Ted Haggard

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Downthestretch55

Danzig,
I'll have to do a search for the NIE report. It's worth the read.
If authorization for going to war was based on false information, the blame is not on the ones that voted, but on those that provided the "information" on which it was based.

dts--i went and found one of the last playboy issues to come out, in which they interviewed arianna huffington...bear with my typing, it will no doubt have typos as i have to peck this out...

huffington:although it goes without saying that we can be legitimately outraged at the administration that took us to war--that i blame the president goes without saying--i'm equally ourtaged at the democratic leadership for allowing the president to take us to war...

playboy:...was there any reason for you to think the opposition would oppose, at least at the time?
huffington: yes, because it was a matter of going to war. and remember, we were actually in the majority in the senate in 2002, if only for a moment. you can forgive politicians for going along on umimortant issues, but to allown an adminstration to take us into an unnecessary war? nothing is more immoral.

playboy: but who in congress knew it was unnecessary? ti took years for accustaion that the administration manipulated and ignored intelligence to surface.

continued...

[Danzig]

huffington: the late democratic senator from minnesota paul wellstone voted against the war in 2002. i've had off the recrod conversations with many democratic leaders who knew better and did not act on that knowledge. i believe the the democrats lacked courageous leadership, lacked a willingness to stand up for what they believed in, for what is right--even if they lost. there is a special blame and a special place in dante's inferno for them.

playboy: so why did they do it?

huffington: democrats are fools and enablers. their spineless leaders went along with the war purely for political reasons: reelectability. they assumed if they opposed the war they would be seen as weak.


---this all supports my belief that congress KNEW exactly what they cia told them at the time of their vote--that only when they felt that things were going poorly in iraq that it was time to trot out the whole 'they lied to us about wmd's' bs excuse. that way they could claim innocence, we voted for a just war, not this--but i think they knew THEN what they claim to have learned much later.

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by Danzig188

huffington: the late democratic senator from minnesota paul wellstone voted against the war in 2002. i've had off the recrod conversations with many democratic leaders who knew better and did not act on that knowledge. i believe the the democrats lacked courageous leadership, lacked a willingness to stand up for what they believed in, for what is right--even if they lost. there is a special blame and a special place in dante's inferno for them.

playboy: so why did they do it?

huffington: democrats are fools and enablers. their spineless leaders went along with the war purely for political reasons: reelectability. they assumed if they opposed the war they would be seen as weak.


---this all supports my belief that congress KNEW exactly what they cia told them at the time of their vote--that only when they felt that things were going poorly in iraq that it was time to trot out the whole 'they lied to us about wmd's' bs excuse. that way they could claim innocence, we voted for a just war, not this--but i think they knew THEN what they claim to have learned much later.

This sounds plausible to me,and after 11/7...I'm going to take a long hot shower to wash all the crap off!

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by timmgirvan

This sounds plausible to me,and after 11/7...I'm going to take a long hot shower to wash all the crap off!

don't forget to go vote! at least we can say we tried. altho i really wish they would start putting 'none of the above, we want new choices' on the ballots...

asa hutchinson came back 'home' to run for gov here. looks like i'll be going straight dem on gov and lt gov here this time 'round. (they run separately, we could actually have a gov from one party, and a lt gov from the other!)....asa is ok, but beebe seems the better choice. and we just had a rep for 8 years, and i don't like huckabee one bit--looks like he's going to attempt a run in '08 for pres--we have term limits here, so he's out.

the republican running for lt gov is an ultra-right wing religious zealot. he scares me!!

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by Danzig188

huffington: the late democratic senator from minnesota paul wellstone voted against the war in 2002. i've had off the recrod conversations with many democratic leaders who knew better and did not act on that knowledge. i believe the the democrats lacked courageous leadership, lacked a willingness to stand up for what they believed in, for what is right--even if they lost. there is a special blame and a special place in dante's inferno for them.

playboy: so why did they do it?

huffington: democrats are fools and enablers. their spineless leaders went along with the war purely for political reasons: reelectability. they assumed if they opposed the war they would be seen as weak.


---this all supports my belief that congress KNEW exactly what they cia told them at the time of their vote--that only when they felt that things were going poorly in iraq that it was time to trot out the whole 'they lied to us about wmd's' bs excuse. that way they could claim innocence, we voted for a just war, not this--but i think they knew THEN what they claim to have learned much later.

Danzig,
Thanks for the article.
We ALL claimed to have learned much later.
Just ask Dubbya.
DTS