|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) |
pnwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:05 AM Original message |
What difference did the IWR vote make anyway? Really? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MichiganVote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:07 AM Response to Original message |
1. It was the fact that * wanted the bill in the first place that convinced me it was BS |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:11 AM Response to Reply #1 |
6. Hagel's comments lead me to think that Bush didn't care about an IWR. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MichiganVote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:16 AM Response to Reply #6 |
14. I was always under fhe impression that it was a mere formality for * |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
FrenchieCat (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:08 AM Response to Original message |
2. Showed who was principled and who wasn't. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:13 AM Response to Reply #2 |
9. That's one perspective. The other was that some Dems were trying to avoid setting |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
thunder rising (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:09 AM Response to Original message |
3. The same neocons had tried to convince Bill Clinton to strike Iraq and Hillary knew this when she |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
John Q. Citizen (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:10 AM Response to Original message |
4. The problem is, Hillary is a hawk who was in favor of invading Iraq. That's the problem. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cha (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:18 AM Response to Reply #4 |
17. Yes, and it's a big problem that |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sab3rX (28 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:11 AM Response to Original message |
5. IWR does matter: it was a moral choice and those who voted for it chose wrong |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:28 AM Response to Reply #5 |
26. You're not responding to the substance of my argument. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BootinUp (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 01:30 AM Response to Reply #5 |
65. Based on the above reasoning, there WAS one chance to stop him |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TwilightGardener (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:12 AM Response to Original message |
7. Hagel uses the same excuses--he voted for it for political reasons, same as Hillary-- |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:14 AM Response to Reply #7 |
12. Hillary has also said she would have voted differently if she had known |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sab3rX (28 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:16 AM Response to Reply #12 |
13. Yet those who voted 'Nay' knew what she knew and still chose correctly |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MichiganVote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:18 AM Response to Reply #13 |
18. Ahhh... but were they representing the state of NY? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sab3rX (28 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:22 AM Response to Reply #18 |
21. I seem to recall the massive demonstrations in NYC against use of force in Iraq |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MichiganVote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:25 AM Response to Reply #21 |
24. One demonstration in one city of NY hardly makes the case. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PassingFair (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 02:18 AM Response to Reply #24 |
76. How weak it has become under the legacy of DLC democrats. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:38 AM Response to Reply #13 |
34. I was strongly against the war but I'm not sure that the IWR vote was "incorrect." |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TwilightGardener (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:43 AM Response to Reply #34 |
40. I was shocked to learn that they had to strip language out of it to |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:58 AM Response to Reply #40 |
48. I read another article about Hagel somewhere that said the White House version |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
emilyg (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:47 AM Response to Reply #13 |
44. Hello perfect person. Welcome to DU. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TwilightGardener (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:30 AM Response to Reply #12 |
29. Hagel is a conservative Republican. Voting against the war would |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
billbuckhead (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:12 AM Response to Original message |
8. Not a damn thing! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sab3rX (28 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:14 AM Response to Reply #8 |
10. There's a difference between voting for war and voting to feed, protect and arm the troops. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cali (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:14 AM Response to Original message |
11. As Senator Leahy said: It violated the Consittution. Isn't that enough? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:17 AM Response to Reply #11 |
16. The other side of the argument is that passing the IWR |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cali (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:22 AM Response to Reply #16 |
22. Sorry. Leahy was right. The Congress has NO business |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:33 AM Response to Reply #22 |
30. It wasn't a blank check. The White House version WAS a blank check. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sandnsea (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:17 AM Response to Original message |
15. Her support of THE WAR for FOUR YEARS |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TexasObserver (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:37 AM Response to Reply #15 |
33. Indeed. She's been wrong and stayed wrong. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HughMoran (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:21 AM Response to Original message |
19. Yes, I remember this argument |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joshcryer (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:21 AM Response to Original message |
20. The fact remains that most who voted for it were incumbants or junior senators. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MadHound (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:25 AM Response to Original message |
23. It is important because it goes to the character of the Senator, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MichiganVote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:27 AM Response to Reply #23 |
25. Except the vote was never FOR a war...that's not what the bill said |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sab3rX (28 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:28 AM Response to Reply #25 |
27. Then why not support the Levin ammendment? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MichiganVote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:39 AM Response to Reply #27 |
36. If you're referring the the Levin ammendment, Clinton and Schumer did not vote Yea |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MadHound (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:36 AM Response to Reply #25 |
31. Yeah, right, whatever |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sab3rX (28 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:39 AM Response to Reply #31 |
35. I agree; the entire world saw through it along with half of the country |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MichiganVote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:42 AM Response to Reply #31 |
