You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #21: I suggest reading this current thread [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-14-07 01:17 PM
Response to Original message
21. I suggest reading this current thread
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
  -True or False: A Presidential candidate who voted for the IWR is unfit for the Presidency. Nutmegger  Sep-13-07 11:31 PM   #0 
  - How about if they voted to fund the war?  tired_old_fireman   Sep-13-07 11:34 PM   #1 
  - Some would say that voting for the funding is the same as voting for the war.  Nutmegger   Sep-13-07 11:39 PM   #6 
  - funny how some want to equate funding a war that is already being fought with  FrenchieCat   Sep-13-07 11:42 PM   #7 
  - Only if you're a Kucinich supporter.  Dawgs   Sep-14-07 02:45 PM   #25 
     - Exactly, they just try to use that to differentiate Kucinich from Obama  maximusveritas   Sep-14-07 06:33 PM   #44 
  - They saw the "evidence" Bush had against Iraq. They had the power in their hands  Katzenkavalier   Sep-13-07 11:35 PM   #2 
  - I seem to remember a post here at DU  zalinda   Sep-14-07 12:05 AM   #12 
  - Some of the intel was cooked,  seasonedblue   Sep-14-07 01:13 PM   #18 
  - Obama was first elected to the Senate in 2004 and therefore did not cast a vote on the 2002 Iraq wa  Netbeavis   Sep-14-07 03:41 PM   #26 
     - Thank you.  pirhana   Sep-14-07 04:06 PM   #27 
     - Bull. He denounced the war in 2002, when it was unpopular to do so.  Katzenkavalier   Sep-14-07 07:14 PM   #54 
        - That is hardly an example of either  Netbeavis   Sep-14-07 08:37 PM   #60 
  - False.  wlucinda   Sep-13-07 11:36 PM   #3 
  - If they waited 3 years later to apologize, right before running for Prez......and if  FrenchieCat   Sep-13-07 11:37 PM   #4 
  - Did Kerry go through this in 2004 on DU.....?  Catchawave   Sep-13-07 11:39 PM   #5 
  - He was beat up here pretty well too. :) nt  wlucinda   Sep-13-07 11:46 PM   #8 
  - Even though he didn't even co-sponsor the Blank check.....  FrenchieCat   Sep-13-07 11:52 PM   #9 
  - What if they made one speech condemning the war, then when joining the Senate in 1/05 voted for  Seabiscuit   Sep-13-07 11:58 PM   #10 
  - there is about 14 miles between starting a war and funding a war  AtomicKitten   Sep-14-07 12:14 AM   #13 
     - No one's insinuating anything.  Seabiscuit   Sep-14-07 01:10 PM   #15 
     - Re: your title: not really - every year a war's funded it gets restarted.  Seabiscuit   Sep-14-07 07:23 PM   #57 
        - On that point we disagree.  AtomicKitten   Sep-14-07 09:01 PM   #62 
           - Actually, we agree on both of those points.  Seabiscuit   Sep-15-07 08:47 AM   #64 
  - Not all votes are the same, Edwards helped to market the war  slipslidingaway   Sep-14-07 12:01 AM   #11 
  - Kucinichite hogwash!  Jim Sagle   Sep-14-07 12:15 AM   #14 
  - Hogwash?  GreenArrow   Sep-14-07 01:50 PM   #24 
     - I find Kucinich worse in his issue changes than JE.  slick8790   Sep-14-07 05:25 PM   #32 
        - "constantly evolving issue"? IRAQ?  FrenchieCat   Sep-14-07 05:39 PM   #36 
        - nah. Kucinich saw the obvious from the get go.  GreenArrow   Sep-14-07 09:45 PM   #63 
  - No IWR voting dem will become president (nt)  Milo_Bloom   Sep-14-07 01:12 PM   #16 
  - Kerry did, well almost n/t  Catchawave   Sep-14-07 01:29 PM   #22 
  - Why? Are the voting machines only rigged against them?  blm   Sep-14-07 04:28 PM   #30 
     - No, b/c many Dems and Independents won't vote for one (nt)  Milo_Bloom   Sep-14-07 05:12 PM   #31 
        - Kerry won. RNC stole that election for Bush.  blm   Sep-14-07 05:33 PM   #33 
           - The IWR had nothing to do with inspections.  Milo_Bloom   Sep-14-07 05:36 PM   #34 
              - Right - because you wouldn't vote for someone who actually HAD a plan to leave Iraq  blm   Sep-14-07 05:59 PM   #38 
