« John Kerry Sets a Deadline | Main | Democrats on the Same Team about Iraq »
Blog Responses To Kerry
Here are some of the things I have been reading in the comments sections that are rational and well thought out:
From a Daily Kos commenter:
This op-ed was not written by a senator or a former presidential candidate, though John Kerry is both those things.
It was written by a former soldier who has been fighting for fellow veterans and for the safety of our troops for 35 years. This former soldier is pissed off at the needless suffering and death he's seen on his visits to Iraq, he's pissed off that he was lied to by his own president and that kids are dying as a result. He's had enough and this is both a warning shot to the Bush administration and a call to arms.
A call to all of us who care about the heartless, heedless, ignorant foreign policy of this administration which is throwing away lives every day. A call to me and a call to you.
This op-ed was written by a guy who's been there and wants our troops HOME and out of danger. But he's also a decorated officer and an excellent, educated military strategist and possibly the most informed, caring member of the Senate Foreign Services Committee. What you're reading here is the result not only of combat experience but also of conversations with generals on the ground and troops on the spot. It is also the result of careful assessment of the diplomatic possibilities of the region and discussions with the leaders of surrounding countries.
So forget all your opinions about Kerry the Senator and Kerry the Candidate -- answer this call and spread the word of Kerry the Veteran and Patriot. What he's saying here makes SENSE.
Send letters to the editor, forward this op-ed to everyone you know, call your local TV stations and talk about it and demand they cover it, and forward it to your members of congress and make sure they know you want them to do whatever they can to make it happen! What John Kerry is calling for here is important not for Democrats or Republicans, but for our country and for the world.
And from Tena at the blog First Draft in response to a commenter (who is not a troll). The commenter's post is in italics:
I mean, I'm grateful that he did, but in both cases it's kind of a day late and a dollar short..... steve simels
I don't think so, and I'll tell you why, and it isn't because I think Kerry is the shizzy. It's because the first goddamned thing out of every Repug's mouth and every f****** pundit's mouth for months has been: The Democrats have no plan. The Democrats have no ideas. Ok, here's a plan and it's based on reality and I like it - it's a good damn plan, the best I've seen. With the most well-reasoned support, and rather succinctly put, at that.
Can we put aside moaning about Kerry long enough to have some appreciation for the plan? Am I the only one who thinks it make perfect sense?
And steve simels responds:
No...as I said, I'm glad Kerry is doing this and I think the party should get behind him on it. steve simels | 04.04.06 - 11:52 pm | #
The above is a good example of what supporting Kerry on the blogs looks like, and how we can use blogs to gain more active support for an issue we are working on, or rebut complaints folks may have, and change opinion through discussion.
From Phoenix Woman:
Kerry's throwing out a lifeline to the other Democrats, and saying "Here's a workable stance on Iraq, a lifeline you can use to set yourselves apart from the Republicans who are chained to Bush and his war. F*** Lieberman, ignore him; he's just a Bush groupie anyway. Use my lifeline to ease away from the Bush/Iraq sinking ship and onto the waiting lifeboat."
From David in Austin:
I am surprised, to this day, the number of Democratic supporters who refuse to support Democrats (Lieberman excepted), who chose to stand up and display some attachments.
Should Kerry have been more forceful in 2004?
What does it matter in 2006.
Good point, not to mention the fact that the majority of Americans still supported the war in Iraq in 2004. That has changed dramatically. That is what gives this proposal an excellent chance of having impact.
I put these posts up because they demonstrate some of the arguments being thrown around out there, and because they are effective in addressing them.
Effectiveness in addressing arguments against one's position is not a partisan issue. It's a political skill that takes constant practice.
Please take these ideas with you as you post around the blogs today, showing support for the solutions that are being presented.
And then come back here and post in the comments what you are hearing and seeing out there, and what the effective responses are.
Yup, I immediately had someone tell me "that sounds like a presidential candidate talking".
People have grown so incredibly distrustful of politicians and motives, thanks in no small part to the current truth twisters in power.
So I fired back ... "READ THE PLAN!"
It was that simple. He aplogized and got back to me later that it was a very sensible plan.
We MUST keep people on task here... do not let them wiggle out of facing the truth by using some lameass excuse not to pay attention.
Blackwell "accidentally" held shares in Diebold
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/14256784.htm
William Fisher: And This Guy Wants to Be President?