39. Well Merry Christmas to you too.:):) Actually that's not what I am saying at all |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sab3rX (28 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:45 AM Response to Reply #39 |
42. I'm sorry to be so vociferious on this issue, but it bothers me deeply... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MichiganVote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:49 AM Original message |
Its ok and if it helps,and it probably won't, 3 of the 5 we've called our own are back |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 01:04 AM Response to Original message |
52. Absolutely, MichiganVote. Whoever is our nominee, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MichiganVote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 08:44 AM Response to Reply #52 |
79. Well its a start.....we hope. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MadHound (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:49 AM Response to Reply #39 |
45. Oh my BP is just fine. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MichiganVote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:59 AM Response to Reply #45 |
49. Not sure what statement you're referring to as I made several responses. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TwilightGardener (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 01:04 AM Response to Reply #49 |
51. John McCain has absolutely nothing on Obama--he's 100% crazy warmonger, and Obama |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MichiganVote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 08:35 AM Response to Reply #51 |
77. Could be. But the fact that Iraq has not met their benchmarks will mitigate some of the barb |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MadHound (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 01:08 AM Response to Reply #49 |
54. That would be this one |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MichiganVote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 08:43 AM Response to Reply #54 |
78. Yes I'm aware of the media hype surrounding the IWR vote. Afterall it was very |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 01:02 AM Response to Reply #31 |
50. As a practical matter, Bush was going to war with or without that compromise |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MadHound (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 01:13 AM Response to Reply #50 |
56. Wow, I haven't heard that kind of twisted reading of the IWR in awhile |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TwilightGardener (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 01:19 AM Response to Reply #56 |
59. Did you read the article the OP posted? There is merit to pwnmom's argument, even |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 01:25 AM Response to Reply #59 |
61. Thanks wienerdoggie. I do get the feeling |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TwilightGardener (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 01:35 AM Response to Reply #61 |
66. There is a lot of damning and revealing stuff in that article--food for thought. I do realize |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 01:42 AM Response to Reply #66 |
71. Some people are assuming I'm a Hillary person, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TwilightGardener (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 01:50 AM Response to Reply #71 |
73. I agree--I think Obama's judgment, even outside the Senate, was better and |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MadHound (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 01:29 AM Response to Reply #59 |
64. Yes I did, but thanks for asking. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 01:24 AM Response to Reply #56 |
60. I was one of those millions of people out in the street before the war. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MadHound (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 01:36 AM Response to Reply #60 |
67. So because you couldn't stop the damn thing, and you couldn't kick him out of office |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Justice Is Comin (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:29 AM Response to Original message |
28. Oh you guys go a long ways to carry water for Obama. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sab3rX (28 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:37 AM Response to Reply #28 |
32. Nice deflection of the issue; in the end Hillary still voted for an immoral and illegal war... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:40 AM Original message |
She didn't vote for the war, as she clearly stated before her vote. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ErnestoG (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:42 AM Response to Original message |
38. Don't give me that codswallop. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 01:08 AM Response to Reply #38 |
53. An attack on Iraq was inevitable, with or without that October resolution. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ErnestoG (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 01:38 AM Response to Reply #53 |
68. And Hillary helped him anyway. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 01:48 AM Response to Reply #68 |
72. She, and other Dems, tried to put restrictions on him. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MadHound (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:44 AM Response to Original message |
41. Again, that is the "I didn't know it would lead directly to war" excuse. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ErnestoG (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:46 AM Response to Reply #41 |
43. Yup. And it's a big stinky pantload. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 01:13 AM Response to Reply #41 |
55. It didn't lead directly to war. Bush had already decided and there was no way |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ErnestoG (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 01:38 AM Response to Reply #55 |
69. And the IWR gave him the public approval he needed. Thanks alot, Hillary |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 01:58 AM Response to Reply #69 |
75. The IWR kept him from going into Iran, because with it Bush implicitly |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ErnestoG (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:40 AM Response to Reply #28 |
37. Who needs to do that? Obama never voted to enable a criminal war. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
emilyg (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:50 AM Response to Reply #28 |
46. I like that. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Whisp (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 12:52 AM Response to Original message |
47. I take it you don't hold that vote against Republicans as well? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 01:18 AM Response to Reply #47 |
57. With the Republicans, it would depend on the individual. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
zulchzulu (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 01:18 AM Response to Original message |
58. If you care about judgment and character, it means a lot. If you want to hide from the vote.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 01:28 AM Response to Reply #58 |
63. Did you read the post, or just the subject line? As a practical matter, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BootinUp (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 01:27 AM Response to Original message |
62. This is exactly right. I'm gonna bookmark it so I can stop |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sampsonblk (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 01:42 AM Response to Original message |
70. Your argument is unbelievable |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 01:56 AM Response to Reply #70 |
74. Politicians have to make political calculations. It's easier for us -- we don't. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sampsonblk (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Feb-03-08 09:20 AM Response to Reply #74 |
80. They were duped into making a bad political calculation? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Fri Oct 18th 2024, 12:19 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC