Stephanopoulus just got Kennedy to agree Bush deserves praise

for invading Iraq and having it result in the Iraqi election blah blah blah blah blah......When is a Democrat or anyone else going to point out the fact that in order for Georgie to get his democratic election in Iraq he is responsible for the death of over 100,000 innocent Iraqis?......That's the bottom line, so far as I'm concerned.....It's disgusting!!!!!

P.S....I keep hearing all these people referring to the number of American soldiers who have died, which is terrible also, but they completely ignore the dead Iraqis!

and to the U.N. and indeed the entire friggin' world (Tony Blair excluded) to get it done.

nt

Talk about media kneepads...

and even threaten other Dems who won't. It's almost comical now to see one Dem throttling another Dem because he/she doesn't have a moist enough tongue for the ass licking of the shrub. They'll get no support from me. The last thing this war deserves is PRAISE. It killed hundreds of thousands of innocents, drained our treasury and fucked up our country for generations to come, possibly beyond repair. FOR NO REASON, unless you call a faux election something for which you don't mind destroying and bankrupting your country. We're supposed to praise the grinning kill-happy fraud king for that? Count me out.

It wasn't originally about liberation. And if the people prefer to drool at face value at what comes out of the tv set instead of looking up *'s and Rumsefeld's own comments before and after the war (which prove them to be deceptive to some degree, if not outright liars), * wouldn't have had as many votes.

The people don't care about the recent past. Only today. Wearing temporal blinders so they can't look back and put the pieces together.

In other words, it's clear that they want fascism to take over. They're not bothering to do the simplest of work that even our Founding Fathers would want: Active citizen participation.

It is one of the biggest rewriting of history efforts today. The liberation of the people angle was their last ditch effort to give the war a bit of legitimacy after everything else had failed.

excuse for war that is being sold....It's as if they agree you can kill as many people as you like as long as you bring democracy to the poor bastards!

every single step of the way.

First off, a key fact often overlooked is that all of the key decisions were made long before any Iraqi citizen voted or had any kind of input at all. Appointments with long terms (5+ years) to key positions were made before they even handed over to the interim government.

But more than that is the key structure of the society was determined with no Iraqi input. I am speaking of the the forced Iraqi free trade agreement drawn up an put in place by a Paul Bremer order. We are all familiar with the trade pacts drawn up such as NAFTA. A lot of the time the developing nation gets the short end of the stick, but despite that they do usually fight for certain things to be in the agreements. Things like ensuring only a set percentage of industry can be own by foreign business and the right to keep public services public (water etc.) They do this because they don't want a situation where the domestic population has zero ownership and zero stake in the industry of the country. In Iraq, the Iraqi people never even got the chance to decide these things. How can a foreign power decide the most basic structure of their society and have it be called democracy? Of course this is largely ignored because we as US citizens are more and more in the same boat. It is declared that we have no right to participate in decisions effecting our economic life. That multinationals should and do have the right to challenge our laws (environmental laws for example) if it interferes with their interests. So it all seems pretty normal to call that democracy but I for one disagree.

Then there is the fact that it was largely forces inside of Iraq that forced the Bush administration to have those elections in the first place, at least in the form that they took place. Remember the administration trying to argue that the date needed to be pushed back? That they should have caucuses instead of direct elections? Talk of excluding certain groups from the voting all together? Not to mention that there was a "council" that got to decide who was allowed to run and who wasn't (a very Iranian type concept of democracy) that was put in place by another Bremer order.

Finally, I then like to contrast Iraq with the events in Haiti and Venezuela over the last couple years. All it takes is a simple look at these two countries to see pretty clearly that the idea that Bush has any interest in democracy is laughable.

They allowed the elections to proceed precisely because the important stuff, the structure of the financial system, had already been decreed through imperial "orders".

I can't say I blame the Democrat politicians though, it is a pretty tall order to explain these things to an American public that is completely in the dark about them and is constantly propagandized by the media.

Senator to oppose republican bullshit, at least during his long term.

I think such a criticism deserves a link, a quote, or the equivalent. Like these:

Kennedy: Iraq war based on politics - Jan. 15, 2004
... S. Sen. Edward Kennedy, an elder statesman among liberal Democrats, slammed President Bush and his administration for going to war in Iraq based on political considerations. In a speech Wednesday ...
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/14/kennedy.iraq

Kennedy says Iraq is 'Bush's Vietnam' By Michael Kranish, Globe Staff | January 17, 2005 WASHINGTON -- Senator Edward M. Kennedy said yesterday that President Bush's Iraq policy is ''ridiculous"
http://www.boston.com/news/world/middleeast/articles/2005/01/17/kennedy_says_iraq_is_bushs_vietnam/

Kennedy to assail Bush over Iraq war
... Kennedy to assail Bush over Iraq war By Anne E. Kornblut, Globe Staff, 10/16/2003 WASHINGTON -- Ratcheting up his criticism of the war in Iraq, Senator Edward M. Kennedy accuses the Bush administration . . . http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2003/10/16/kennedy_to_assail_bush_over_iraq_war/

