Howard Dean's Track Record on Iraq (Ignore Him at Your Peril)

[BurtWorm]

John Judis of the New Republic has assembled some of his most controversial and found that Dean is virtually always right on the money:

http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?pt=Vff%2BA3onh%2FX7dvdZiZxXBG%3D%3D

Dean's statements perfectly fit Michael Kinsley's definition of a "gaffe"--an assertion that is impolitic but true. Here is a brief timeline of Dean's most controversial statements about Iraq and his critics' responses during the months before and immediately after the invasion:



February 2003. After Secretary of State Colin Powell made his case for war at the United Nations, most other leading Democrats applauded. Senator Joe Biden called Powell's case "very powerful and, I think, irrefutable." Senator John Kerry called it "compelling." Only Dean dissented. "I heard little today that leads me to believe that there is an imminent threat warranting unilateral military action by the United States against Iraq," he said.

Later that month, Dean warned that the Bush administration was preparing to invade Iraq unilaterally. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay charged that Dean "either doesn't know what he's talking about ... or he's seriously uninformed, or he's just misleading the American people and his party."



April 2003. Senator Joe Lieberman declared that the capture of Baghdad and the fall of Saddam Hussein's regime vindicated his support for the invasion. "The vindication that I feel is the confidence that with Saddam gone, America's going to be a lot safer than it otherwise would have been," Lieberman said. House Minority Leader Richard Gephardt said that "it's a continuation of a historic, long-term trend that we stand on the right side." Once again the dissenter, Dean said, "All these folks who are crowing about their vote and the outcome are going to learn that the occupation will be very difficult." He added, "I'm not a pacifist. We've removed a horrible dictator, but the price we're going to pay is down the road."



June 2003. As reports began to surface that the Bush administration might have misled the country about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, many leading Democrats were hesitant to question the administration's probity. Republicans dismissed any doubts. Senator George Allen asserted, "It's not a question." But Dean said, "We need a thorough look at what really happened going into Iraq. It appears to me that what the president did was make a decision to go into Iraq sometime in early 2002, or maybe even late 2001, and then try to get the justification afterward."



December 2003-January 2004. After Saddam Hussein was captured on December 14, Dean appeared to go out on the farthest of limbs. "he capture of Saddam has not made America safer," Dean said. "The Iraq war diverted critical intelligence and military resources, undermined diplomatic support for our fight against terror, and created a new rallying cry for terrorist recruits." Gephardt termed Dean's statement "ludicrous." Kerry took it as "more proof that all the advisors in the world can't give Howard Dean the military and foreign-policy experience, leadership skills, or diplomatic temperament necessary to lead this country through dangerous times." Republican National Committee Chairman Ed Gillespie said, "It's baffling that anyone could possibly think life under a brutal dictator who routinely tortured, raped, and imprisoned his own people is better than the freedom and democracy taking root in Iraq today."

[Mass]

1. Anything coming from TNR has a 0 credibility for me!

They endorsed Lieberman for president. That should be enough to see where they stand.

[BurtWorm]

2. Suit yourself.

:shrug:

[Cha]

5. Not all writers are equal at tnr..

I think John Judis is one of the good ones.

[liberalnurse]

6. Me too...

I have no complaints at the moment. He just nailed Dean for his ability to look way outside the box!

[BurtWorm]

12. He absolutely is one of the good ones.

:thumbsup:

[Mass]

7. Anyway, I have no problem with what Dean has said about winning the war.

May be Judis is one of the few good writers on tnr, but I still prefer to ignore them and anyway, I do not have a subscription to read them.

[BurtWorm]

13. I know what you mean about TNR generally, though.

Generally they do suck, and they've spread their suckiness far and wide over the years. But occasionally they let an intelligent piece of progressivism slip through.

[mzmolly]

16. The quotes are accurate and their position on Lieberman makes them

more credible in this instance. ;)

[Rageneau]

55. I thought only Freepers rejected information before hearing it.

Freepers constantly dismiss stories (or facts) they don't want to hear by saying they don't trust the source. Of course, the only sources they DO trust are the ones saying what they want to hear.

Me, I'll read anything -- from any source -- and make up my own mind as to whether it is BS or gold-plated.

[rucky]

82. Can you read the quotes and judge for yourself? n/t

[blm]

3. Saddam is no different than Bush - they both needed to be gotten rid of.

Saddam HELPED the BFEE on everything they needed from him for decades.

