Friday, December 08, 2006
GOP senator criticizes Iraq war in emotional speech

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- In an emotional speech on the Senate floor Thursday night, Sen Gordon Smith, a moderate Republican from Oregon who has been a supporter of the war in Iraq, said the U.S. military's "tactics have failed" and he "cannot support that anymore."

Smith said he is at, "the end of my rope when it comes to supporting a policy that has our soldiers patrolling the same streets in the same way, being blown up the same bombs, day after day.

"That is absurd," he said. "It may even be criminal."

Smith said he has tried to quietly support President Bush during the course of the war -- and doesn't believe the president intentionally lied to get the U.S. into the war -- but now recognizes, "we have paid a price in blood and treasure that is beyond calculation" for a war waged due to bad intelligence.

Moved this week by the findings of the Iraq Study Group, Smith said he needed to "speak from my heart.

"I, for one, am tired of paying the price of 10 or more of our troops dying a day. So let's cut and run or cut and walk, but let us fight the way on terror more intelligently than we have because we have fought this war in a very lamentable way," he said.

http://www.cnn.com/POLITICS/blogs/politicalticker/2006/12/gop-senator-criticizes-iraq-war-in.html

:wow:

He's just thinking about November 4th, 2008.

blaming the soldiers?

I know that others have made statements blaming soldiers, but I think he is coming from a different place...

:shrug:

to the troops? :sarcasm:

the blame is on *, the neocons who hatched the scheme, and the public who bought into the lies while ridiculing anyone who urged caution and more time.

That implies the soldiers and not their leadership are to blame. Condi has used the 'tactical failure' distinction more than once, and the choice of words is deliberate. There is nothing wrong with the military's tactics. It is a strategic blunder, a clear case of failed leadership.

But to be fair, Publicans have been mindlessly repeating their slogans for so long I'm sure it's really hard for them to relearn how to actually convey thoughts more deep than "Git 'er done!" Can you imagine how hard it's been for Junior to avoid using his "Stay the course" slogan?

FYI: Tactics = planners (generals & sec def's)... not operators (soldiers)

Blaming failures on tactics and not on strategy is a clear attempt to get people to think that the overall plans (strategy) for the invasion of Iraq by the executive (Junior, Lord Vader, Rummy) were sound and that faulty execution of them (tactics) by the military (all soldiers from generals to privates) is to blame. Neither category is the exclusive domain of either, but most would correctly believe the executive branch is mainly responsible for strategy, and the military for tactics.

Emotional speech, "the scales have fallen from my eyes," and as soon as the cameras turn off and the klieg lights dim, it's back to business as usual for Gordon Smith. "Two-faced hypocrite" doesn't begin to describe his record, and I hope the voters of Oregon have a viable competitive candidate to vote for this time around instead of the state Democratic party just conceding another Senate race.

Right after the election, Bush puts a rabidly anti-contraception kook in charge of family planning at HHS.

Frankly, I don't know how these so-called "moderate" republicans can stand to stay on a ship being run by Loony Fuckin' Theocrats.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Bush lied and everyone with half a brain knows it. I don't think you can lie and not mean it to be a lie. So to say someone did not intentionally lie is to say he didn't lie. Bush knew he was lying in his State of the Union address about the yellow cake. He knew he was lying about Saddam's not letting the inspectors do their job. He knew Powell was lying at the UN which Bush supported.

I don't let repukes off the hook unless they admit Bush lied.

It's not a lie if the person telling the lie believes it's the truth. That's how these assholes can go on lying without punishment. "I believe this to be true, so how can it be a lie?"

any more than a ventriloquist's dummy lies. * is just a sock puppet who says whatever words are put in his mouth by Cheney who has his hand up *'s ass controlling every move. * has no substance at all. This in no way diminishes the likelihood of his being forever labeled the worst president in history. On the contrary I believe it actually enhances his chances.
May I have the envelope please.

And the loser is....

Of course he didn't lie! And he hasn't intentionally dropped his phony Texas accent either. It just went away all by itself one day while he was clearing brush. You see this angel of the Lord came to him in a white robe and Nike sneakers and slapped him upside his head and told him to knock off the dim-bulb routine already, and he's been a changed man ever since....

he "doesn't believe the president intentionally lied to get the U.S. into the war". How can he have his head in the sand. What more proof does he need then what has already been revealed. Do they not want to admit what Bush did because it is horrible and criminal.

