Kerry Says Dean Has No Chance Vs. Bush

[Dagaz]

MANCHESTER, N.H. - With a month to go before the New Hampshire primary, John Kerry (news - web sites) made some of his strongest attacks yet against Democratic front-runner Howard Dean (news - web sites), portraying Dean as inexperienced in foreign policy, wrong-headed on the economy and a muddled thinker.


AP Photo



"People are left wondering: What will he say next?" said Kerry, addressing about 180 supporters in a city library auditorium.

"We need more than simple answers and the latest slip of the tongue," he said. "This election is too vital for us to lose it if voters refuse to take a gamble on national security and the steadiness of our leadership."

He pointed to Dean's statements on Saddam Hussein (news - web sites)'s capture and Dean's answer to a hypothetical question about where Osama bin Laden (news - web sites) should be tried, if captured.

"What kind of muddled thinking is it if you can't instantly say that in your heart you know that bin Laden is guilty?" Kerry asked. "After every episode comes a statement trying to explain it away. Will Americans really vote for a foreign policy by clarifying press release?"

The Massachusetts senator and Vietnam war veteran said "this is a perilous moment in history and we cannot master that moment with a stubborn unilateralism or a soft and vacillating isolationism."

Kerry, the early Democratic front-runner, now trails Dean by double digits in polls in New Hampshire — a state where Kerry has said he needs to finish No. 1 or No. 2 for his candidacy to have momentum..

Aides to Kerry note that Dean, the former Vermont governor, fares poorly against Bush in head-to-head matchups.

Kerry said "we can't beat George Bush by being Bush-lite," referring to Dean's criticism of more centrist Democratic candidates.

"But we also won't beat George Bush by being light on national security, light on fairness for middle-class Americans or light on the values that make us Democrats."

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=694&u=/ap/20031227/ap_on_el_pr/kerry_7&printer=1

[Jerseycoa]

1. So true

"This election is too vital for us to lose it if voters refuse to take a gamble on national security and the steadiness of our leadership."

[Monte Carlo]

2. We don't have to like Bush, but we cannot discount the POTUS so easily...

... when he says, officially, that Saddam had the means to strike the East Coast of the U.S., even if he is a liar 9 times out of 10. Only a single vital piece of information can be a justification for preparation for war.

[Dagaz]

6. That's the problem

Bush has to be right some of the time if even by chance. Just running anti Bush on everything looks stupid. I don't see, for example, why the candidates can't say that the war against bin laden and the Taliban was the right thing to do. Then say that Saddam may have needed to be removed but that we should have exhausted diplomacy first.

[CWebster]

114. That is such garbage

A country weakened by a war, agitated by the US backing Saddam, then years of punitive sanctions weakening Iraq, killing thousands of children, turning a formerly thriving secular, well-educated country into a third world wasteland. Attacking Iraq only caused greater suffering to the already suffering PEOPLE of Iraq.

Attacking Iraq was a crime against humanity, lest anyone forget.

[Name removed]

124. Deleted message

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

[seventhson]

3. Kerry is pitiful

he voted for the war and just sounds ...

pitiful

[Sensitivity]

7. Clark said same thing. Guess that is knock on Dean

[isbister]

30. RE: voted for the war

Actually, Kerry didn't vote for the war. Only one person voted for the war in Iraq and that was George Bush.

The President can order troops anywhere to defend the "national security" of the United States. Bush determined the war was necessary to protect the national security of the United States. You can read his exact words at the White House web site in his letter to the Speaker of the House.

Kerry voted for the Authorization to use force in Iraq. He really spoke well from the Senate floor at the time of the vote (and has continued with this position).

A couple of key lines:

"In giving the President this authority, I expect him to fulfill the commitments he has made to the American people in recent days - to work with the United Nations Security Council to adopt a new resolution setting out "tough, immediate" inspections requirements and to "act with our allies at our side" if we have to disarm Saddam Hussein by force. If he fails to do so, I will be the first to speak out. If we do go to war with Iraq, it is imperative that we do so in concert with others in the international community... "

"..The Administration may not be in the habit of building coalitions, but that is what they need to do - and it is what can be done. If we go it alone without reason, we risk inflaming an entire region and breeding a new generation of terrorists, a new cadre of anti-American zealots - and we will be less secure, not more secure, at the end of the day, even with Saddam Hussein disarmed. Let there be no doubt or confusion as to where I stand: I will support a multilateral effort to disarm Iraq by force, if we have exhausted all other options. But I cannot - and will not - support a unilateral, US war against Iraq unless the threat is imminent and no multilateral effort is possible. "

If you're confused about Kerry's position, go read the speech:

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2002_1009.html

[Shanty Oilish]

64. Too much 'appearance of nuance'

As a Kerry supporter I'm now very depressed over the coming disaster of Election 2004. It was Kerry's to lose and he has lost it.
His speech, which you linked, offers his support of the resolution on specific terms. Those terms were met. Bush cobbled together a coalition. It's not unilateral simply because France wasn't on board.

Kerry should not have proceeded to distance himself on the grounds that the war was unilateral or that diplomacy failed. Diplomacy would have failed no matter who was president here. It failed not because of Bush, or France or Germany or Russia---but for a reason none of us gave much weight to: Saddam Hussein was too stupid to back down.
This man is now saying he wound up in a spider hole because he didn't feature having his palace privacy invaded.

So, diplomacy failed. Kerry has never laid out quite what diplomacy of his would have succeeded. Instead he's condemning the failure and leaving a great big blank in his own case. This makes him look as if he's got some reasoning too abstruse to follow, when he's simply got none.

Attacking Bush works for some purposes. This isn't one of them. Kerry won't get the Democrat voters behind him by attacking Bush's war, because Kerry voted for it. Those who didn't, like Dean, are more credible on that score. Kerry would have been better off to stand as an alternative to anti-war, while admitting that war is lamentable. He'd have been better off to focus on other aspects of Bush's record. There are enough to pick from.

This was a failure of campaign strategy. Dems would have held their noses and overlooked Kerry's vote if he hadn't tried to talk it away. We're used to holding our noses. Right now some of us are standing on our heads trying to see Dean's self-corrected positions rightside up. But Kerry decided to compete with Dean for anti-war rage, and he's just not entitled to do so.

Dean is set to lead us to a devastating defeat in '04. Republicans are in a tizzy at the prospect. "Please nominate this man." They mean it. You'll never hear them say it about John Kerry.

[isbister]

72. Re: Too much...

I agreee, I think they way things look now, a shutout is possible. But remember, these pollsters are the same folks that called the 2000 election this way and that way.

"It's not unilateral simply because France wasn't on board."

How many nations participated? US, UK, and the Aussies. Of 191 nations, three, with two actually fighting (I believe the Aussies watched the ports or something like that). That's unilateral.

"It failed not because of Bush, or France or Germany or Russia---but for a reason none of us gave much weight to: Saddam Hussein was too stupid to back down."

It absolutely failed because Bush was determined to take over Iraq. Nothing short of war by a predetermined time would satisfy him.

Saddam did back down and, evidently, has been doing so since the first Gulf War.

"Instead he's condemning the failure and leaving a great big blank in his own case."

The diplomacy any other President would have followed would have been to allow the inspectors to do their job and not undermine them or our allies. Look at what the first Bush did. Granted, it was a different situation but he and his team understood the situation. (Gulf I called for unilateral action more than this did) Dick Cheney himself was interviewed about why the US didn't finish off Saddam and went further than the "company" line by saying that the different factions in the country would leave the US with a mess.

"Kerry won't get the Democrat voters behind him by attacking Bush's war, because Kerry voted for it. "

Kerry didn't vote for the war. Bush was the sole voter in that election. He would have had the authority to attack for national security reasons whether Congress approved or not.

"Those who didn't, like Dean, are more credible on that score."

Dean's position on the war was iffy, although he did stick with his position once he found it. As much as the press makes about their differences, they both were and are not all that far from each other.

"Dems would have held their noses and overlooked Kerry's vote if he hadn't tried to talk it away."

I don't think Kerry has tried to talk his vote away. The first attack of this campaign was Dean's criticism of the IWR voters. This, combined with the fact that our soldiers are in Iraq being wounded and killed, brought the issue out. People ask, he answers.

"But Kerry decided to compete with Dean for anti-war rage, and he's just not entitled to do so."

Nonsense. Kerry said in his speech at the time of the vote what he would do, he spoke often after that and has been consistent.

"Dean is set to lead us to a devastating defeat in '04. Republicans are in a tizzy at the prospect. "Please nominate this man." They mean it. You'll never hear them say it about John Kerry."

I believe they are rubbing it in our face because they believe he has it locked up now and in the worse case (if by some miracle) they would have to face either Clark or Gephardt.

I agree believe they have always known Kerry is the only Democrat with a chance to beat Bush and that is why the corporate media's effort to paint Kerry's war position as something it is not nor ever has been.

Pray for a miracle to remove all republicans from their offices.

[Shanty Oilish]

77. Not the 1st time I'm hearing K didn't vote for the war...

but rather the use of force. Now that's real nuance.
Kerry voted all right. You just fog up the issue by saying only Bush voted.
And unilateral means unilateral. One-sided. It wasn't. It wasn't one or two or three. Like it or not, many countries endorsed Bush's war. WHY they did so, isn't always pretty. Neither is why some didn't.

Kerry should face facts and quit trying to change history (his vote). Redefining unilateral is not helping.

Yes, Bush was determined to go into Iraq. But if Saddam Hussein had agreed to terms and flung open all doors, Bush would never have been able to explain himself.

Pray for a miracle? Yes, the miracle I'd like to see is, all nations acting from high moral principle. Not one does. Not even one.

[TeacherCreature]

86. Kerry had no chance against bush for the same reasons he has no chance at

beating Dean. Kerry is a lousy candidate. He is a lousy candidate and you should know that. He keeps proving it over and over. Stop buying the Dean can't win spin and get active trying to get rid of bush.

[Name removed]

129. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

128. Deleted message

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

[polpilot]

116. Kerry should say: 'Dean has no chance against me!!' That should bring

down the house.

Dean '04...

[Name removed]

127. Deleted message

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

[DuctapeFatwa]

4. Whoever is willing to be George Wallace has the best chance

Some of you probably don't know who George Wallace is, but those of you who are old enough to remember his famous promise to himself after he lost the Alabama governor's race in 1958 will nod in agreement, disgust, or both.

Politics ain't pretty.

It is unlikely that any Democratic candidate who is not willing and able to "out-terrorist" the bush regime even has a chance at the nomination.

[Bertha Venation]

5. As if anyone's saying so

will improve his or her own chances.

[shivaji]

8. Kerry has no chance vs. Dean

Just look at the polls.
Just look at the fund raising.
Just look at the energy in the campaign.

Dean will whomp Kerry, Clark & Gephardt.....won't be long now.
Kerry goes back to senate.
Gep goes back to the house.
Clark goes back to lobbying for defense related companies.

[isbister]

42. Re: Kerry has no chance vs. Dean

Is there any chance you could look at the Dr.'s record and not just at his promises?

I agree that people can change but, with politicians, a record can give a good indication of how the will perform in the future. A well-timed oposition to a war does not a progressive/liberal make.

