from G_j's thread, "No Defense for Sandy BERGER":
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2048506See, my opinion has changed already. This doesn't blunt the point about the Shrubbites' deviousness, however. I was just reacting to one of our prominent figures being whacked, but, despite all I see on DU, I had never heard anything negative about BERGER here or anywhere. But now I'm definitely swayed against him. In this case, it just might have been somebody from OUR side who sprang the leak, and no, I don't have any proof.
*******QUOTE*******
http://www.madison.com/tct/opinion//index.php?ntid=7211&ntpid=3Editorial: No defense for Sandy Berger
An editorial
July 23, 2004
.... Berger has for many years been
an atrocious player in American politics. He
tried to get former Clinton to launch a
war with Iraq in the late 1990s,
using "evidence" every bit as flimsy as that employed by the Bush administration in 2003. He has been
a Democratic apologist for some of the Bush administration's worst abuses. And, as a senior adviser to John Kerry's presidential campaign, he pressured the presumptive Democratic nominee to echo the Bush administration line on
maintaining the occupation of Iraq. ....
Berger claims his removal of the documents, which may have contained
material harmful to his own reputation, was an "honest mistake." ....
While it may be true that
Republicans are ginning up the Berger controversy at this point in order
to cover for the misdeeds of members of their own party, Democrats should not waste an ounce of energy defending the former Clinton aide.
In fact,
Democrats should be celebrating the fact that he has been forced to resign as an adviser to Kerry. The further Berger is from the Kerry campaign, the more likely it will be to take responsible stands on the war in Iraq in particular, and on national security in general.
********UNQUOTE*******