I CALL BULLSHIT. A Prezzydent who'ds been lied to calls for investigations--not coverups.

Wanna respect the Office of the POTUS? Then put that unworthy bastard on TRIAL.

That really says it all.

that the POTUS did not lie on purpose. If the POTUS didn't lie, heads would have rolled to find out who was responsible for this terrible, tragic mistake. There was ample evidence available to anyone who wanted to look, before the war started, that the reasons for war were systematic lies.

"Wanna respect the Office of the POTUS? Then put that unworthy bastard on TRIAL."

A war that has taken so many lives, has diminished our security and standing in the world, has bankrupted us financially deserves to have those who pushed it held accountable... preferrable before there is some oopsie, some bump in the night that commits us to war with Iran. I do not want to hear the for-sale congress lining up saying, "Well, we have to support the president now, etc., blah, blah" on that one.

and it isn't anybody in Washington.

The President and Vice President are invested in WAR PROFITEERING.
The Iraq War is history's most massive exercise in SELF-DEALING, ever. These bastards put the best of Africa's Kleptocrats to shame.

Biggest mistake in history. Not very much investigating and accountability. There's an elephant in the room. I like the way this guy talked about not believing Bush lied. It's good to hear the proposition, even in a negative way.

Logical consistency is not one of their strong points.

just can't bring themselves to admit that. Frankly, it's too much for them to handle. We, of course, have no such problem!

wrong on this war, to say (and prove) that they were lied into it? It gives them some cover for their constituents who have already turned from the way.

Actually, since it's the easiest way to deflect Personal Responsibility, I'm really surprised that the Repugs haven't jumped all over it. It fits their style perfectly.

The first, which you have pointed out. The second one being he feels that the intelligence community failed by providing bad intelligence. Nothing about cherry picking and group think mentioned. Nothing about the failures of the republican party to police their own and hold an administration accountable. Nothing about the Senator form Kansas, on the senate intelligence committee, who has failed to basically even start the investigation into the war.

Smith knows full well Bush lied but he is like all Republicans; they will not face the facts about this lying, thieving, murdering Fascist. Absurd? Sorry, Senator, this war goes far deeper than that. It's a fiasco of major proportions and Bush and Cheney should be tried as war criminals. Bush lied and still lies. The entire administration is a cabal of accomplished liars and Senator Smith knows it. For him to come now, on the verge of tears, and claim he could not continue to support this war is hypocritical. The only reason Smith has "seen the light" is because he can no longer defend the indefensible. When the sainted Baker and his panel of ancients said junior had blundered and hundreds of thousands are dead because of this hideous man and his followers, Smith caved in. He's not a moderate, he's been one of Bush's dependable votes in the Senate.
Broken Top

The fact that this guy finally caved, after declaring himself (in his "I'm caving" speech) to being a "good soldier" for bush in the past, is really significant. That he's doing so. That he's SAYING OUT FRONT that he's doing so. That's a REALLY lovely parting gift to give the adjourned Congress and Senate as it packs up to go home for the holidays. It WILL give others on his side of the aisle pause, and they'll be thinking about this A LOT over Christmas and New Years' (those who are lucky enough to be able to return to their jobs in January, that is).

I always like to see when one of the staunch believers caves in. If indeed he isn't a moderate and he has been one of bush's dependable votes in the Senate, as you say, then this is even sweeter. It's one thing if they ARE moderate, or they're already wavering, like Chuck Hagel. But it's quite another when one of the hardcores gives up the ghost.

There will be a LOT of them wondering whether to go down with the ship, or grab a life preserver and some flares and jump beforehand.

This is what happened when it all began unraveling on Richard Nixon.

One by one, and then in bunches, republicans realized they could either go down with the ship or jump ship.

We'll have the votes to impeach and convict BushCo by next summer.