[mouse7]

51. Kerry has no chance vs. Sharpton, CMB

For all the talk about supposed electability, Kerry is about to get lapped by Sharpton and lose to CMB.

[TeacherCreature]

9. TeacherCreature says Kerrry couldn't arm wrestle her Grammy and win!

"What kind of muddled thinking is it if you can't instantly say that in your heart you know that bin Laden is guilty?" Kerry asked. "After every episode comes a statement trying to explain it away. Will Americans really vote for a foreign policy by clarifying press release?"


So Kerry is saying he doesn't believe in our laws , he doesn't support our system of justice? What is this mook smoking?

[w13rd0]

12. Thank God Kerry isn't the judge and jury in trials...

...because despite his tell-tale hearts ability to render verdicts, we are a nation of LAWS, and both Kerry and Bush seem to need to re-aquaint themselves with the concept.

[babzilla]

17. nice talk from a lawyer

Kerry's law professors must be cringing from this statement.

"What kind of muddled thinking is it if you can't instantly say that in your heart you know that bin Laden is guilty?" Kerry asked.

c'mon John, as a lawyer and former prosecutor you know better than that. Treat the justice system with a little more respect esquire.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

26. Easy now...

...perhaps Kerry has the "Shining."

[babzilla]

27. Danny's not here now Mrs. Torrence

"After every episode comes a statement trying to explain it away. Will Americans really vote for a foreign policy by clarifying press release?"

all work and no play makes John a very dull boy.

Do you like ice cream doc?

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

29. Did someone say ice cream?

[polpilot]

117. Kerry appears to be too ANGRY. We need more than ANGER.

Dean '04...

[Name removed]

125. Deleted message

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

[polpilot]

132. Was this response intended for another post?

Rage Against The Machine!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Dean '04...

[auburnblu]

13. Oh please

Kerry, said in his heart knowing that Bin Ladin was guilty. What's scary is that there are posters on here that think there is a greater chance that Bush is guilty of causing the earthquake in Iran than the possibility that Bin Ladin is guilty. he's not saying don't have a trial, but sometimes there are just situations where you feel pretty sure someone is guilty. The I hate everything about Bush and I'll give Bin Ladin every benefit of the doubt attitude is going to fail miserably in November if any candidate tries that approach.

[TeacherCreature]

88. he knows in his heart bin ladin is guilty

Sorry but that sound too much like George Bush rhetoric. I couldn't give a damn what someone "knows in their heart".

[Name removed]

126. Deleted message

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

[Rose Siding]

10. The GOP thanks you *again*, Senator.

Always there in a clinch!

[dfong63]

21. Clark and Kerry partisans repeat this over and over,

... as if repetition would make it true.

[MoonRiver]

11. Kerry's right.

And the truth is that even though I disagree with Kerry's vote on IWR I would much rather see him as the Dem candidate than Dean. Why? Because he has a much better chance of beating b*sh, and that's what we must do or this democracy and our party will not survive.

[TeacherCreature]

90. if he can't win the primary how is he a better candidate?

My suffed Eeore doll would be a better candidate.

[paulk]

120. I see this argument a lot

and it has to be among the stupidest ever.

Think McGovern, Goldwater, Dukakis, Mondale.

Sometimes the strongest candidate doesn't win the primary.

[batman]

14. f**k john kerry

and his losing ass

hes a bigger dissapointment by the day

johns loyalty lies with john and not his country - poor pathetic loser

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

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

[isbister]

35. Re: We Are Doomed To Lose With Help

Your position assumes the Republicans just fell off of the turnip truck. Maybe you haven't been paying attention but these folks may very well be the most media savvy group the Presidency has ever seen.

If you support Dr. Dean and are concerned by these friendly Democrat jabs you had better think about looking into your candidate's positions a little further. If he is our candidate next fall, he's going to be hit by a great number of haymakers and Bush's handlers won't need any Democrat's help.

[mouse7]

53. Kerry so media savvy getting crushed in his home media market

Dean is crushing Kerry using his home media market as the club. Most of NH gets Boston TV news and Dean is killing him in it.

[isbister]

63. Re: Kerry so media savvy getting crushed...

A lot of Portland tv, too.

I live in the area and see the same "Boston" TV as southern NH and there isn't an inordinate amount of Sen. Kerry on (or Sen. Kennedy, for that matter).

By the way, did you know Vermont shares an extensive border with New Hampshire?

[mouse7]

69. Don't see Kerry? Who's fault is that?

If Kerry can't figure out a way to get on his hometown TV stations, what the hell can he do? He's supposed to be proving he's capable of running a smart campaign against Dumbya. If Kerry can't figure out how to get on his hometown TV stations, he won't be able to figure out how to run a good media campaign in any other city.

[isbister]

74. "Don't see Kerry? Who's fault is that?"

I'm not trying to take away from Dean's effort in NH, he's put in the time, effort and money and he's done great, maybe better than he had ever hoped for.

I think WiseMen made a good point, Dean was Governor of the state next door performing his duties. Kerry was a Senator spending a great deal of time in Washington performing his duties. Understand how one may get a little more face time than the other leading up to the campaign?

I think we'll be seeing a lot of everybody on tv over the next month...probably won't be any time for the regular shows... with nine candidates they'll probably be running 24 hour commercials :-)

You might want to start up your calculator but its still a few days early to be counting your chickens.

I like Kerry and his record in the 11th hour.

[TLM]

79. And when Kerry does get media time....

he uses it to attack Dean.

That's why Kerry is losing... Dean, Dean, Dean, Dean, Dean!

[TeacherCreature]

91. Marcia Marcia Marcia

I feel sorry for Kerry and his supporters. The guy is tanking and he has no idea what to do about it besides attack Dean. I am humiliated for him.