                 - Yes, because I don't trust him.  Milo_Bloom   Sep-14-07 06:20 PM   #41 
                    - Kerry didn't lie - he Wouldn't lie about serious matters of war.  blm   Sep-14-07 06:33 PM   #43 
                       - Sorry, but he lied.  Milo_Bloom   Sep-14-07 06:37 PM   #45 
                          - IWR was not even a factor in WHETHER we went to war or not. Downing Street Memos  blm   Sep-14-07 06:43 PM   #46 
                             - So Kerry is an Idiot or a Liar?  Milo_Bloom   Sep-14-07 06:52 PM   #47 
                                - No. But I'm not an idiot and I thought Bush2 was more influenced by Bush1, Baker  blm   Sep-14-07 07:05 PM   #49 
                                   - I want him gone from DC as well.  Milo_Bloom   Sep-14-07 07:15 PM   #55 
                                      - Heh - if you think BCCI is tinfoil, or AQ Khan is just a fictional character  blm   Sep-14-07 07:19 PM   #56 
                                         - No, just that there is no big connection...  Milo_Bloom   Sep-14-07 07:24 PM   #58 
                                            - Your conclusions carry no weight with me. The same names  blm   Sep-14-07 07:43 PM   #59 
                                               - The conclusions are the conclusions, your tin foil hat theory is your own.  Milo_Bloom   Sep-14-07 08:38 PM   #61 
                                                  - Pure bunk.  blm   Sep-15-07 09:26 AM   #65 
                                                     - The Bunk is the cookie conspiracy theory...  Milo_Bloom   Sep-15-07 10:11 AM   #66 
  - Which part of "they were lied to" don't you understand?  Perry Logan   Sep-14-07 01:12 PM   #17 
  - Which part of classified NIE docs left  seasonedblue   Sep-14-07 01:14 PM   #19 
  - An excuse not to do their job?  Milo_Bloom   Sep-14-07 01:16 PM   #20 
  - I suggest reading this current thread  WesDem   Sep-14-07 01:17 PM   #21 
  - Considering, that (from both parties) the likely nominee and  GreenArrow   Sep-14-07 01:47 PM   #23 
  - How many GOP candidates will have to pass this "sniff test" ?  Catchawave   Sep-14-07 04:08 PM   #28 
  - All of them.  Milo_Bloom   Sep-14-07 05:38 PM   #35 
  - You would have to BELIEVE that the IWR took this country to war. It didn't.  blm   Sep-14-07 04:25 PM   #29 
  - The IWR gave Bush the credibility he needed to go foward with his plan.....  FrenchieCat   Sep-14-07 05:52 PM   #37 
     - Thinking Powell, Scowcroft and GHWBush had more influence on a final decision than  blm   Sep-14-07 06:04 PM   #39 
        - Which is what the Levin Amendment would have put "control" over.....  FrenchieCat   Sep-14-07 06:16 PM   #40 
           - Still doesn't change anything. Bush was going in - Downing Street Memos showed that.  blm   Sep-14-07 06:28 PM   #42 
  - skepticism is job #1 for congress-critters  jobendorfer   Sep-14-07 06:59 PM   #48 
  - This is how I look at it  MadHound   Sep-14-07 07:05 PM   #50 
  - that bad decision will not be forgotten  Lord Helmet   Sep-14-07 07:08 PM   #51 
  - I Used To Feel That Way But I Softened My Position  DemocratSinceBirth   Sep-14-07 07:11 PM   #52 
  - I've gone the other way  WesDem   Sep-15-07 10:39 AM   #67 
  - The person who voted was either lazy or lacked judgment or both.  illinoisprogressive   Sep-14-07 07:12 PM   #53 
  - Not lazy, cowardly n/t  MUSTANG_2004   Sep-15-07 01:22 PM   #70 
  - They are welcome to redeem themselves all they want  WesDem   Sep-15-07 10:43 AM   #68 
  - Unfit, for two different reasons  MUSTANG_2004   Sep-15-07 01:22 PM   #69 
  - A Presidential candidate who would STILL vote for the IWR is unfit for the Presidency.  uppityperson   Sep-15-07 01:27 PM   #71 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
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