Now that this Congress is over and they all go home, they go home to their constituents. Constituents who are OUTRAGED about the war and probably increasingly upset about the reaction of "The Decider" and how he appears not to be willing to go along with the Iraq Study Group's report. You're gonna see MORE of this, not less. And those who do get to come back to Washington in January after spending the holidays at home amidst angry constituents will come back with their ears ringing and their asses burning. One by one, and then in bunches, you'll see the aspens turn. Because they will be starting to think of how they can possibly salvage ANYTHING in 2008 if they don't.


By summer, at least. Maybe even sooner.

He's up for a re-election in 2008 in the Senate, and there's increasing numbers of people like me around the country that are looking to potentially move to places like Oregon in the coming year or so to make it an even more blue state. He knows his number is up if he keeps playing the Rethugs' game. I think this is a sign of that happening. He also has seen what has happened to GOP moderates in the last election. Perhaps he's preparing to do a Jeffords?

He'll be up for re-election in 2008...that explains his sudden change of heart. Just trying to save is sorry ass. Loser.

Looks like Joementum's reign of blackmail will be short lived. I'm keeping that for reference.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_elections,_2008#Republican_incumbent_races

The wind will be at our backs in the 2008 Senate races. And lookee here, Whitewash Roberts is up for reelection. He might not get a lot of votes after Jay Rockefeller gets through tarring and feathering him.

so dishonest. He votes pro-environment because he has to but take a look at his vote. He's in the pockets of Big medicine, big pharma, big oil, etc. We need a great Dem candidate here in Oregon. He can be beaten!!

"Yup. Gordon is up for election again in 2008."

This is what is sometimes referred to as "seeing Jesus."

During the previous congress (108th), he was a stronger voice for LGBT individuals- more legislation introduced overall, both positive and negative.
Smith's LGBT record from the 108th congress:
2 - DENOTES CO-SPONSORSHIP OF DOMESTIC PARTNER HEALTH BENEFITS
EQUITY ACT, S.1702
Under the current tax code, employees are taxed on the benefi ts provided to their domestic
partners while benefi ts for spouses are tax-free. Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Ore., introduced a bill that
would amend the current tax code, allowing employees to exclude from their gross income the
costs of employee-provided health coverage provided to other eligible designated benefi ciaries, in
addition to spouses and dependent children. As of Oct. 1, 2004, ten senators have co-sponsored
this legislation: Democrats — 8; Republicans — 1; Independents — 1.

2 SMITH-KENNEDY AMENDMENT TO DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
AUTHORIZATION BILL,
S. AMDT. 3183
An amendment by Sens. Gordon Smith, R-Ore., and Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., was offered
during debate on S.2400, the Department of Defense authorization bill, to attach the Local Law
Enforcement Enhancement Act (a hate crimes prevention measure) to the bill. Th e amendment
passed the Senate with a vote of 65-33, with two senators absent: Democrats — 47 yes, 0 no;
Republicans — 18 yes, 33 no. HRC supported the amendment.

LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT ENHANCEMENT ACT OF 2003, S.966
(CO-SPONSORSHIP)
Senators were asked to co-sponsor legislation introduced May 1, 2003, that would update and
expand federal hate crimes laws to cover serious, violent hate crimes committed because of
real or perceived sexual orientation, gender or disability to cover the gay, lesbian, bisexual and
transgender community.

4 EMPLOYMENT NON-DISCRIMINATION ACT, S.1705 (CO-SPONSORSHIP)
Senators were asked to co-sponsor legislation introduced Oct. 2, 2003, that would prohibit
discrimination based on sexual orientation in the workplace. As of Oct. 1, 2004, S.1705 had
44 co-sponsors: Democrats — 39; Republicans — 4; Independents — 1.

6 EARLY TREATMENT FOR HIV ACT OF 2003, S.847 (CO-SPONSORSHIP)

7 POLICY PLEDGE OF NON-DISCRIMINATION G. Smith- aye
This Congress, the Human Rights Campaign and the Gender Public Advocacy Coalition worked
together and asked every senator to adopt, voluntarily, a written policy for their own offi ces indicating
that sexual orientation and gender identity and expression are not factors in their employment
decisions. As of Oct. 1, 2004, 26 senators in the 108th Congress have adopted this policy:
Democrats -- 22; Republicans -- 3; Independents -- 1.
from HRC's Congressional Scorecard for 109th congress: Voted for HRC positions on both of the following.