[WiseMen]

65. Please Look Again. NH and Vermont are Extension of Each Other. Not MASS

NH pop is usually looking to what's happening in Vermont re
policies etc. Dean day to day is pretty much know in NH. Was a
good Governor. NH like his conservative pro-growth policies. Kerry's Senate career gave him little visibility in NH compared with Dean.

[mouse7]

70. Read #69

The TV coverage of an area is more important.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

134. Not in New England- Papers and word of mouth count for more

esepcially in heavily canvassed NH.

[TLM]

80. Dean's beating him in Mass too

stompin him in his own state.

[Name removed]

130. Deleted message

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

[polpilot]

133. You're a bit late to the party. This nonsense was promoted when Dean

was at 0% in December, '02...

Dean '04...

[John_H]

16. The new Dean strategy: "If we lose it's because all those other folks

recognized the obvious."

[bhunt70]

28. I agree. the buck won't stop with dean.

It will be everyone elses fault.

[TLM]

81. Nope, it will stop with the owners of the knives in his back...

The dems seem to be working harder to take Dean out than Bush.


If Kerry had focused this much energy on Bush and attackign Bush over the last 3 years... he'd be the frontrunner right now.


Seems Kerry can only bother to get in the fight, when he's attacking Democrats.

[stickdog]

18. stickdog say Kerry has no chance to reclaim his respect.

Fucking Bush enabler.

[sandnsea]

19. He says it because he cares

He knows full well the risk of saying these things is that he will be seen more negatively, as has happened all along. He knows full well that it's possible his perceived negativity against Dean will help Clark more than him. He says the truth about Howard Dean because he knows we are truly in a perilous moment in history, he knows to the very core of his being that we have to get rid of George Bush. He knows Howard Dean simply cannot go up against Bush on national security and win. This is the kind of courage he has always shown, even when he voted to confront Saddam when he knew his core followers would rake him over the coals for it. He does what is right. He does it every single time, no matter the consequences. He is the same John Kerry who stood up against the Vietnam War and exposed Iran/Contra.

He has always done what is right. It is time for the people of this party to remember how many times he has been there for us, remember his integrity, and trust him this one time. This ONE time. He's earned that trust 1,000 times over.

This is a perilous moment in our history. In the history of the entire world. The Democratic Party cannot afford to get it wrong. We MUST beat George Bush. Howard Dean simply cannot do it.

[babzilla]

20. how much more risk taking can we take from Kerry?

yes it is very risky for Kerry to declare with unmuddled certainty from the bottom of his heart that bin laden is presumed guilty before a trial or even before the 9/11 commission report, he's really going out on a limb on that one.

I beg to differ, this is not the same John Kerry who stood up against the Vietnam War and exposed Iran/Contra. This is the John Kerry who voted for the Iraq war and exposed himself to be a go-along get-along politician when the going got tough. It is sadly disappointing that he has chosen that path.

[Monte Carlo]

22. You don't know that.

You don't know that Kerry voted for the IWR to be a go-along politician when the going got tough. It is very possible that there were legitimate reasons, regardless of the antics of the Bush Administration, to justify a preparation for war. John Kerry has been a great Democrat for years, going against much before repeatedly, and I don't see any reason why he suddenly changed to send soldiers off to die to bomb Iraqi civilians.

[babzilla]

25. I don't see any reason why he suddenly changed

to send soldiers off to die and to bomb Iraqi civilians either, I wish he could explain it to me one of these days.

[isbister]

37. Re: I don't see any reason why he suddenly changed

Kerry didn't change, read what he said at the time, its long but worth it.

Remember, sometimes you can't believe every thing the corporate media tells you.

[babzilla]

61. its not what the corporate media tells me

its more what I have seen with my own eyes. I heard his speech on the senate floor and then I saw him vote for the war.

I was surprised to say the least, the words and the vote just didn't mesh up for me.

[isbister]

67. Re: the words and the vote just didn't mesh up for me

Me too, until I read the speech.

[sandnsea]

45. It's so fucking simple

WMD. WMD. WMD. WMD. WMD. WMD. WMD. WMD. WMD. WMD.


THEY ARE REAL!!!! TERRORISTS AND ROGUE NATIONS HAVE THEM!!! THEY WANT TO KILL PEOPLE WITH THEM!!! Americans, Australians, Europeans, kill them wherever they can.

It is not because of our freedoms, it's because we're assholes.

But we can't do NOTHING about the very real fact that this shit exists on the planet.

That's why he voted for the IWR. To get the UN to take the problem of WMD in rogue nations seriously. To create an international strength in dealing with the problem in order to make ALL peoples safer.

BUSH FUCKED UP. He fucked up more than Iraq. WAY MORE. He fucked up the entire process in dealing with WMD. He set the world back decades.

Kerry understands this. He understands you have to be strong and consistent in getting weapons off this planet. OURS included. He also understands you have to address the underlying problems of poverty and animosity that breed terrorism.

Anti-war people can put their heads in the sand and pretend there's no terrorist threat all they want to. They can laugh and guffaw at Bush's stupid orange alerts and make political hay with it all they want to. But when another 9/11 happens, and it will, what will they say??? How many people have to die until they understand that we need a leader who will address BOTH the criminal aspect of current terrorism as well as our own political failings which is killing people in other countries as well.

There simply isn't another person, NOT ANOTHER PERSON, who would bring both strength and international engagement in dealing with the whole terrorism problem the way Kerry would. He's the last best hope for the country and the world.

[babzilla]

47. fucking simple is

as fucking simple does.

There simply isn't another person, NOT ANOTHER PERSON, who would bring both strength and international engagement in dealing with the whole terrorism problem the way Kerry would. He's the last best hope for the country and the world.

wow sandnsea, I admire your support for your candidate, over the top as it may be.

