.

I do think for myself though. Is that OK?

[LittleClarkie]

19. Depends on his stated reasons

for or against.

We shall see.

[ClarkUSA]

32. If he's politically savvy, he'll vote no, knowing that as a gesture ...

it will give him much-needed some political capital in the Party.

His bid for 2008 is getting a cool reception in some quarters.

[marcologico]

30. Like she's not going to get it? n/t

[Generator]

31. I'm not drawing a line in the sand because I don't have one

But I don't understand how you would vote YES for someone when you were so close to picking the spot yourself!!! How could he vote for her if she would be someone he would have never ever picked if he was President?

One of the most heart breaking things was reading the list for Kerry's celebration on election night and who was listed-like she was a celebrity-Kristin Breitweiser. How do you think she and others like her FEEL having Condi confirmed as a secretary of state?

It's a disgrace. 9/11 certainly changed everything. It made this country into something horrible and false. The truth is dead.

Thankfully, there will be history books. Slim consolation to those that have lost their loved ones. Condi will go down as the mendacious, false, incompetent thing she has let herself be.

[Cookie wookie]

36. This thread seems to be something out of the twilight zone

Condi who said they never thought of planes being used as weapons? Condi who has supported * in everything he's done? Condi who should have been brought up on charges for misleading the American public about WMD? How about: "We don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud."

Is this the same Condi who is being discussed here as an acceptable choice for Secretary of State? Condi who said the presidential daily memo in Aug 2001 about the threat from Al Qaeda was "historical," then in the same testimony said it was titled, "Bin Laden determined to strike in the U.S."?

"Moyers, on Friday night's Now on PBS, denounced how "we are to have a new Secretary of State who dreadfully misjudged the terrorist threat leading up to 9/11 and then misled America and the world about the case for invading Iraq." Adding Bush's National Security Adviser pick, Stephen J. Hadley, to his targets, Moyers lectured: "So instead of putting America's foreign policy in the hands of people who might have restored the country's credibility in the world, the President has turned it over to two of the people who helped shred it. Both are known first and foremost for loyalty to the official view of reality, no matter the evidence to the contrary."

http://www.mrc.org/cyberalerts/2004/cyb20041122.asp

Hey, but who am I to criticize someone for such small infractions when she are obviously so wonderful, knowledgeable and intelligent? Man the bar is now low, so low it seems to be located somewhere around Hades.

[sandnsea]

38. I'd prefer he vote no

On both Rice and Gonzales. But if he votes no on the final Senate vote, that'll be good enough. I don't really understand historic protocol on Senate confirmations.

[emulatorloo]

39. TYPICALLY CONGRESS LETS A PRESIDENT CHOOSE THE ADVISORS HE WANTS

do a little research and you will see this is the case. . .Congress typically gives the President a lot of leeway on cabinet posts. . .And quite frankly, Give Bush Condi -- give him as much rope as he wants.

at any rate, it would be cool if Kerry votes against her. But the main thing is getting her lies/BS on the record, which he did a very good job of today.

[Der Blaue Engel]

40. More than 'nuff said

You obviously don't want real answers to a real question, or real discussion of an issue. You're drawing your own line in the DU sand, and taunting people to stand on what you perceive as the correct side, those who like nothing better than to constantly and endlessly pillory Kerry for not doing exactly as you think he should. How is this productive? I wish people could express disappointment in Kerry's decisions or actions in a way that encourages discourse rather than inciting rancor.

Instead of posting snarky polls, why not write or call Kerry and tell him how you'd like him to vote?

[MoonRiver]

43. Why do you assume I haven't done that?

I have. Plus, I voted for Kerry and adamantly supported him after his nomination, despite my disappointment with his IWR vote.

What really p.o.s me though is that Kerry threw this election, imo, for political expediency. Considering what was at stake I consider that unforgivable. I will NEVER support him as the Dem candidate again, because I cannot trust him not to once again betray me.

Regarding my thread, I stated I did not know how he handled himself in the hearings, but I wouldn't be surprise if he caved. Apparently, he didn't cave, just cozied up to Condi a little. But none of that really matters. It's how he votes at the end that counts.

[brentspeak]

47. He "threw" this election?

You have evidence of that?

Now, if you said he "blew" this election, I'd agree wholeheartedly with you. But these boards are already saturated with conspiracy theories -- aw,heck, there's always room for one more x(

[Der Blaue Engel]

48. The tone of your post made me assume you didn't have anything constructive

to offer.

While I can respect your opinion (though I disagree with it), I don't see the usefulness of baiting people.

[MoonRiver]

49. I'm simply gathering information. Can't help myself, I was born curious.

[emulatorloo]

51. "Cozied up to Condi a little?"

no - he got her caught up in contradictions/lies under oath. And boiled her and her "husband's" butts.

[marcologico]

45. He's a senator, he has a job, his life doesn't revolve around payola blogs

Try to get that through your head before sending another check to your televangelist.

[Blue_In_AK]

50. I'm not even going to vote in your stupid poll. n/t

[leesa]

53. No. He was unable to declare the Iraq war wrong and illegal.

I waited his whole campaign and he was for the war the whole way. I would never vote for him again.

[paineinthearse]

65. There is no declared "war in Iraq"

If Kerry had any balls, he would introduce a resolution in the Senate declaring war on terrorism. Let there be a stright up or down vote, not the executive order.

[Bake]

54. He's still a puss!

I've never been more disappointed in my life. Too late to grow a spine, John.

Bake

[Clarkie1]

55. Why would anyone support Kerry in 08' over all other candidates?

I was thinking about it today and can't see why anyone would have Kerry as their first choice. Seriously.

Why nominate a senator, much less a losing senator?

[elshiva]

56. I love Kerry,

my support for him is too strong to be broken by voting to confirm her.
I am very proud of what he said today as well as Boxer. Thanks to Sarbanes for being weird, too.

[Guaranteed]

62. He's voting no.

:)

[paineinthearse]

64. oops!

I voted "No, I'll remain disappointed in him" before I fully comprehended "Yes....we the people". Wonder if others have made the same mistake?

[burn the bush]

66. ok I give him a little more respect. I will support him as a SENATOR

but not as 08 pres nom.

[CWebster]

69. If

he continues to hold his own.

[JohnKleeb]

71. It seems he voted no