109th Congress

D Lautenberg Amendment to Child Custody Protection Act (S. 403)- G. Smith- aye
Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., offered an amendment to the anti-choice Child
Custody Protection Act (S. 403) that contained provisions from the HRC-supported
Responsible Education About Life Act (S. 368). The amendment would create a
federal funding stream for states to teach comprehensive sex education. The only
current federal funding available to teach sex education in schools mandates the
teaching of abstinence-only until marriage. The Senate rejected this amendment by a
vote of 48-51 (Senate Roll Call Vote 214, 2nd Session). Democrats — 42 yes, 1 no,
1 not voting; Republicans — 5 yes, 50 no; Independents — 1 yes. HRC supported
this amendment.

E. Early Treatment for HIV Act (S. 311) (Co-Sponsorship)
Senators were asked to co-sponsor legislation that would offer states the option to
provide Medicaid coverage to low-income, HIV-positive Americans as “categorically
needy.”

But until someone actually DOES something meaningful to extract our troops from Iraq, I'm afraid all else is lip service.

In other words:
"I think, I personally have to change the course to have a chance in 2008. Like the majority, I don't like the war, now. So please vote for me."

Senator Smith: I was pleased to hear your heartfelt comments about how badly this military action in Iraq has played out. Thanks for your courage in going against what many in your party are still clinging to, a hope that this Administration has dealt fairly with the American people. However, it's important to go beyond "repairing a mistake" and instead obey the mandates of the Constitution in investigating and punishing those responsible for what is arguably the worst public act in U.S. history. My colleagues in Linn, Benton and Lincoln counties are keenly aware of the current political atmosphere, and will closely follow the upcoming events in Congress regarding these crimes, if any. Thanks again for your leadership in this direction.

Sincerely,

wrongheadedness, I didn't figure he'd care what I had to say. Glad you did this.

Gee, ya THINK??

:eyes:

Not in my book. Oh well. At least he's seen the light.

He has to keep his true far right-wing colors under wraps to keep getting elected in Oregon.

Just a little late, but welcome I guess.

Whoever it is, we'd better have an assload of money and volunteerism ready to roll out in the campaign, because Gordo's got major assets and backing, and he'll say anything to fool the moderates.

It is a different time now. Could we raise enough money for him?

To all - Gordo is NOT a moderate.

and Oregonian article critical of Smith? Just wondering since I quit reading it years ago. It was once a good paper but it's been crap for some time now.

be quite surprised when Rockefeller relases the report that Roberts has surpressed fot the last 2 years.....

He was "moved by the ISG report". Me thinks he sees the handwriting on the wall when Poppy's friends have had enough, so he's now climbing on the bandwagon. I respect Walter "freedom fries" Jones' timing in speaking out against the Iraq debacle more, because he went against the grain to do the right thing.

with a straight face?
Oh yes, he is a politician after all, among his skill set!

That day being November 7th, 2006, of course. All hyperbole aside, it really may have been the election that saved the world.

Stunning times we live in.

what a ratfucker. I just hope we can find someone credible and charismatic to run him out in 2008.

"So much for a Democratic Senate primary run in 2008 by former Oregon Gov. John Kitzhaber . Asked on Nick Fish's Sunday public-affairs TV program whether he'd have any interest in the U.S. Senate, Kitzhaber splashed cold water on any Dem fever to get him in a race against U.S. Sen. Gordon Smith (R-Ore.). Check out the video clip of the interview from KWBP's Outlook Portland with Nick Fish at WWire on wweek.com."

Smith can be be readily beaten- if someone as you say, someone decent runs. The only reason he's in there now is that he's had two half hearted lame challengers that never stood a chance.

De Fazio, for example, would destroy him.

He is a slick character. I did not feel that his statement rang sincere at all.I wish Kitzhaber would reconsider. We need someone to destroy Gordo's chance of winning again. And hands off DeFazio. He is my Congressman and is a wonderful guy.DeFazio is tops in my book.

Good story.

is speaking in such strong language, what are the other ones THINKING? They have to deal with their constituents.