[sandnsea]

52. Deal with the goddamn issues

For one fucking time I wish people would deal with the fucking issues. They are REAL. I find this immature goddamn temper tantrum bullshit sickening. What the hell is wrong with people who are more interested in their own self-deluded "revolution" or self-righteous protests than the REALITY of DEAD PEOPLE. DEAD PEOPLE. DEAD. Can you get that through your heads. This is not a goddamn game. We are at a real and true crossroads. It really and truly is a perilous moment. I don't understand how people who supposedly see the monstrosity Bush is can turn around and vote on fucking health care for chrissake. Who gives a rats ass about health care when George Bush is leading us to nuclear disaster? When he is destroying every international opportunity to create peace? THAT is the issue this election. Any Democrat who doesn't get that and vote accordingly, is point blank full of shit on the entire war altogether. And when Howard Dean says he's going to run on the economy, it proves he doesn't get it at all and never did.

[babzilla]

57. get a grip sandnsea

maybe you wouldn't be seeing so many DEAD PEOPLE, DEAD PEOPLE, DEAD PEOPLE if your candidate would have taken a stronger stand against the Bush monstrosity.

Kerry had his chance to vote on the side of the courageous Senators and Representatives who said no to making more DEAD PEOPLE in our name, now he is reduced to merely holding out his unmuddled heart to show the world how convinced he is that bin laden is evil. You cast your vote and you takes your chances, in this case it didn't work out for him too well.

I give a rats ass about health care and the economy and the DEAD PEOPLE all in the same time as I am chewing gum and walking, its not that hard to do if you know what you stand for.

[isbister]

60. Re: get a grip sandnsea

Kerry didn't take any chances, he voted in a manner consistent with his position. You should read his speeches on the IWR and the war itself, this is not an issue Senator Kerry just stumbled upon on his way to the race. Read, it will help clear up your confusion about the Senator.

sandnsea,

I agree, take it down a notch... It's not like Reagan is running for office. Granted bush II is a danger but just as much domestically as well as internationally. The damage he is doing here should not be swept under the rug.

[sandnsea]

76. I disagree

I'd rather Reagan were running for office. Any day of the week. He did alot of stupid shit, but at least he knew the meaning of international relations and TALKING.

And yes, Bush is doing alot of damage here. But we're fighting it in our courts and we're making slow progress. The damage done with his "war on terror" can't be stopped or undone by a court order. It's damage that goes on for decades and affects the entire world. I'm not happy when trees get chopped down or he puts arsenic in our water or whatever stupid thing. But I truly am terrified by what he could unleash with his pre-emptive war doctrine. He HAS to go. It's imperative.

[TLM]

89. How'd Kerry vote on that patriot act?

you know the one helping do all that REAL damage.

[sandnsea]

96. Who is going to repeal it?

What Congress would even let Kucinich repeal it?

[TeacherCreature]

94. how can the thousands of Iraqi war dead be fixed?

That is the ultimate question and one you can not brush away. I agree bush has to go. The problem with your position is you have to argue Bush's arguments to defend your candidate. That is why Kerry is losing (amoung other reasons er....james baker....) he must make Bushlite arguments to run his campaign. He put himself in that position with his vote on IRW and the patriot act.

[sandnsea]

97. Blame Bush

I cannot understand why people who are always harping on taking it to Bush won't blame him for this war. He didn't have to start the war when he did or the way he did. HE chose to do it. HE lied to do it. HE is responsible for it.

And again, who is going to repeal the Patriot Act? What Congress would even let Kucinich repeal the Patriot Act? Most people know there are good aspects of the Patriot Act and aspects that have been abused that need to be repealed. Who actually introduced legislation to repeal those parts of the Patriot Act? Kerry.

And the comment about James Baker, like everything else in this election, makes sense when taken IN context.

But like I said, throwing some sort of self-indulgent temper tantrums is more important than getting a candidate who can actually be elected and will actually implement the kind of foreign policy we all want.

[TeacherCreature]

108. okay you win...Kerry is as dumb as a fence post

and shouldn't be held responsible for his votes on IWR and the patriot act.

PS... James Baker makes no sense in any context. If you can figure that one out you might understand finally why Kerry is getting his ass handed to him in this primary.

[sandnsea]

62. Then why contain Saddam? Why the NEW UN Resolution?

If there was no threat at all, why? WHY? How in the world can anybody be taken seriously when he supports containment AND a war resolution; then says Saddam is no big deal? It's irrational!

And anybody who makes the central issue for one candidate a vote and then doesn't remotely care about the serious foreign policy gaffes of the opposing candidate is just being selfish and phony as far as I'm concerned. People don't care about this vote or this war. They care about some sort of smug validation and Howard Dean is giving it to them. If people truly cared about our foreign policy and the desperation third world countries find themselves in, they'd be DEMANDING a candidate who truly had the knowledge and experience to deal with it. It might not be Kerry, but it sure as hell wouldn't be Dean.

[babzilla]

68. you and I differ on serious foreign policy gaffes

I believe that the Iraq war was a serious foreign policy gaffe.

Kerry saw it differently.

Its not about smug validation, it is about the real consequences of real votes on real executive power.

In this instance I agreed with Sen. Byrd that the Senate was delinquent in their duties when they voted to leave it up to the president to decide on whether to invade the country of Iraq with no compelling reason to do so.

That is how I saw it, and that is why I am not convinced that Kerry is good on foreign policy.

[sandnsea]

71. That's the way it always works

When we declared war on Germany, it was years before we invaded. FDR made the final decision. That's the responsibility of the Commander in Chief. It is expected that the Commander in Chief do everything in his power to avoid war, even with a Declaration of War.

