Don't be angry and dumb

[jpgray]

I had hoped criticism of Bush and the war was something we could all get together on. But I have seen some posts that say "it's too late" or that criticism now is hypocritical. What do you want? Less criticism? Only people who were against the war by a certain date can criticize freely? If you can't accept the criticisms of Dems, and certainly now the harsh criticism of the DNC when it comes to Bush's terrible bumbling, you are lost in your rage towards the Democratic Party. This is what everyone has been hoping for!

Here's some of the criticism:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&ncid=514&e=3&u=/ap/20030708/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_iraq

[WhataBildeberger]

1. yahoo article rated 3.58

this should be ANOTHER "5." Their whole page one ought to be filled with "* lied" stories.

[sendero]

2. cannot argue with that..

... there is a lot of "too little too late" talk. Some people just cannot handle good news.

[CWebster]

3. Don't be dumb and not get angry

when you should be outraged.

[jpgray]

4. So you want less criticism?

Who is allowed to criticize? Again, answer me here or in the other thread, I don't care. What do you want? Anger isn't an end in itself.

[Jacobin]

5. Actually I'm angry and THEY are dumb for supporting Smirk's war

As has been pointed out by more than one person for months now, their acquiesence in the stupidity of this invasion (and the quagmire aftermath from which we will not easily or cheaply be extracted) will be exceedingly hard for them to live down.

In fact, they will be tempted (and some already have) to cover for Bush and help him blame lower level underlings in the CIA for this outrage being outted.

My concern is that they will look like the senate panel questioning the Enron executives and will be forced to pretend to investigate (but not too much lest it become clear that they were complicit in the lies). I remember the cartoon of the senate Enron committee with Holy Joe and the others with the amount of the contributions each had received tacked to the back of their chairs.

Tens of millions of americans were vocally against the invasion, took to the streets in unprecedented numbers, wrote, emailed, faxed, marched and pleaded with the Dem leader to stop Smirk's Hitleresque March to the Middle East.

Most did not listen. Most pandered to Bush* in hopes of "riding his coat tails to more popularity".

To suggest that this craven, ghastly behaviour is beyond reproach and is to be commended, is a startling statement for me to hear from a poster on DU.

[jpgray]

6. Sure

But the criticism itself is worthy of praise. If you want to say those who were aware of what was going on (Dean, Kucinich, many others) deserve more praise, I agree with that too.

But I refuse to agree that this criticism doesn't have value. After a critical piece in the WSJ, it truly begins to feel like the tide is turning! We need all the help we can get--Bush criticism should be an inclusive club for Dems, not an exclusive one.

[Q]

8. Criticism without action is worthless...

- Dems 'criticized' the Bushies about election fraud, shadow government, hidden presidential papers and energy policy documents, 9-11 and WMD. But NONE of these things have gone beyond criticism.

- Levin and a few others are TRYING to break things loose...but the PARTY isn't backing them. They must take a step beyond simply being critical.

[jpgray]

9. How bout applying that post to yourself?

;-)

Criticism has its value. Especially on the eve of a presidential race.

[Jacobin]

10. The criticism of a co-conspirator is highly suspect and rightfully so

I can hear the questions on Meet the Press:

Timmy: But, Senator Kerry, didn't you VOTE in favor of this invasion?
Kerry: Well, yes, but I didn't have the information that the uranium story was faked.
Timmy: But, Senator, this report was in several newspapers and didn't you have access to the classified data also? Did you vote for the invasion and fail to check the CIA reports? Doesn't that make you just as big a fool as Mr. Bush*?
Kerry: Well, I relied on what the president told me.
Timmy: So, what you are saying is that both you and president Bush* were fooled by CIA documents.

They can pile on, like the political opportunists they are. Personally, it makes me sick. They get no cudos from me.

Kerry btw is now stating that we need MORE targets in Iraq, but they should come from Europe, so that when the body counts are done, the dead soldiers won't be american and he won't get so much heat.

He is disgusting.

[sandnsea]

11. You could have been wrong

We could have gone into Iraq and the military could have gone straight to the weapons and nuclear and bio/chem programs. It's pure arrogance to act as if there was only one way to view Iraq, given its past history and the sketchy information available. The Administration certainly had all the intelligence, but nobody else really did. Bush and his banshees lied and as that information becomes absolutely clear, the Democrats are pouncing on it.

[alaine]

7. I agree.

"forged" is a pretty strong word. I am thinking 'better late than never' and 'a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush'.