"That is absurd," he said. "It may even be criminal." Sound like impeach to me.....

:sarcasm:

"HE"

is tired of paying the price???

:wtf:

I was surprised no one else mentioned it - glad I found your post! I think there are a whole lot of people who have paid the price, I'm not sure he's one of them...

How about a nice cup of "Go Fuck yourself." I am an Oregon resident and still have the form letters you sent back over the years. You practically couldn't contain your mirth and savage disregard for us concerned liberal Oregonians. You have voted the wrong way to many fucking times. Come election time this is one vote you can count on...for your opponent.

their hands and give "an emotional speech on the Senate floor" (saying they need to "speak from my heart"!). They acted to help investigate and remove him. It was Republican special prosecutors that Nixon fired, in his effort to avoid being charged with a clear crime (conspiracy to burglarize the DNC headquarters in the Watergate complex during the 1972 Nixon v. McGovern election). One of Nixon's closest advisers--White House Counsel John Dean--came forward as a whistleblower to testy against Nixon and his chief aides. 40% of the Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee voted to impeach Nixon. Republicans like Sen. Howard Baker put the Constitution and the country above partisan loyalty, and acted to impeach Nixon and force him from office.

These people certainly must have felt emotional at times. Nixon had deeply betrayed them by participating in criminal acts.* But their public demeanor was mature and professional and cool-headed. There was some partisanship at first--when the burglary first became known--but partisanship soon ceased as the evidence against Nixon emerged--evidence developed as much by Republicans as by Democrats.

All that contrasts very sharply with Sen. Smith's performance--which seems so immature, like a young boy who gets caught with his hand in the cookie jar and claims that his older brother put him up to it. ("But, Mom, he said you said it was okay!") I think something else is going on here, that people like Gordon Smith cannot acknowledge--their own complicity in the crime of unjust war (--if it's a crime, as he says it may be--he helped Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld to commit it), and the Bushite tactics of bullying, bribery, blackmail, and "groupthink," that they used to silence any questions about this heinous policy. Congress critters LOST THEIR INTEGRITY in this atmosphere of fear and intimidation. Many entirely lost their ethical sense--and descended into cheap financial corruption and other perversions. And Congress itself--as an institution, and co-equal branch of government--was severely damaged. We now have the VP of the US saying that he WILL NOT respond to Congressional subpoenas, and the President and VP saying that they will not heed the advice of THEIR OWN REPUBLICAN/BUSH CARTEL power-brokers on the Iraq War. And we have a President who has the nerve to add hundreds of "signing statements" to bills passed by Congress saying that HE will decide if the laws apply to HIM.

And at the bottom of all this is the illegitimacy of stolen elections--the complete loss of ethics within Republican circles on transparent vote counting (their Bushite/corporate-controlled electronic voting systems, run on TRADE SECRET, PROPRIETARY programming code--I mean, come on!**), on unfair tactics (mean-spirited and illegal suppression of black, poor and other Democratic votes), their pigsty attitude toward filthy campaign money/lobbying, and their contempt for the American people expressed in so many ways.

And now that they're all being caught out on these many crimes and ethical breeches, they have nowhere to run to--nothing they can do but throw themselves on Mom's mercy (us--the American people), who must judge their levels of guilt. So we see finger-pointing ("He lied to me!"), and backfilling (perhaps out of fear of big brother--"but he didn't mean to"), and all sorts of erratic and immature behavior.

---------------------------------

*Nixon had violated the "rules of the game" by planning and covering up a political burglary. His much worse crime--the on-going slaughter in Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos--was never mentioned in the Watergate hearings, except peripherally (the burglary of Pentagon/Vietnam War whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg's psychiatrist's office -- to get dirt on Ellsberg to discredit him). But many people believe that the Watergate prosecution was in some way connected to Nixon's campaign lie that he would bring peace in Vietnam and in the U.S. over Vietnam (the country was being ripped to pieces). I remember that's how I felt at the time. Nixon had said that he had a plan to end the Vietnam War, then, as soon as he was in office, he escalated the war. I didn't exactly feel betrayed, because I had never trusted Nixon in the first place. But I think a lot of people DID feel betrayed--especially those who voted for him specifically to bring peace and normalcy. In any case, the Watergate burglary was a far lesser crime than the continuing horror in Southeast Asia--but it was the burglary that brought him down.) (The war was ended about eight months after Nixon's resignation, with the fall of Saigon and the evacuation of US forces. Upwards of two million people had been killed in the expanded war, including over 55,000 US soldiers.)

**(Smith was elected in Oregon, which has an all mail-in Absentee Ballot voting system. However, the ballots are not hand-counted, but are scanned into an electronic system--I'm not sure whose--Diebold? ES&S? Sequoia?--which makes Oregon elections also vulnerable to electronic theft. They claim their system is fraud-free. If they don't have a hefty audit--comparison of ballots with electronic totals--that claim cannot be made. I favor a 100% audit--full hand count--but a 5% to 10% audit MIGHT catch fraud, IF the audit is NOT directed by electronics, which can be programmed to miss the fraud. Many states have no audit at all. The best--the best!--have only a 1% audit. I presume Oregon has a 1% audit. A discussion of Oregon's voting system: http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewPrint&articleId=11419 )

I hope many!

I'd like to see her defect and/or help us out with impeachment.

"we have paid a price in blood and treasure that is beyond calculation" for a war waged due to bad intelligence."

This zebra hasn't changed his stripes. He's just hoping that voters won't hold him accountable for his actions. What a BS artist.

the one he will face in a couple of years. But as they say better late than never?

... for him to be honest with his constituents. But that will never happen. He'll blame it on a lack of intelligence (his own, perhaps?) rather than ideology. Sweeping the floor while the dead rats under the floorboards won't make the stink go away.

Is it possible Republicans would suggest impeachment?

I love 12th-hour attacks of feigned moral outrage by "moderate" Republicans and conservative talk show hosts. Especially when I know that what they're really against is the fact that America is losing in Iraq, not the fact that an unprovoked invasion against another sovereign country was morally wrong and against international law in the first place.

It all proves that they still haven't learned, and that they will be early supporters of the next corpo-imperialist attack against another nation's natural resources, as they're ordered to be.

I also know that if the troops were sent to abduct Venezuela's oil fields instead of Iraq's, people wouldn't be taking so long to make up their minds against the war. When American troops are being massacred half a world away, it's much easier for Americans to play politics about it.

I love all these Republicans, some who were in a position to at least try to find out the real deal from Bush before the war, who KNEW the truth before the 2004 election, NOW after the 2006 election saying that they cannot support it anymore.

Too fucking late, Albert Speer. You were lock stepping when you could have made a difference.

People of Louisiana - start looking for a replacement NOW. There should be one real democrat somewhere in the state.

Her name is not mentioned in the text.

And why does La. need to find a replacement for her?

sorry.....X number of days until we kick your ass out of office , juts like Burns, just like Allen, just like Talent

For many folks, the blurb on TV is the reality. It's a nudge in the national consciousness, imo, to have one of those blurbs, from a Republican, mention the word "criminal" in regards to our POTUS.

Agree, I seriously doubt he'd put his vote on the line behind his comment, but that was probably a given in any event. Y'know what I mean?

Don't know how it plays in his re-election chances in Oregon, but the press coverage of another (R) "defection" is a plus for us, in the national setting.

Go Jump in a Lake Senator..

NT!

who'll be deserting the good ship GW BUSH..

Sorry, Smith, but bush LIED.

That's a fact. I KNEW it6 was bullshit, and yer trying to tell me the President of the United States DIDN'T KNOW??! :wow:

He knew.

"Fuck Saddam, we're taking him out"
-March 2002, a year before his illegal invasion.
http://citypages.com/databank/25/1247/article12600.asp

‘If I have a chance to invade….if I had that much capital, I’m not going to waste it."
-1999..years before his illegal invasion.
http://houstonpress.com/issues/2004-11-18/news/news_print.html

Bush planned Iraq 'regime change' before becoming President
http://www.sundayherald.com/27735

O'Neill: Bush planned Iraq invasion before 9/11
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/10/oneill.bush

Bush 'wanted war in 2002'
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1154473,00.html

WE knew.



US Public Want to Give UN Inspectors More Time

Seven in 10 Americans would give U.N. weapons inspectors months more to pursue their arms search in Iraq, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll that found growing doubts about an attack on Iraqi President Saddam Hussein
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A23564-2003Jan21

Poll: Bush hasn't made case for Iraq war

More than two-thirds of Americans believe the Bush administration has failed to make its case that a war against Iraq is justified...
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002-12-17-iraq-poll_x.htm



Poll: Majority of Americans oppose unilateral action against Iraq

A robust majority of Americans - 83 percent - would support going to war if the United Nations backed the action and it was carried out by a multinational coalition. But without U.N. approval and allies, only about a third of the public would support a war with Iraq.
http://talkleft.com/new_archives/001415.html

NO, the world DID NOT believe Saddam had "WMD".

And fuck that "bad intelligence" bullshit.

CIA to Bush: 'No clear Evidence of WMD'
http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/120103A.shtml

Why the CIA thinks Bush is wrong
The president says the US has to act now against Iraq. The trouble is, his own security services don't agree.
http://www.sundayherald.com/28384

CIA in blow to Bush attack plans
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,808970,00.html

White House 'exaggerating Iraqi threat'
Bush's televised address attacked by US intelligence
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,807286,00.html

bush the MFing war criminal LIED America into an illegal "supreme crime" invasion.

FACT.

to take cover from the fall out lest they loose the whole Republican Party...

This might be fine except for two things.

1. What passes as a debate over Iraq was in full swing four full years ago. It is only after the Republicans suffered a sweeping defeat at the hands of the American people. And that leads to the second point.

2. Smith is up for re-election in 2008. Oregon is not exactly friendly territory for a "stay the course" Republican.

Too little, too late Sen. Smith. Enjoy your retirement come January 2009.

is that in the 90s it was President Clinton who caught hell for his policy of nation-building and yet Iraq is the biggest example of and by far the most expensive nation-building project this nation has ever undertaken. It seems the far-right types are hypocritically silent when the shoe is on the other foot and it's their boy doing the same shit they're supposedly against.

Do you remember in the '00 debates against Gore, Chimp even trotted that out, trying to score points against Gore for the so-called sin of "nation-building" in Bosnia and Kosovo.

I guess nation-building in the service of humanitarian crises is an abomination and un-American, but nation-building in the service of US oil interests and neo-conservative wet dreams of world domination is no vice!

Ha!

The Repulikkkans are like any other crooked group of politicians -- whatever serves their cause for the moment is pragmatically expedient for them to use to their advantage -- and that includes them going against their own "values."(and that's an oxymoron if I've ever heard of one)

As an Oregonian, our Jr. Senator has never ceased to disgust me.

First, he ran as a right-wing *freak* (only way he could win the rePuke primary, of course) against the horribly "Lib-er-al" Ron Wyden, Congressman from *gasp* Multnomah County (largest OR. urban county). Guess what, kids? He lost. Big time.

2 years later, he "re-invents" himself as a "moderate"!!

The worst part was, the voters bought it, and he got elected!!?? :wtf:

So, in the Senate, he votes like, I don't know, 99.9999999999% of the fucking time with Bu**it and the Repuke extremists, but he's always making the media play (like voting against drilling in ANWR...when it doesn't really matter!!), so he can get the local media whores to call him a "moderate"!!!???

Makes me sick!!! :puke: :puke: :puke:

So, needless to say, his Johnnie-come-stupidly "emotional" speech on the Senate floor strikes me as yet another rat leaving the sinking ship, CYA, etc., by another Repuke who hitched his wagon to the Bush**it train and is just now realizing that America has woken up to the nightmare that is the Repuke fascist lock-step approach to raping and pillaging the grand ol' US of A, and is hoping to save his pasty white ass from what he has coming to him.

As long as we Dems in Or-e-gon can nominate a candidate with a pulse and a conscience, we should have a fighting chance of sending Mr. Smith home from Washington... and not a moment too soon!

:rant:

They are scared to death that the GOP incompetence in every way will sweep the GOP out of office completely in 2008.

here we have a moderate Republican stating that the tactics in this war may be criminal.