Biden-Lugar would have given Bush the same final authority. Any resolution would. I understand Byrd's preference that they wait to make the vote, but Bush still would have been given the authority to invade when he saw fit if a resolution had passed. That's the final authority the Commander in Chief has.

[isbister]

73. Re: serious foreign policy gaffes

Here, read Bush's March 21, 2003 letter to Hastert:

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=108_cong_documents&docid=f:hd054.108

First paragraph:

"...my determination that further diplomatic and other
peaceful means alone will neither adequately protect the
national security of the United States against the continuing
threat posed by Iraq..."

When protecting the national security of the United States the President doesn't need the the Congress.

.......................................

Kerry sees the Iraq War as a serious foreign policy gaffe. Shoot, even Bush might see it as a gafffe now... although he's in too deep to turn back.

.......................................

"In this instance I agreed with Sen. Byrd that the Senate was delinquent in their duties ....."

Ah, but if the vote was to forbid the President from using force... I wonder how that would've turned out. Can Congress prohibit the President from protecting the nation's security (no matter how right or wrong the president may be)?

[TLM]

87. Kerry helped make those dead people...

And we are at a crossroads... one where the people of this party on mass have decided that we do not want Kerry's or CLark's or Lieberman's brand of bullshit in the whitehouse. These fence sitting fuckheads can take their asses right back home.

We've been losing elections under their style for too long, we've been watching them capitulate and lay down for too long. They fucked up too much and now the base is abandoning these assholes just like that abandoned us.

Last best hope my ass... last best hope for more of the same status quo shit.

You need to wake up and look around this party. There is a big fucking crack right down the middle. Dean is our last best hope for saving this party. Because if we nominate someone like Clark or Kerry... that crack gets bigger. And we LOSE another election. Kerry and Clark can not win at this point... after the capture of Saddam their war hawk chest puffing is no longer an advantage. They've been declawed.

The foggy logic which says in the conventional wisdom that Kerry or Clark are the only ones who can win, is the same wisdom that said Gore would win by 10 points because he was too clean to attack. Kerry would be no different, same with Clark.

Hell those guys can't even beat Dean, they'd be push overs against Bush.

Dean is going to beat Kerry, then he's going to beat BUsh. No thanks to the efforts of some so called democrats who would rather kneecap our best contender because they feel they are entitled to the nomination.

[sandnsea]

103. Dean is NO hope

And the biggest fence sitter of them all. How can people not see that?

How many times do his own words, his own support of war resolutions, unilateral invasion, his own flip-flops on EVERYTHING have to be posted.

If Dean is the hope of this party, then we are so far gone as to be beyond hope. He stands for nothing, absolutely nothing that can be construed as "Democratic". Well, health care. And civil unions. That's it. He's sold the rest of the Democratic Party platform out years ago and all he's got left is a bunch of election year pandering that he has to test, restate, retest, evolve, and then finally come to a "position".

I am beyond frustrated with this calamity.

[mouse7]

112. Take a deep breath and step away from this for a bit

I posted like 10 pages worth of transcripts on the 1441 proving what you say about Dean on the Iraq question just is not true. So you came back over on this thread and try to push the same stuff on a thread away from the evidence that proves you are wrong.

Dean clearly said unless Saddam refused to allow inspectors in, that Iraq was not an imminent threat. This is a clear pattern from Sept. 2002 through March 2003. The transcripts don't lie. The only reason Dean gave as a possible reason for invasion of Iraq was if Saddam refused to allow any UN inspectors in

Take a step back from the discussion. You've invested too much in winning some argument that isn't going your way. The evidence just isn't there for you to do it. You don't understand that most everyone here "gets" it. We understand public policy. You just cannot force people here to your point of view based on sheer willpower.

[TeacherCreature]

95. cough cough

For one fucking time I wish people would deal with the fucking issues. They are REAL. I find this immature goddamn temper tantrum bullshit sickening.

I'll say.........

[JNelson6563]

109. Nice tantrum

I find this immature goddamn temper tantrum bullshit sickening.

Oh the irony!!

Julie

[TeacherCreature]

93. WMD WMD WMD

They didn't exist in Iraq. Everybody knew it because the inspectors said so. Even if they did, that does not justify going to war. We don't get to attack every nation with WMD. That is the reality.

[sandnsea]

98. How did the inspectors get in the goddamn country?

Jesus fucking christ. How can people use an argument they wouldn't even have without the vote that gave them the argument in the first place. What kind of logic is that. I can't even wrap my head around it.

And if you think we should leave nations with leaders like Saddam Hussein sit around with WMD and do nothing about it, then you leave in a way different world than I do.

[TeacherCreature]

101. making the pro-bush argument is not a winning strategy

Come on over to the light side of the force where people are positive about their candidate and don't have to swear at other democrats to make a point and no one has to make Dubya's argument to justify their campaign. Get on the winning team, you'll feel better. Dean's website link is on DU's home page.

And if you think we should leave nations with leaders like Saddam Hussein sit around with WMD and do nothing about it, then you leave in a way different world than I do.
......um, what WMD?

[sandnsea]

105. It's a pro-SANITY argument

Acknowledging the threats of terrorism and WMD, regardless of Saddam Hussein, has absolutely not one thing to do with George W. Bush. It has to do with being SANE.

I will NEVER support Howard Dean. I'll vote for him if I have to, but that's it. I couldn't possibly embarrass myself in front of my friends or family by trying to even pretend he's truly qualified to be President. He's not Bush, that'll be all I can say.

YOU are the one who said we shouldn't worry about countries with WMD. ANY countries. I responded to THAT comment, as you well know.

[TeacherCreature]

110. really , "how's that working for ya"?

that "pro-sanity" strategy is working huh?

