Great Slate editorial on Lieberman

Thanks Zeke. That clears up a good portion of that. Personally, I would rather hold them to how they voted. I don't necessarily believe them if they said they are disillusioned. They are too smart to play that dumb. It's not that they were naive about it. Shit, they have intelligence meetings/hearings/briefings almost weekly in Congress. That's just me rambling. :-\

 

If I remember correctly, they voted to authorize the president to send troops AS A LAST RESORT.

Not knowing at the time it was a first resort and that the "intelligence" regarding why we needed to go there was grossly cherry-picked.

 

And circumstances change. That's a problem with politics, that we hang people on their petard and don't allow for evolving views and situations. Voting one way every time or sticking to the same view is not an unmitigated good. It can often be quaintness or stubbornness.

 

The most glossed-over/ignored distinction in history.

 

If John Kerry had said the troops should be bought home now or even a set timetable, he would have lost like McGovern did. The Democratic leaders know that, but they were behind Lieberman. It was the voters in the primary who defeated him, and the writer of this editorial used the rationalization that people were on vacation. Lamont was an unknown and he still defeated Lieberman. This is the first real referendum on this war.

The Boom70s and George Bush's will always justify a failed policy with the you are for Al-Quida if you disagree with me sort of logic. No different than Viet Nam, where is you opposed the war you were a supporter of the Communists. Tripe.

Some words from Pete Seeger say it best.

Waist Deep in the Big Muddy

It was back in nineteen forty-two,
I was a member of a good platoon.
We were on maneuvers in-a Loozianna,
One night by the light of the moon.
The captain told us to ford a river,
That's how it all begun.
We were -- knee deep in the Big Muddy,
But the big fool said to push on.

The Sergeant said, "Sir, are you sure,
This is the best way back to the base?"
"Sergeant, go on! I forded this river
'Bout a mile above this place.
It'll be a little soggy but just keep slogging.
We'll soon be on dry ground."
We were -- waist deep in the Big Muddy
And the big fool said to push on.

The Sergeant said, "Sir, with all this equipment
No man will be able to swim."
"Sergeant, don't be a Nervous Nellie,"
The Captain said to him.
"All we need is a little determination;
Men, follow me, I'll lead on."
We were -- neck deep in the Big Muddy
And the big fool said to push on.

All at once, the moon clouded over,
We heard a gurgling cry.
A few seconds later, the captain's helmet
Was all that floated by.
The Sergeant said, "Turn around men!
I'm in charge from now on."
And we just made it out of the Big Muddy
With the captain dead and gone.

We stripped and dived and found his body
Stuck in the old quicksand.
I guess he didn't know that the water was deeper
Than the place he'd once before been.
Another stream had joined the Big Muddy
'Bout a half mile from where we'd gone.
We were lucky to escape from the Big Muddy
When the big fool said to push on.

Well, I'm not going to point any moral;
I'll leave that for yourself
Maybe you're still walking, you're still talking
You'd like to keep your health.
But every time I read the papers
That old feeling comes on;
We're -- waist deep in the Big Muddy
And the big fool says to push on.

Waist deep in the Big Muddy
And the big fool says to push on.
Waist deep in the Big Muddy
And the big fool says to push on.
Waist deep! Neck deep! Soon even a
Tall man'll be over his head, we're
Waist deep in the Big Muddy!
And the big fool says to push on!

Words and music by Pete Seeger (1967)
TRO (c) 1967 Melody Trails, Inc. New York, NY

 

I think a loud buzzer should go off any time somebody makes an argument based on what happened in 1972, or what happened in Munich in 1939.
It's History By Refrigerator Magnet.
The Democratic party split over Vietnam in 1968 -- and not in 1972 -- because it was a Democratic war, pursued by a Democratic president. That same dynamic doesn't exist here. Also, in 1972, there were a number of factors at play that are not in play here, the biggest one being that the white backlash down south against the Democratic support of the civil rights movement, predicted by LBJ and exploited by Harry Dent and the Nixon campaign, came to fruition for the first time. Muskie wasn't going to carry any of those states and neither was Humphrey -- even if the Nixon people thought they might. None of that is in play in Connecticut.
Also, losing a primary doesn't cast you out of the party unless you choose to leave. Lieberman could have been a good soldier -- god knows, he could have been a better candidate -- and likely would have been on the short list for a Cabinet post oif and when another Democrat wins the WH. Now, I don't think they'd piss on him if his hat was on fire.

 

On the heels of what Fenian brought up in reference to the Dems in '68. Many would say that it's was overdue to get rid of those like Joe, but at what cost to lose the centrist base?

http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060813/OPINION01/608130324/1035/OPINION

 

D-3 --
In what sense is what Ned Lamont is suggesting -- a Murtha-esque redeployment out of the civil war -- extreme? The last poll I looked at said 61 percent of the American people felt exactly that same way. Yepsen's been the Beltway media's Iowa Boy for a little too long.

 

Once again, Paul Krugman, the shit-for-brains Washington press corps should turn its lonely eyes to you:

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/081106F.shtml

War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.

 

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and
developing weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002