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/040506Z.shtml
William Fisher writes that this week, we got yet another pitiful lesson in just how craven wannabe presidential hopefuls will be in pandering to their "base." The lesson came from Senator George Allen, who wrote to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to recommend 3-star general Jerry Boykin to be the new head of the Army's Special Operations command.
We have had a request for some assistance in truthtelling at HuffPo. Thanks to anyone who can help.
Kerry is going to talk about his op-ed piece on Al Franken's show on Air America Radio in a few minutes.
Turn it on now... If you don't get satellite radio, you can listen live online via this link:
http://shows.airamericaradio.com/alfrankenshow/
Feingold supports Kerry's statement...
Statement of U.S. Senator Russ Feingold
On Senator John Kerry's Call for an
End to Our Military Mission in Iraq
April 5, 2006
“Since August 18, 2005 I have been calling on the Administration to aim to redeploy U.S. military personnel from Iraq by the end of this year so that we can focus on the threat posed by global terrorist networks. I applaud Senator Kerry’s call today for our combat forces to be withdrawn from Iraq by the end of this year. Senator Kerry has been a strong leader in calling for a clear, coherent strategy to complete our military mission in Iraq while engaging Iraq’s leaders with genuine diplomacy. Having just visited Iraq last month, I witnessed the desperate need for Iraqi politicians to form a unity government to prevent the country from falling deeper into violence. Senator Kerry is absolutely right to say that the end of this year is a reasonable target date for redeploying our troops in Iraq.”
http://www.senatedemocrats.net/node/758
If you missed Kerry on Franken's show, you can listen to it here ==>
http://www.kerrysupport.com/media/Kerry-AAR-040506.mp3
In the "yechhhhhh" department:
Katie Couric of NBC is apparently going to be the news anchor on CBS's evening news in a couple of months. I didn't know Bob Schieffer was retiring. Apparently there's gossip about asking Meredith Viera (now of The View which I quit watching because of the blonde neocon bimbo) to replace Couric. ABC currently has a female anchor whose name escapes me at this moment - I've always disliked her, so try not to watch ABC evening news if I can avoid it because her tone of voice when talking about "the president" is just so adoringly deferential and sickening (and they have entirely too much snooze with religious stories and rhetoric)....
I witnessed the desperate need for Iraqi politicians to form a unity government to prevent the country from falling deeper into violence.
http://www.senatedemocrats.net/node/758
Posted by: madame defarge at April 5, 2006 12:34 PM
I'm still waiting to read a definition of a "unity government." Is that anything like a "unitary executive?" Who coined the phrase and what, precisely, does it mean? Is this another one of The Cretin's neologisms, the definition of which changes with his level of ignorance on any given day??? And why are Dems using the term to imitate him if he coined the phrase?
I thought The Cretin's most recent objective was to impose "democracy" (or some kind of theoretical democratic republic like we're supposed to have) on the Iraqi people, only we all know he really means he wants to install a neocon puppet who will do whatever he dictates, per PNAC objectives to control the world's oil reserves???
NonnyO
Unity Government is The Puppet They (US admin)Want. That's why Straw & Rice have been over there, I think (in the "Green Zone") - they both need to sleep on the floor. The results of "democracy" in can't be guaranteed (witness the "surprises" such as Zapatero, Chavez, Hamas), though they may preach about "spreading it."
I also wish the media would stop using the inflammatory word "Crusade," even to describe Pamela Anderson and her seals.
I read McCain got booed by Union leaders.
http://www.comcast.net/news/politics/index.jsp?cat=POLITICS&fn=/2006/04/04/361052.html&cvqh=itn_mccain
DeLay Says He'll File Ethics Complaint Against McKinney
by Robert B. Bluey
Posted Apr 04, 2006
Soon-to-retire Rep. Tom DeLay (R.-Tex.) said today he would file an ethics complaint against Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D.-Ga.) for striking a Capitol Police officer should no other House member do so first.
DeLay’s comments came during a wide-ranging interview at his Capitol Hill office with reporters, including HUMAN EVENTS Editor Terry Jeffrey.
“If nobody in this House files an ethics charge, I am,” DeLay said in response to a question about McKinney. “Her behavior is outrageous. And it’s not the only time.”
DeLay was asked if he supported the Capitol Police’s actions following the incident with McKinney, which took place last week when she bypassed a metal detector and a police officer stopped her.