[TLM]

84. Oh but I do... I know it in my heart to be true

That Kerry is a craven coward more concerned about his career than the lives his was helping shovel into the meat grinder.

[TeacherCreature]

92. I know Kerry made a political choice

We all knew it. It's either that or I am way more qualified to be a senator from a liberal state than John Kerry is.

[sandnsea]

99. What if they find the WMD?????

Flap flap flap. Over half this board was clucking around in a panic over the goddamn WMD less than 6 months ago. That anybody knew is crap. I just posted 1441. Nobody KNEW anything about what was or wasn't in Iraq.

[TeacherCreature]

104. what WMD?

Millions of us knew it was wrong to invade Iraq and that they were not guilty of any act of war against us. Kerry knew it too.

[sandnsea]

106. Well who said it wasn't?

Invading a country for no reason is what George Bush chose to do. It had nothing whatsoever to do with John Kerry.

[TeacherCreature]

111. sure it has something to do with Kerry

he voted to give bush that power.

[Scott Lee]

119. thats not enough. you'd have to make a case for an imminent threat

that was also serious. And judging from presidential poodle Tony Blair's recent blunders, I don't see it on the horizon.

[mouse7]

55. Prove it.

Show me the results of the 2004 Presidential election.

Ahh, you can't.

So enough of the absolute pronouncements.

[sandnsea]

75. When will you believe the polls??

If Dean is still losing to Bush 60 - 40 in March, will you believe it then? Will Dean supporters ever be able to look straight at the facts and recognize those facts, if it means Dean shouldn't be the nominee?

I can look at the facts with Kerry and concede Clark may well be better positioned to beat Bush. Even though I think Kerry would be the better President, I'm willing to go with Clark in order to beat Bush.

Can Dean supporters look at him objectively?

[mouse7]

85. According to you Clinton had no chance and should have quit

Clinton was further down in the polls than Dean is right now.

Reagan was getting destroyed by Carter about this point.

Your points are utter rubbish, sandnsea. Electability polls mean absolutely nothing right now. Polls as a whole don't mean much either. That's why I'm all over these "(YOUR NAME HERE) cannot win" threads. With the exception of Kerry, who has proven he can't win because of being a terrible campaigner, not polls, they are all invalid.

[sandnsea]

100. When?

When will you concede Dean can't win? How many times does he have to come out with a devastating loss to Bush before you concede it? That's why I asked. If not now, when?

[mouse7]

102. Conceed the polls said EXACT SAME THING about Clinton in '92

Clinton was further down in the polls than Dean.

[sandnsea]

107. Which means what?

Kerry will win. Okay, I concede.

This is NOT 1992. Dean is NOT behind in the Presidential polls the way Clinton was. He's in the LEAD. And Bush trounces him. THAT'S the polling I'm talking about. When will YOU concede that Dean can't win if he's still getting trounced by Bush? March, April? Ever?

[mouse7]

121. Right after Dean's Inauguration n/t

[oasis]

23. Candidate A says "Osama's a killer". Candiate B says "maybe"

Question: Which candidate would Americans trust on national security issues in a post 9/11 world?

[thinkahead]

24. Question:

Is candidate A running for Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, or President? Because we have laws also in this country, which apparantly only candidate B remembers.

We all know Osama is guilty - but we can't ignore our laws, it's what separates us from the terrorists.

[babzilla]

31. maybe candidate A in this scenario

is feelin' lucky, punk.

[oasis]

36. Correct. People are in a rage about what terrorist have done to the

country. "Shoot now and ask questions later" is closer to the prevailing sentiment in regards to perceived terrorists.

[babzilla]

40. and that is surely the direction

that our president should lead us to, right?

Just where are you going with this Bernard Goetz?

[oasis]

41. Since you brought it up, how many folks do you think agreed with Geotz's

actions?

[babzilla]

44. as I recall

the 12 in the jury box didn't cotton to it much.

[oasis]

48. The jury was bound by the law to render a decison based on law. The public

may have had a different view, as in the O.J. trial.

[babzilla]

50. a jury bound by law =

don't shoot first and ask questions later.

See how this works out nicely for everyone?

[oasis]

58. Voters are NOT bound by law to do the right thing at the ballot box.

They will vote according to their interests. On emotional issues such as post 9/11 national security, voters are easily manipulated.

[TLM]

82. SO we should join with the repukes and play to the worst fear and hate

in order to compete with them at the ballot box, rather than defend the concepts of due process and justice that we claim to be fighting these fucking wars to protect in the first place?


Kerry's is the very worst example of trying to incite mob mentality through fear and hate in order to attack another democrat.

[oasis]

122. Dean's posturing like a card carrying member of the ACLU is no way

to win votes in heartland America. If we have to take baby steps to get to the society you desire, then it would be helpful to take a first step by getting Bush out. Dean's campaign for president is beginning to look more like a self promotional tour.

"We need to remake the Democratic Party" says Al Gore. Makes me wonder where Dean's priorities lie.

[Monte Carlo]

32. That's a very nice lecture.

But in Washington, you have to choose your battles, and in my opinion, the issue of Osama's guilt at this point in time does the Democrats more harm than good. Laws are only as strong as its enforcement.

[babzilla]

38. Laws are only as strong as its enforcement

that is true, and that enforcement of law is determined within a court of law, not from anyones unmuddled heart. Even in Washington.

[oasis]

39. I don't disagree with you on how we should think and act. Sadly, the

voters out there will have no patience with anyone that is perceived to have sympathy for Osama. When it comes to emotional issues, law and fairness sometimes take a back seat.

[babzilla]

43. well, that is a sad story

I on the other hand get emotional when law and fairness take a back seat to emotional issues.