Kennedy: Give Iraq Back To Iraqis | January 28, 2005 06:00 ...
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/01/27/iraq/main669789.shtml

Kennedy's 'Texas' remark stirs GOP reaction - Sep. 18, 2003
... to justify the war. As for the administration's current policy in Iraq, Kennedy called it "adrift." He said Bush officials had failed to account for $1.5 billion of the $4 billion the war costs
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/09/18/kennedy.iraq/index.html

Sen. Ted Kennedy To JHU SAIS Audience: Bush's Iraq Policies "a Catastrophic Failure"
http://www.baltimorechronicle.com/012805Kennedy.shtml

Kennedy was almost a lone voice in his outright opposition to the war...I don't understand why he said what he did....It was on TV.....there won't be a link till ABC posts the transcript

and people shoudl STOP POSTING RW CRAP HERE.

Kennedy did fine.repugs get way more tv time to express their views we have to find a way to shape public opinion.For some reason people believe everything that spews from repugs mouth.

I don't see the purpose. Just more fodder for Limpballs and friends.

That was the only good comment Kennedy made about Bush,he said bush did ok but still has alot of work to do.He blasted repugs on class action lawsuits,bancruptcy,I believe he actually said that Bush is attacking the regular people.He also said Bush is trying to eliminate SSI.So he didn't praise Bush!

deserves praise for the war and election....He said to Stephanopoulis..."I agree"....I was so disappointed, because I've always considered him unshakeable in his oppostion to the war....I still think he's a good man...Maybe he spoke too quickly, without thinking???

The remaining part of the show was right on target.
But I also believe that the Dems are working on SS so are being light on other issues so they win this one and get some repubs to go along with them on other issues as well. It is a very dangerous political game they play.

:kick:

I think he's up in '06 and the reality is he'll be facing SBV2 if he breathes a word against "democracy" fake or otherwise.

there is no work for Dems on TV or radio. You don't whore for Smirk, you don't have a job.

it is shameful that the lies of Bush have almost been forgotten, that the media chose not to tell the world about those lies, that the congress chose not to expose the lies, but instead voted to give a man who teeters on the brink of fascism,(if not there already) the go ahead to illegally invade a country, murder tens of thousands of innocents with enormous bombs, on the lies, and on the relentless propaganda that we were threatened and needed to invoke the "pre-emptive" doctrine of slaughter .

It has been forgotten, and Bush says it shouldn't be brought up anymore because the people voted for him, so that proves it was all just fine and dandy to murder and slaughter in the name of the US. Ah, but, hell, once Bush did all the dirty work, and as long as it has gone this far, we might as well make the best of it.:eyes:

I will not mention the grab for the spoils that is almost as shameful.

It has been almost forgotten these past two years of Bush lies to kill, maim and destroy, except that history will record without the use of Bush propaganda -- I hope for the sake of the next generation who in many ways seem to have developed a sharpened tooth for killing pre-emptively.

It gets worse day by day.

http://images.globalfreepress.com

peace

I do.
Nobody can be as stupid as these guys appear to be, no one can be that thick and obtuse and utterly incompetent and still manage to survive just goin' out to get the mail every day.


http://www.presidentevilonline.com/stoopid.html

They're evil, that's all.

D X Stone
http://www.presidentevilonline.com
"I LOVE horror movies, man... I just don't want to LIVE in one."

I don't think he left the White House of his own accord, I think he was fired. I think little Georgie was responsible for many, many problems the early Clinton Administration had with the beltway whores.
I saw the movie, War Room, many years ago and was struck by a scene near the end. Its election night in 1992, Clinton has won, little Georgie and Carville are outside the Governor's Mansion in Little Rock. Georgie is telling the others about a telephone conversation he had with Clinton regarding voting results in Nevada. The contempt in Georgie's voice for Clinton is unmistakable. I remember thinking: "This guy doesn't like Clinton."
In 1993, according to the book, Blood Sport, Georgie suggested to Clinton that he should accept an Independent Counsel. The White House Counsel at the time, Bernie Nussbaum, went berserk. He wanted it left to Congress. Mr Nussbaum told what would happen, with startling prescience.
IMO, Georgie owes his million dollar salary to the fact that he worked for Clinton. He would be the last person on earth to admit that, though.
If Georgie thinks chimpie is so great, maybe he should transfer to the White House beat. I think he has all the qualifications for a Day Pass.

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

It was held because Ayatollah Sistani demanded it and backed up his demands with a credible threat of mass demonstrations and civil unrest.

If Bush and the neoconservative thugs around him had had their way, there would have been a byzantine series of caucuses to produce a transitional government more to their liking, perhaps headed by the compliant quisling Allawi. Instead of a government responsive to the needs of the Iraqi people, such a government would have written Proconsul Bremer's colonial decrees into the new Iraqi constitution and invited foreign troops to stay in order to protect them (and they would have needed protection) indefinitely.