One not to forget: Edwards calling for Congress to cut off Iraq escalation funding

[demdiva]

I guess it's easy to call for this when you don't actually have to be on record as voting for it...

Dear DemDiva,

Tonight, President Bush is expected to adopt the McCain Doctrine and announce his plan to send up to 20,000 more troops to Iraq. That is a grave mistake.

The president's decision is wrong for Iraq and wrong for America -- and it's time for the new Congress to stop Bush from stubbornly pursuing his failed strategy in Iraq.

Congress should make it clear to the president that he will not get any money to put more of our troops in harm's way until he provides a plan to turn responsibility of Iraq over to the Iraqi people and to ultimately leave Iraq.

Click here to sign a petition calling on Congress to block funding for Bush's escalation of the war in Iraq. http://johnedwards.com/action/sign-petitions/nofunding/

The situation in Iraq demands a political solution -- not an escalation of the war that our generals agree won't help.

Escalating the war in Iraq sends the wrong message to the Iraqi people, to the region, and the world.

To get the Iraqis to begin to take responsibility for their country, we must show them that we are serious about leaving. And the best way to do that is by actually starting to leave -- beginning by immediately withdrawing 40,000-50,000 of our troops, not escalating the war.

George Bush wants to dig a deeper hole, but we need to climb out:

Join me in calling on Congress to block funding for Bush's escalation in Iraq.

Only when the U.S. starts leaving will the Iraqi people and other regional powers be forced to step up and engage in the search for a political solution -- and bring an end to the sectarian violence.

This president has had nearly four years to get Iraq right -- and at every step, he's gotten it wrong. Tonight, he's more wrong than ever about what America needs to do. It's time for Congress to act. And it's time for America to begin leaving Iraq.

Tell Congress to stop Bush's escalation of the war.http://johnedwards.com/action/sign-petitions/nofunding/

Thank you for taking action,

John Edwards

P.S. Please forward this email on to everyone you know -- Congress needs to hear from all of us that the American people are opposed to escalating the war in Iraq.

uggg... off topic...while writing this MSNBC just broke into Condoleeza Rice's testimony to Senate Foreign Relations to tell us that David Beckham is joining the LA soccer team...literally "Breaking News".

[Mass]

1. Careful, it is not to pull funds for Iraq, it is pull funds for escalation,

the same thing Kennedy has been proposing and Kerry is co-sponsoring.

So, it is good, but many have said the same thing. (I know you understand that, but people tend to be loose with the terms they use. Universal healthcare becomes single-payer. A call to withdraw some troops and other later becomes a call for withdrawal NOW... No need to play the game).

[demdiva]

3. You're right .... thanks for pointing that out nt

[karynnj]

2. To be fair, sending this out actually puts him on the record

when he doesn't have to be. He is volantarilly putting himself on record. This is a gamble (not a very risky one) to put himself on record as the anti-war candidate. Obama is likely the one this puts on the hot spot - if he votes against this he can lose to Edwards. (Edwards clearly sees that denigrating Kerry's 2004 run is the way he is eliminated.)

I never defend Edwards' shifting his other Iraq positions and still thing he needs to settle on one story -

- he has claimed to both believe and not believe there were WMD when he voted (believe in the current New Yorker and many 2002 inteviews. Not to in the Oct 2003 Hardball interview after non were found and he was supporting the war. As he is speaking of what he believed at a point in time this is not flip flopping but rewriting history.

- In the debate in 2003 or 2004 on the funding - he simply agreed with Kerry to explain the same yes/no vote Kerry had. Since then he (or at leeast Elizabeth) has said he voted against the funding to appear to be anti-war earlier. My guess - he was following Kerry's lead.

[demdiva]

4. You're also right

And I know I was a little snippy introducing it. But in the end Edwards will not share the brunt of the vote as the current Senators will. I just think it's important to remember where he stands as the race goes forward, since this was a clear statement about his position.

[karynnj]

5. I agree with you - and was not criticizing

Edwards is slicker than anyone including Clinton and shifts his positions. Here, I think it's an easy choice for the primaries. (Where Edwards is weak is that he has no interest in the political/diplomatic part and rarely addresses it.)