[me b zola]

64. "Saddam is no different than Bush "

Indeed. As I listened to the trial of Saddam the other morning I was struck by how similar they are. Listening to the testimony of an Iraqi woman speaking about how Saddam's soldiers sexually humiliated her and assaulted her I could not stop thinking about all of the detainees that have been similarly treated in US custody---should King George be sitting in a chair next to Saddam? I think so.

[Cha]

4. Good on John Judis!

This one is especially portent..

"Dean said, "All these folks who are crowing about their vote and the outcome are going to learn that the occupation will be very difficult." He added, "I'm not a pacifist. We've removed a horrible dictator, but the price we're going to pay is down the road."

[BurtWorm]

8. This one is amazing:

"We need a thorough look at what really happened going into Iraq. It appears to me that what the president did was make a decision to go into Iraq sometime in early 2002, or maybe even late 2001, and then try to get the justification afterward."

:wow:

[Cha]

11. That's what happened but

are the corporate media's headlines SCREAMING IT? No, it's all Underground!

[FreedomAngel82]

26. Bush was talking about going in Iraq in 1999

They've had this planned from day one. IN F911 Richard Clarke talks on "Meet the Press" about how after 9/11 he only cared about going into Iraq and finding some reason. More IHOP for me.

[Marie26]

39. Dean must feel a little like Cassandra sometimes

Always knowing where these policies will lead, w/no one listening to him.

[Upfront]

9. Dean Was Right Then

and he is right now. Get your head out of your ass people!

[NYCGirl]

10. K&R

[shance]

14. Glad to see some media finally on this. Thanks for posting.

n/t

[wordpix2]

59. unfortunately media storm re: Dean has timid Dems fleeing for their holes

just peeping their heads out enough to say, "But,but, the war is Bush's war and it isn't going well."

Democrats need to grow a spine, unite on the Murtha message and GET OUT of IRAQ. This is what the MILITARY is telling Murtha so why are those unfamiliar with military matters so expert they can't back him up?

Dean: right then and RIGHT NOW.

[depakid]

15. If more Dems spoke the truth

they wouldn't be the minority party.

And chances are that until they either clamp down on or get rid of members like Biden & Lieberman, they'll probbly remain the minority party.

[mzmolly]

17. Bravo Howard and TPR. Sending far and wide. Recommended

:toast:

[Greyhound]

18. Dean/Clark in '08? Just wondering. n/t

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

49. There was a point in the primaries, when Dean was at his peak,

when it was reported that he had asked Clark to run as his VP. Reportedly, Clark declined. I believe, if true, had Clark accepted, the 2004 election would have been quite different. Although this would have been an effective coup d'etat on the Dem primary system I believe it was the tipping point of the Dean campaign- not the "scream."

[LandOLincoln]

68. I believe the VP offer was made

before Clark decided to get into the race himself.

Josh Marshall had some interesting things to say on the subject back on September 11, 2003:

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2003_09_07.php#001940

[redneckhippy]

73. dean

DEAN made the mistake of calling for an "evan handed policy" in the middle east right before iowa. the entire media immediately turned on him. he lost iowa and the race as a result. remember he was the only person anti war running

[LandOLincoln]

74. Did you really mean to imply that Kucinich was pro-war?

Clark was also against the war, but since he didn't compete in Iowa I'll give you a pass on that.

[redneckhippy]

81. DEAN

you are right about kucinich
i tried to imply the media was pro war and was the cause of dean's drop, before iowa,

[newyawker99]

86. Hi redneckhippy!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Greyhound]

75. They would have got my vote. I'm not sure I even care who would've

been at the top of the ticket. I'd like Dean on the domestic issues and Clark for foreign policy.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

77. I wasn't fond of the ticket but it might have won.

[farmbo]

19. But but but...Isn't he the guy who gave a scream? How can he be credible?

The Republican noise machine, fueled by Leiberman, Biden and, alas, Hillary is now enforcing a rigid form of political correctness in the rhetoric surrounding the Iraq war. Will Pitt nailed it in the Truthout article above.

No Virginia, there is NOT a war against Christmas...that's pure fake Republican outrage made out of whole cloth.

But there IS a war against truthful rhetoric in the public discourse...and the Republicans are winning handily.

[wordpix2]

60. Dean screamed---unforgivable!---- and BushCo starts a war for oil

profits but that's OK

[McCamy Taylor]

20. Proves doctors are smarter than the average politician.

:7

PS Frist knew that the WMDs were a crock of shit and that the invasion and occupation would be a dismal failure, too, I can guarantee this 100%, since he also made it through medical school, but that did not stop him from sucking up to the WH. This means that Dean owes his conscience and his courage to something else.

[eppur_se_muova]

22. Which, in Frist's case, just means more devious.

[eppur_se_muova]

21. Jeez, that's almost frightening.

This Dean guy seems really sharp...he must be a real smart feller...like a doctor or sumpin'. Maybe we should get him to run for...something...can't think...mind clouding up...must watch Streaming Celebrity Divorce Channel...

[muriel_volestrangler]

23. Any chance at all of Dean running for President in 2008?

Please, please tell me it might be possible for him to get support. He's simply the most perceptive American politician there is. The world will need him, especially after 8 years of disaster.

[BurtWorm]

25. Unfortunately, he's probably not going to run in 2008.

At least that's what the conventional wisdom was when he took on the job of leading the Democrats last year.

[FreedomAngel82]

27. He said he wouldn't if he got the chair job

[FreedomAngel82]

24. So what's his secret?

Is Dean a psychic? How does he know all this stuff and has been proven right? If I had to pick only one person to trust in politics it would probably be Dean.

[DebJ]

31. psychic? no. Honest, yes! No one else has the cajones!

[High Plains]

76. Spell check: cojones

[calimary]

35. Maybe he just gave a damn enough to take some time and read more

than what the mainstream media was saying. I mean, there WERE more voices out there saying different things. People "not in the loop," as it were, got a LOT more plain, simple truths about this, as early-on as could be. I mean, most of us here on DU back then knew enough already to be suspicious of what ANYONE involved with this White House was saying about Iraq. The info was out there. Maybe he just took the time to see it, instead of merely relying on White House-issue memos and directives and selective-intelligence briefings and half-truths and distortions and outright lies and fabrications and "well just take my word for its" and "well, just gimme the benefit of the doubt, then, OKAYs?!?!?!?" and other such crap we were being forcefed all the time. People who weren't even here back then, but who've read in since, and looked at the many links that the research-minded participants here contribute, and the discussion and analysis - some of it QUITE professional and comprehensive, THEY knew the truth, too. It's only those consuming a steady diet of NY Post, Wall Street Journal, limbaugh, Pox "news," and various other crapmeisters on the air (specially on the radio) who fell for the bushco bullshit about Iraq, hook, line, and sinker. Those who tried to take some time to get more information than just the cheap-ass headlines would have known - and DID know - the truth. The truth was, and still is, out there.

When you're on the outside, maybe you DO see in to the inside a little more clearly. Just ask the Knight/Ridder people who had NONE of that precious almighty "access" to the inner sanctum like the bob woodwards and judy millers did. But it was the Knight/Ridder people who scored - getting the truth, and getting it out in print, about the lies leading up to war.

Consider this Frank Rich column from the NYTimes - (Thank you, TRUTHOUT! Otherwise it's strictly pay-per-view.)

-------
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/120405Z.shtml

[LandOLincoln]

44. His "secret" is that he was and is talking to Wes Clark.

Clark was advising Dean on foreign policy and national security issues before Clark himself got into the race in 2003. Now that they're no longer rivals, I'm sure that's once again the case.

[BurtWorm]

45. Maybe, but Wes Clark's recent NY Times op-ed piece on Iraq

was criticized for being behind the curve, as though it was 2002 and the chaos and tribal breakdown hadn't yet ensued. He seems to think the US can play a role in stabilizing Iraq if the Bushists just start acting as Clinton and Clark did in Kosovo.

Dean is more in line with Murtha, I think. They are arguing that the US has no positive role to play in Iraq, that the damage is too far gone for having never been properly planned for and that you can't win in Iraq just by wishing. If they administration is not going to do the heavy lifting--the raising of taxes, the reinstitution of the draft, and everything elser that would have to be done to stabilize the country--then quit stalling and get the troops out of harm's way.

[LandOLincoln]

48. It may well have been criticized on the grounds you mention,

but I've a big suspicion it's the critics who are behind the curve, not Clark.

I wonder how many of those same critics paid real attention to the fact that Clark's article was datelined Doha, Qatar? How many noted that the op ed was based on conversations Clark had with Arab leaders just last week?

And while I don't have time to Google it right now, didn't Dean correct his controversial recent statement to assert that he'd meant to say we couldn't win militarily in Iraq? Didn't Clark say the same thing in his op ed, in just those words?

Incidentally--and again I don't have time to Google it and provide links--but it seems to me that I read yesterday that NATO has agreed to send more troops into Afghanistan. Clark was in Qatar primarily for a NATO conference.

Just a coincidence, I'm sure. ;-)

[angel823]

28. Dr. Dean

speaks for me.

[NNadir]

29. I am increasingly proud of the small part I played in bring Dean to the

national stage.

I would have rather he'd been President than Cassandra, but he is, all told, an impressive man. I think he's been outstanding in the role given him.

[rabid_nerd]

30. Same talking points as Al Gore

Is there any space, really?

Looks like the same page to me.

[JaneQPublic]

33. True. No wonder Gore endorsed Dr. Dean. (nt)

[Jackpine Radical]

32. Remember the legend of Cassandra?

That aside, I truly do respect Dean. He's right almost as often as I am (unless I'm predicting anything having to do with my own welfare & prosperity--investments, for example, in which case I'm almost always wrong).

[othermeans]

34. Yes but remember Cassandra was cursed, doomed to speak the truth but

with no one believing her.

[bklyncowgirl]

38. Dean IS the Cassandra of the Democratic Party

He's been ridiculed every time he opens his mouth about Iraq but in the end it turns out he was right.

[siztnarf]

42. Our Leaders

I really believe that most of the Democratic leaders privately held the same controvercial views about the Iraq War that Dean stated but were afraid to say them publicly. That is sad, but the truly maddening part of it is that they attacked him for saying what they generally believed was true.
The truth is that most of the Democratic Party leadership consists of political opportunists and cowards. If America never fully awakens from its blissfully ignorant stupor then it's those Democratic leaders that took the lead in the lullaby that put this baby to rest.

[newyawker99]

87. Hi siztnarf!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Jackpine Radical]

56. Yes, of course. That was my point.

[Matthewhoye]

36. Pomeroy to Howard Dean:Shut up

http://www.bismarcktribune.com/articles/2005/12/09/news/state/106702.prt



Pomeroy to Howard Dean:Shut up

By MARY CLARE JALONICK
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - North Dakota Rep. Earl Pomeroy is accusing Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean of overstepping his bounds, saying the former presidential candidate should not give up on the war in Iraq.

On Monday, Dean likened the war in Iraq to Vietnam and said, "The idea that the United States is going to win the war in Iraq is just plain wrong."

"My words to Howard Dean are simple - shut up," Pomeroy told WDAY Radio in North Dakota on Thursday.

Pomeroy later told the Associated Press that he is tired "of the overblown rhetoric on both sides."

"We have young men and women with their lives on the line," he added. "The debate has fallen far short of what they deserve."

Pomeroy said Dean wasn't representing Democrats like him when he discussed the war.

"He is not hired to make major policy announcements on behalf of all the Democrats," Pomeroy said. "As our party chairman I believe he needs to focus on the nuts and bolts of winning elections."

Dean backtracked on his statements somewhat Thursday, saying his assertion that the United States cannot win the war was reported "a little out of context," and that Democrats believe a new U.S. strategy is needed to succeed there.

A spokesman for the Democratic National Committee declined to comment on Pomeroy's remarks.

Pomeroy said he also is frustrated with Republicans who have politicized the war and a recent House debate on Iraq that became heated and angry. During that debate, Ohio Republican Rep. Jean Schmidt implied that Democratic Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., was a "coward" because he called for troops to pull out of Iraq. Schmidt later said her remark about Murtha was a mistake.

"I thought the debate on the House floor was shameful," Pomeroy said. "It was loud, strident and partisan."

Pomeroy, who has visited Iraq three times, said he believes the United States must stay in the country for now to achieve progress on national security, the creation of a stable government and the establishment of a functioning economy.

In 2002, Pomeroy joined 215 Republicans and 80 other Democrats in voting to authorize force in Iraq.

[aquart]

40. Pomeroy should be ashamed.

But he doesn't have the guts to look in the mirror.

[BurtWorm]

43. Dean did not backtrack. Dean said, truthfully

that his remarks were taken out of context. As have Murtha's and Pelosi's been. Maybe it's Pomeroy who should shut his fat trap.

[newyawker99]

88. Hi Matthewhoye!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[proud patriot]

91. Matthewhoye please read

in the future please limit your snips of articles
to 4 paragraghs as per the Democratic Underground
copyright rules .

proud patriot Moderator
Democratic Underground

[MoJoWorkin]

37. Thanks so much for posting this, BurtWorm---

It feels good to know that SOMEONE else out there sees it a I have all along. I am very glad to say I supported Dean from the beginning. He, almost all alone, continues to have the courage to speak the truth---like the Energizer Bunny, he keeps going and going. He is such a breath of fresh air.

I've been a Dem since age 15, when I walked door-to-door for JF Kennedy. I feel the Party has been hijacked or infiltrated with Repug-Lites and I WANT MY PARTY and MY COUNTRY back. I see Dean as instrumental in getting them both back.

DEAN CONTINUES TO SPEAK FOR ME!!

[confludemocrat]

41. in last part, what's said there by 2 Dems and 1 Repub is very telling

as to how one reached oblivion and how the two others will also be found there before too long

[iamahaingttta]

46. The problem with Howard Dean is...

... that he is a member of the "reality-based community" and there is no place for people like him the 21st century fantasy land that is Bush's America. The people in charge and the suckups on both sides of the aisle feel like they cannot afford to alienate the 30 per cent or so of Americans who have absolutely no idea what is really going on in the world. There are so many enablers for the fantasy-based community, that it really seems like it's impossible to get the truth out there.

The administration and their suckups play to the upside-down people, and those of us who seek and value reality are left on the sidelines, frustrated and marginalized.

Thank you, Howard Dean, for making the attempt. Maybe you won't suffer Cassandra's fate in the long run!

[savemefromdumbya]

47. Dean in tune with what most UK Labour MPs thought

In fact Dean was in tune with what the rest of the world was saying about Iraq at that time but not the majority of the US. The Blair cabal somehow managed to worm their way in to support Bush as Bush and Bliar had already decided to invade Iraq in 2002. I just wish we had a party full of Deans at that time.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

50. kickety-kick

:kick:

Priceless Gephardt, Lieberman and Kerry quotes. (Bzzzt! "I'm sorry, you are wrong." - Alex Trebec)

[jaysunb]

51. Dean provokes great fear.

Fear from all corporatist, be they Republicans or unprincipled Democrats.
Fear, that if people hear the truth, they will recognize it and respond accordingly.
That would not be a good thing for those greedy individuals that, are currently very busy, looting our treasury and personal pocketbooks.

[Carolab]

52. A little late to the party, but welcome nonetheless.

We "Deaniacs" have always known HD was "right on the money", and it's nice to see everyone else finally getting caught up. It's just that he sees things for what they are and isn't afraid to say it like it is.

[AuntiBush]

53. This is why Dr. Dean Will Always Have my Full Support & Some...

... I needed that reminder to send Dean a donation to help him & his aides with all the work they've got cut out for them in the coming year, just around the bend.

And coming from Judis, well... maybe some on the other side are seeing the truth too. Why not break loose, and be the Dems we are meaning we're open-minded, and be glad one of them is as well. While I don't like the Kerry knocks, at least he wrote good of Dean - something no "other side" does. They're afraid of him because he speaks the truth.

And yes, I'm a Deanie and darn proud of it! He gets my support hands-down.

Proud of Dr. Dean, very, very proud.

[hippywife]

54. Not always right.

www.wtv-zone.com/Morgaine_OFaery/HDean4pres/deantrpswar.html


(March 17th, 2003)"Those of us who, over the past 6 months, have expressed deep concerns about this President's management of the crisis, mistreatment of our allies and misconstruction of international law, have never been in doubt about the evil of Saddam Hussein or the necessity of removing his weapons of mass destruction."

[alfredo]

57. Not entirely wrong, the comment on

Saddam correct. At one time it was necessary to remove Saddam's WMD's, but that job was completed in 1998 by Operation Desert Fox. What little resources Saddam had were destroyed then.

[quaker bill]

58. You all know that Bush said "we cannot win" last year, right?

New York Times Headline: "Bush Cites Doubt America Can Win War on Terror." "President Bush, in an interview broadcast on Monday, said he did not think America could win the war on terror but that it could make terrorism less acceptable around the world, a departure from his previous optimistic statements that the United States would eventually prevail." (New York Times, 8/31/04)

Just thought it was worth a mention.