“You bet,” he said.
“It’s outrageous behavior,” he said about McKinney. “Had it been Tom DeLay, the Ethics Committee would have met the next day.”
http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?print=yes&id=13784
I expected that little piss-ant DeLay would do this.
McKinney is wrong. She didn't wear her badge and expected the guard to let her by.
By raising a stink she shows want an arrogant jerk she is.
She is a convenient target for DeLay.
As we all know, DeLay is a fine one to claim ethics violations... A main reason for DeLay to stay in the race as long as he did was to raise legal fees under the guise of raising money to run a political campaign. How *ethical*...
From today's WaPo...
DeLay was determined to hang on to his seat at least through the primary, said Carl Forti, spokesman for the National Republican Congressional Committee. That was because he considered his three Republican challengers gadflies and traitors and he was determined to try to block them from succeeding him.
...
An additional impetus for putting off the resignation until now was suggested by John Feehery, a former aide to DeLay and House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.). "He needed to raise money for the defense fund. That was the bottom line," Feehery said. "He wanted to make sure he could take care of himself in the court of law." Under federal campaign rules, any reelection money a lawmaker raises can be used to pay legal fees stemming from official duties.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/04/AR2006040400513.html
Sadly, I am seeing so much of the same (lack of) thinking we all dealt with on the K-E Blog, but I am heartened by the good folks who have really thought about these issues and their responses to those mindless idiots.
Honestly, some on the left are just as programmed as those on the right. They see the name Kerry and, without actually reading and thinking about it much, they jump right into "He's a quitter", "He should have done this a year ago", and the rest (You all know it all).
I am still not seeing much understanding of the process of learning he has been through over the past year and a half. It cannot have been easy to come to a place where he feels he has to stand up more or less alone, after spending two years trying to work with and within the party leadership. Even though he has often had to take a stand alone (BCCI, Iran Contra, etc.), it must have been a pleasant feeling to be the choice of the party, whether in the end they did him good or not.
At any rate, I, for what it is worth, am once again proud of him, and glad for my year-plus of work. For all that I wish he had been able to do, at least he is a good honest man, and one with a plan.
John Kerry is a hero.
I'm taking off half of a day next week to hope to see he and Teresa.
John Kerry is a true patriot & world citizen in a world of pretenders.
Kerry was making the rounds on progressive radio today; you can hear the discussions/interviews at these various sites:
Franken (as posted earlier): http://www.kerrysupport.com/media/Kerry-AAR-040506.mp3
Randi Rhodes (no audio posting; text only): http://www.therandirhodesshow.com/live/todaysshows
Ed Schultz (not posted yet; check site later): http://www.wegoted.com/dailyAudio/index.asp
Posted by: DiAnne at April 5, 2006 01:45 PM
Yup, that's what I figured. "Unity government" = puppet government installed by he-who-shall-not-be-named....
I, too, wish people would temporarily stop using the word 'crusade,' which only fans the flames of already-sensitive tempers for people whose region has been illegally invaded and occupied. (No, I do not advocate censorship, just some tact and sensitivity about words spoken and what's appropriate and what's not appropriate for any given circumstances.) There's enough inflammatory adjectives in the national snooze and propaganda already.
Additionally, I have a problem with the word "redeployment." Redeploying troops does NOT mean a total "withdrawal" from Iraq or Afghanistan or surrounding countries (and I think NumbNutz would "redeploy" them to Iran, anyway, if he and his criminals in office agree to a deadline date).
I'm not seeing much in the way of any politicians talking about "withdrawing" troops, especially in reference to guard and reserve troops who belong on US soil. I can understand "redeploying" regular troops (preferably to someplace peaceful!).
But, IMHO, the guard and reserve troops need to be "withdrawn," all the way back to their home bases/states on US soil. I'm thinking of hurricane season coming up, in particular, and floods in MN and CA for the moment, and the middle of the nation where tornados just struck where cleanup is needed, etc. Guard troops sure could be employed helping their fellow citizens in those areas when natural disasters occur, or have already occurred. But to help their fellow citizens in this country, guard troops have to be stationed here on US soil and able to be easily deployed to the disaster areas within hours, or a day or two at most.