I expect the elected protectors of the constitution to do the same and will accept no less.

[oasis]

46. I have confidence that Dean, Clark, Kerry ,Gep, and the rest of the Dems

will do all they can to protect the constitution. But they must first get into office. In a campaign it is sometimes helpful for a candidate to appear more virtuous than his constitiuents.

[babzilla]

49. I see what you are saying

damned the virtuous torpedoes, full steam ahead to muddled victory. Only then will I be able to uphold the rule of law, when I get around to it.

whoo-hoo, way to go team!

[oasis]

54. Walter Mondale, an honest and respected senator, ran for president

about 20 years ago. He is still honest and respected, but he never became president because he insisted on telling the truth about raising taxes.

On edit: The reality of the times are upon us. People like Tom Delay, Karl Rove, Rick Santorum and George Allen are going to lie and cheat to get Bush back into the White House. they are going to twist what any Democrat says and turn it against him.

Our people have got to be ready to give it right back to them.

[babzilla]

56. well, that's another sad story

I'm just about to choke up as I hear tell about all the honest and respected politicians done in by their truthful ways. :cry:

You've just about convinced me that those that insist on telling the truth don't stand a chance to become president.

Just about, but not quite.

[oasis]

59. Babzilla, you seem to be a fair and rational person. I'm glad your a Dem.

[babzilla]

66. thanks for saying so Oasis

I'm glad your a Dem too.

:toast:

[stickdog]

33. The one who is telling the truth?

Just a wild guess.

[TLM]

83. No it is more like

Candidate A says that ni**er is guilty, lets get a rope and string him up from the nearest tree... and Candidate B says no this is a matter for the courts to decide.


Kerry is talking about vigilante revenge and Dean is defending the concept of due process.

[AntiCoup2K4]

34. Look at this realistically...

Is Osama Bin Laden capable of orchestrating a terror attack such as that of 9-11-01? Yes, probably.

Would he be likely to do so if given the opportunity? Definitely.

Do either of these statements prove Bin Laden's guilt? No, they do not.

Now the likelihood of Osama being responsible increases when you add the intelligence which existed in the weeks and months before the attacks. However, the Bush Jr Fraudministration wants you to forget about all of that. Forget that they knew of the hijacking plot. That Asscrotch and Willie Brown had stopped flying commercial air. That Poppy and Uncle Dick stayed up all night on September 10th bullshitting at the White House while Junior was in Florida with missile launchers on the roof of his hotel. That Junior watched the first plane hit the tower on TV in his limo on the way to a grade school, yet no live cameras were on the scene until well after the first hit. Forget that they have done their damndest to ensure that Zacarais Moussaoui, the only living person held in connection with 9-11, never has the opportunity to make his case in court. What does he know that they're afraid he might reveal?

In all likelihood, Bin Laden is guilty. He's far from alone though. And ALL of those guilty should stand trial, but not under the corruption of the Bush Criminal Empire.

[TLM]

78. So is Kerry saying he does not support due process?

He thinks that OBL should be executed without a trial?


And if Kerry were to make a statement clarifying that's not what he meants... would that make his thinking muddled?


You have to love how Kerry spins Dean's statements as something they are not.

Dean says that he thinks we should make sure OBL is tried and not prejudged as guilty and killed... and he's right. Simply taking him out would not serve our interests nearly as effectively as they would be served by a legit trial in the eyes of the world.


But Kerry spins that into Dean saying Osama isn't guilty so he can attack Dean, then when Dean puts out a statement to counteract that spin... Kerry attacks that very act of countering the spin as if that's an indication of muddled thinking?

You want to talk about muddled thinking... "that in your heart you know that bin Laden is guilty." Your heart doesn't know shit, Kerry. Your heart feels... and we don't base out system of justice on a feeling that someone is guilty. If we do, then we're no better or more just than the tyrants we overthrow in the name of freedom. We base or justice system of proof, and reasonable doubt, and evidence... not feelings. Dean wasn't talking about feeling Osama is guilty, he was saying that rendering judgment sans a trial is a bad thing for anybody in a leadership position to do.

This is more of Kerry's attempts to say something, without actually saying it... saying "we all know he did it so lets kill him" but in a way not quite so distastefully blatant.

It is simply disgusting to equate defending the system of due process with claiming Osama is innocent, in order to use that as an attack. Kerry's like that chick at the end of the body snatchers screaming and pointing at the one who did not hate osama enough.

[CWebster]

113. Out of here for a few days

and back to see all the anti-Dean partisans still manning their stations.

Yesterday morning, on the C-Span call-in show, the subject was, "Are the Democrats angry?". One of the callers complained about the Republican talking points, to which, the host responded it was a sentiment to be expressed by Kerry in a speech scheduled that morning.

John Kerry can kiss my ass. He lost any chance of ever winning my vote. He doesn't have a clue to the scope of that anger and it starts at his doorstep. Get out of the way, John, you are a lost cause and a detriment to our future.

[RetroLounge]

115. America says Kerry has no chance against Dean

eom

[Scott Lee]

118. Hilarious, coming from a guy who trails Dean by a light year

So tell us, John - are you, with your single digit support, lackluster fundraising, flip flops on major issues, Bush War Appeasing yet denying, self gonna beat Bush-hole?

John, hang up your hat. Talk to the bank, see if you can get your house back. The party's over. Move over and let a real candidate handle it from here.

[jsw_81]

123. Really?

And I suppose that John Kerry (who trails Dean in Massachusetts) would beat Bush by a landslide? :eyes:

[creativelcro]

131. LOL, see what Kerry will say when Dean gets the nomination

He would have to take back all this BS of his, and it's gonna result in Kerry losing even more credibility...