[Kurovski]

65. Yep. And the more references to it I see, the better I like it.

Bush Himself has said "We cannot win."

Funny how no one told him it was a stupid thing to say, he was undermining the troops or that he should shut up.

Only dems--apparently--are to be told to hush up.

[Moloch]

61. Dean really does need to shut up....

Going to lose the Iraq war? I don't see how we could possibly win a pointless war based on false pretenses. Everyone is a loser in this war.

Dean didn't need to say that, though. It's the kind of thing he should have just kept to himself, like that embarassing scream he did in Iowa.

I don't understand why Democrats rally around Dean and not, say, Cynthia McKinney. I agree with him on a lot of stuff but he doesn't seem to have that mechanism most sane people have that tells them not to say something. I truly believe him and his wild-eyed Deaniacs cost us the last election.

[savemefromdumbya]

62. no

Dean didn't cost us the last election. If the Dems had stood their ground since 9/11 we would have been in a much better position than we are now. The party has become some washed out shades of republican colors. Dean and a few others at least had the guts to pull through and define real democratic policy!

[Kurovski]

63. Well,

Dean knows how to find the needle of truth hidden in a haystack of horseshit. That's the man's record. And it's pretty damn consistent.

In this day and age in America, that is all that matters.

All else is piffle, squabble and cocktail party talk. (IMO)

[Moloch]

78. I disagree...

Republicans are using Dean's words against us in attack ads. Not only did his rhetoric affect the outcome of the 2004 election, but I fear it may also effect the 2006 elections. It was a terrible mistake to elect him as chairman of the DNC.

I agree with him on most everything, especially the war. However, I believe his choices of words reflect on the rest of Democrats very negatively. He just says things that he shouldn't. I'll give you an example. When he was campaigning last year, he told some 8th graders "Now that we're on dog pee, we can have an interesting conversation about that," Dean said. "I do not recommend drinking urine . . . but if you drink water straight from the river, you have a greater chance of getting an infection than you do if you drink urine."

That's an example of something Dean should have probably kept to himself. And let's not forget about the "I have a scream" speech.

[Kurovski]

79. I agree that we disagree.

There are also things the Media COULD keep to themselves, and others they could put more thoughtful focus upon.

After careful consideration over two years, I've not found a reason to fear how the media chooses to define Dean. They define everyone, and my money is on those who answer back.

The reality of the "scream" is well documented. The fact that the Corporate Media's behavior during that period did not garner them permanent exile from the American psyche is the worry that I personally sometimes entertain. I'm not worried about trying to out-smart, or being manipulated by the ca-jiggered false reality that corporate media and Republicans wish to present.

The administration says outrageous things, ridiculous things, idiotic and troubling things on a regular basis. They lie. That is where the focus is. that is part of Dean's focus.

Dean is raising record money, he has raised money in a way and in amounts that were historically unprecedented. he is organising the party from the ground-up in all fifty states. He is much better than your stated fears will allow.

Focus on that, and focus on how this government is being run by the party that is in charge of three branches.

The media is screwing themselves over with every passing day. I refuse to allow them to transfer their self-serving nonsense into creating a form of reality they would prefer to see override the truth.

And: I'm no longer afraid of losing, which is what the Democratic Party's MO has been for far too long. Dems often sound like this to me: "We must figure out a way not to lose."

You don't win by "not doing" or saying something. you win by doing.

And don't get me started on election fraud, but Dean had best come up with something on the matter in the coming months. :-)

[upi402]

66. They ridicule those who tell the truth

Rightists HATE the truth.
They'd rather eat their kids than hear the truth...





...and they really like their kids!

[DonQuijote]

67. I dont have enough posts...

to make a new thread, but could someone please do everyone a favor and announce this? Thank you.

(edited for tags)

Bush on the Constitution: 'It's just a goddamned piece of paper'

Bush on the Constitution: 'It's just a goddamned piece of paper'

By DOUG THOMPSON

Dec 9, 2005, 07:53

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_7779.shtml

Last month, Republican Congressional leaders filed into the Oval Office to meet with President George W. Bush and talk about renewing the controversial USA Patriot Act.

Several provisions of the act, passed in the shell shocked period immediately following the 9/11 terrorist attacks, caused enough anger that liberal groups like the American Civil Liberties Union had joined forces with prominent conservatives like Phyllis Schlafly and Bob Barr to oppose renewal.