So, I'm sitting back scowling, wondering about the wording on some of these things and how easily the wording can be manipulated to mean something other than what we want to perceive the meanings. The dictionary definitions of "withdrawal" and "redeployment" mean two different things, so when politicians talk about "redeployment" I'm sure most people think politicians mean "withdrawal" (equates to: troops come home) and that's not what "redeployment" means....
So, my mind's stuck like a broken record on "redeployment" ~ and it's stayed stuck on that one word since I first heard any proposals about it weeks ago....
Nonny,
Redeployment is the official military term for sending people home.
In normal English, redeployment hints that you're sending them somewhere else. But in militaryese, you deploy someone when you send them somewhere and when you "withdraw" them you redeploy them back home.
NonnyO
They are afraid of sounding like wimps, wusses, cut and runners, appeasers and so on, even though it was cowardly in the first place for a superpower to fight these guerilla wars.
I just saw a nun give away a prize so children can have more. That is compassion and charity.
Contrast that with Cheney and Halliburton and the billions earned off the blood of others. That is an illustration of what is not moral (Christian or otherwise).
Hypocrites. May they burn eternally or if there is no hell, may they rot. If there is reincarnation may they come back in a manner so vile it cannot be named. I guess that's a curse.
My favorite exerpt:
tristero Wrote:
Actually, *this* John Kerry did run for president. But no one could see him. There are three reasons:
1. The GOP let fall an avalanche of lies about Kerry, both big and small.
2. The media didn't like him. Bush seemed a nicer guy to them.
3. The Democratic party gave him only token support and were nowhere to be found when there was heavy lifting needed to help him.
But Kerry the candidate did, imo, a superb job. Read the debates. Read his detailed plan for the Iraq war.
Don't get me wrong: there was much that Kerry said I strongly disagree with - gay marriage, eg. But Kerry was competent. And therefore, the Bushites had to destroy him.
Why Democrats couldn't give him any serious help is the real question.
tristero | Homepage | 04.05.06 - 10:30 am | #
http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/04/05/oh-get-a-room/
I am so offended by this!
I'm really having a difficult time with the democrats and I have always had a difficult time with the republicans. Kerry is no hero and I have lost immense respect for him. He didn't have the balls to speak out against his opponent whom he knew cheated us out of our votes last election. What makes anyone think that his big announcement and demands are so great and so brave?
I find it absolutely perfect that Kerry decides to make this announcement just when George Bush announces he wants to wipe his hands clean of Iraq. He's got his eye on Iran, of course. So Kerry is allowed to make these demands which the GOP will meet because they WANT to pull them out.
The GOP can't very well change the course now, can they? Not after leaving a mother standing in a damned ditch outside of his house because of the noble cause her son died for. Not after all those calls to support our troops and how many times did he say we would finish the job? Sure now Bush and rackateers want to leave; now that the whole damned place is in ruin and they are worse off then they were before we invaded. Now that the hospitals are blown to smithereens and the schools no longer exist and the country is on the brink of war - NOW they want to pull out our over worked, understaffed, ill-equipped and tired young men and women - Why? Because they need them in Iran.
I can't be more sure that the Democrats and the Republicans are all putting on this big charade to make us believe someone is listening to us and we are being represented. This is all a song and dance and we need to open our eyes and wake up. These damned Senators don't represent us and there is very few exceptions.
As far as Kerry goes, where was he when Murtha made the call. He acknowledges it himself that the war has been going on for 3 years - a little to late there Kerry - You won't be my big hero doing something you should have done years ago and not when the GOP needs you to. Are you going to toss this election to another Bush too or is it your turn.
Sorry guys, I'm not biting this is a sham - we need some serious reform and we need it now.
John Kerry is my President!
lizbitch,
He did fight to count the votes; he was involved in three lawsuits in Ohio, one of which is still pending. (The others were dismissed).
When Murtha made the call, he was right there. Believe me.
I think he has felt as frustrated as we have, and he is doing what he thinks he needs to do. We can quibble about timing--and I do. But, he's throwing those chairs now. I suspect we had all better duck--but especially those Bushites.
Someone during the campaign said he is like the Incredible Hulk. I am seeing some green...
We need to get behind those dems that are speaking out instead of worry about who is stealing the spotlight from who. Karen is right, we can discuss the timing and everything else, but it only plays right into the hands of Bush, Rove, Cheney and the GOP congress.
This is not a time to be an rehash the past, be an ABK person and eat your own. It's time to get our men and women home.