Reply #61: Quite true, and many with the most Foreign and Intelligence knowledge

[PurityOfEssence]

That can be interpreted many ways, but like most things, bits and pieces of things interplay and combine in odd ways. It's definitely important to note how people like Graham and Levin saw through this crap with no trouble, but they're experts in this area. It's also worth noting that those who absolutely distrust the administration went against it too.

What went on behind closed doors will not be divulged for a very long time, though. Why did Harkin vote for it? Why did Waxman, Schiff, Harman and Berman? (There's a through-line for those four, but one isn't wise to say such things, is one?) Why Clinton?

Enough did get it right, and they're some of the real luminaries: Stark, Schakowsky and Frank come to mind. My Rep, Becerra figured it out too. (He's worth watching, incidentally...)

The intent of my post was to at least give Clark a break for candor, even though I do point out that it could just be cynical positioning too; he could have easily ducked it or positioned himself otherwise. The devil deserves his due, after all, and this was a bit of straight shooting on his part. As you know, I'm no fan, and certainly not of the more ham-handed of his supporters.

I don't necessarily buy the Dean contention that he definitely would have voted against it, regardless of circumstances, and although it's all gotten so tender of late--and on this issue, dammit, it SHOULD be tender--this was meant as a bit of a gentle reminder of the uncertainty of it all. Dean's veracity is a more than just a little iffy, and his tactics brash and often sullied, so this bears mentioning.