GOP leaders told Bush that his hardcore push to renew the more onerous provisions of the act could further alienate conservatives still mad at the President from his botched attempt to nominate White House Counsel Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court.

“I don’t give a goddamn,” Bush retorted. “I’m the President and the Commander-in-Chief. Do it my way.”

“Mr. President,” one aide in the meeting said. “There is a valid case that the provisions in this law undermine the Constitution.”

“Stop throwing the Constitution in my face,” Bush screamed back. “It’s just a goddamned piece of paper!”

I’ve talked to three people present for the meeting that day and they all confirm that the President of the United States called the Constitution “a goddamned piece of paper.”

And, to the Bush Administration, the Constitution of the United States is little more than toilet paper stained from all the shit that this group of power-mad despots have dumped on the freedoms that “goddamned piece of paper” used to guarantee.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, while still White House counsel, wrote that the “Constitution is an outdated document.”

Put aside, for a moment, political affiliation or personal beliefs. It doesn’t matter if you are a Democrat, Republican or Independent. It doesn’t matter if you support the invasion or Iraq or not. Despite our differences, the Constitution has stood for two centuries as the defining document of our government, the final source to determine – in the end – if something is legal or right.

Every federal official – including the President – who takes an oath of office swears to “uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia says he cringes when someone calls the Constitution a “living document.”

“"Oh, how I hate the phrase we have—a 'living document,’” Scalia says. “We now have a Constitution that means whatever we want it to mean. The Constitution is not a living organism, for Pete's sake.”

As a judge, Scalia says, “I don't have to prove that the Constitution is perfect; I just have to prove that it's better than anything else.”

President Bush has proposed seven amendments to the Constitution over the last five years, including a controversial amendment to define marriage as a “union between a man and woman.” Members of Congress have proposed some 11,000 amendments over the last decade, ranging from repeal of the right to bear arms to a Constitutional ban on abortion.

Scalia says the danger of tinkering with the Constitution comes from a loss of rights.

“We can take away rights just as we can grant new ones,” Scalia warns. “Don't think that it's a one-way street.”

And don’t buy the White House hype that the USA Patriot Act is a necessary tool to fight terrorism. It is a dangerous law that infringes on the rights of every American citizen and, as one brave aide told President Bush, something that undermines the Constitution of the United States.

But why should Bush care? After all, the Constitution is just “a goddamned piece of paper.”

© Copyright 2005 by Capitol Hill Blue

[newyawker99]

89. Hi DonQuijote!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[proud patriot]

90. DonQuijote please read

In the future please limit your snips of articles
to 4 paragraphs as per the Democratic Underground
copyright rules .

proud patriot Moderator
Democratic Underground

[obxhead]

69. One of the very (I stress very) few who may deserve 2008.

I've never donated to a campaign in my life. Dean will get a few dollars from me if he will fight again.

[alfred e bush]

70. howard dean

is my president

[lonestarnot]

71. HOWARD DEAN SPEAKS FOR ME!

[bpilgrim]

72. Dean's just parroting DU

:evilgrin:



peace

[Kurovski]

80. Yeah, he does "squawk" a lot, doesn't he?

:evilgrin:

[Armstead]

83. He's had a pretty good tracvk record on other issues too

Remember how they went after him for bringing up the isue of race and class?

Lo and behold, Katrina happened and he was right again.

Remembr how he got attacked for going after Tom Delay?

It's not surprising that the GOP goes after him. But I am baffled how Democrats want to muzzle him.

[Kurovski]

84. Once you see the DLC as a subsidiary of the corporate owned

Republican Party, the baffling aspects vanish as if by magic.

The DLC has a not-so-secret slogan: "What's good for the Repubs is good for the DLC."

[norml]

85. Here's the intro.

IN DEFENSE OF DEAN.
Chair Lift
by John B. Judis
Only at TNR Online | Post date 12.08.05

Howard Dean is being vilified again--not only by Republicans in the White House and Congress, but by his fellow Democrats as well. And once again it's for making a critical comment about the administration's conduct of the Iraq war. In an interview Monday with a San Antonio radio station, Dean, comparing the conflicts in Iraq and Vietnam, said, "The idea that we're going to win this war is an idea that unfortunately is just plain wrong." Dean also likened the Bush administration's lack of candor about the war to that of the Nixon administration. "What we see today is very much like what was going on in Watergate," he said....