General Discussion

ProSense

(116,464 posts)

38. And

Wed Mar 20, 2013, 11:45 AM

Mar 2013

"He voted for it, so his speeches to the contrary mean jack shit."

...Wellstone voted for Durbin's amendment. The fact that the bill that passed is the one used doens't mean "jack shit" if every Senator was spouting claims that Saddam had WMD, which is the point of the OP.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

189 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Sadly, Democrats played a role [View all] michigandem58 Mar 2013 OP

Why is ProSense Mar 2013 #1

There's an attempt to act as if the Democrats had nothing geek tragedy Mar 2013 #2

Actually, there were Democrats who voted against it, and THEY had the real courage, not the jerks still_one Mar 2013 #5

Of course. But none of them were leading contenders to run geek tragedy Mar 2013 #11

Maybe I am too harsh, but it does not cut it with me. Those Democrats who voted for it helped still_one Mar 2013 #14

The party has improved since 2003. geek tragedy Mar 2013 #16

And yet, bvar22 Mar 2013 #127

Obama did appoint Eric Shinseki head of the VA. geek tragedy Mar 2013 #129

And it was cowardly of them, yeah, I said "cowardly," and I mean it Lydia Leftcoast Mar 2013 #24

Actually, ProSense Mar 2013 #31

This is just another OP attempting to revise history. Most of the world thought there were WMD stevenleser Mar 2013 #101

But not an invasion Lydia Leftcoast Mar 2013 #110

Correct, but understand the timeline. France was ready to go to war in early January 2003. stevenleser Mar 2013 #116

Your excerpt fits something that has been bugging me lately. ieoeja Mar 2013 #112

Wellstone voted against the final war resolution going against all the advice being given to him dflprincess Mar 2013 #157

You don't ProSense Mar 2013 #158

I've been reading your posts for a long time dflprincess Mar 2013 #159

What ProSense Mar 2013 #160

From your reply to Lydia Leftcoast (#31) dflprincess Mar 2013 #188

You can't be serious? ProSense Mar 2013 #189

Paul Wellstone, speaking on the Senate floor (I miss him every day): geek tragedy Mar 2013 #34

That was right around the time I met the late Senator sarisataka Mar 2013 #48

REAL Patriots like Congresswoman Barbara Lee Taverner Mar 2013 #60

Because the so-called "moderate" Democrats are in charge and won't support anyone Lydia Leftcoast Mar 2013 #113

I am not ProSense Mar 2013 #6

Oh please. Saddam's WMDs--even if they existed-- geek tragedy Mar 2013 #13

And, ProSense Mar 2013 #22

So was he for it before he was against it, or was he against it before geek tragedy Mar 2013 #35

And ProSense Mar 2013 #38

Thanks for the info. Snopes.com also verifies that chain letter. alp227 Mar 2013 #161

Don't stop there. Syria, Mauritania, China, Russia, France etc. stevenleser Mar 2013 #103

Everyone knew two things: geek tragedy Mar 2013 #108

Most people strongly believed WMD were in Iraq and programs restarted to produce them. stevenleser Mar 2013 #119

But, that ignores the question of "so what?" geek tragedy Mar 2013 #120

To a fair number of countries, it would have justified an invasion because of the UN Resolutions in stevenleser Mar 2013 #124

How could Bush's lies effect comments from 1998, 1999, 2000??? n/t Fix The Stupid Mar 2013 #20

Maybe the RW is right: It's Clinton's fault? ProSense Mar 2013 #28

Please - no strawmen. Fix The Stupid Mar 2013 #42

Please ProSense Mar 2013 #47

How can you say this? Fix The Stupid Mar 2013 #65

Actually, ProSense Mar 2013 #69

Obfuscate, derail, change subject, Fix The Stupid Mar 2013 #72

Not to worry. People here are very familiar with how commercials work. woo me with science Mar 2013 #76

"People here" ProSense Mar 2013 #83

At least ProSense Mar 2013 #82

Most of the world thought Iraq had WMD or WMD programs in November of 2002. stevenleser Mar 2013 #102

Then it would be Scott Ritter's lies when he complained then of Iraq's WMDs being blm Mar 2013 #78

I didn't know it. I was uneasy about Iraq, but I certainly didn't TwilightGardener Mar 2013 #7

but to pull quotes from Gore's speech AGAINST the invasion of Iraq hfojvt Mar 2013 #40

I didn't check every quote. geek tragedy Mar 2013 #41

Wait ProSense Mar 2013 #44

...which GREATLY depended on Bush admin threat assement... you forgot that part uponit7771 Mar 2013 #134

Anyone who trusted Bush/Rove/Cheney is a dunce. geek tragedy Mar 2013 #136

OTOH - anyone who believes Bush-Cheney were incapable of PLANTING blm Mar 2013 #183

+1 uponit7771 Mar 2013 #133

What makes you think those statements in the OP are real? Honeycombe8 Mar 2013 #152

No. The fact remains there was more than enough Democrats who knew it was B.S. and voted against it still_one Mar 2013 #3

And I'm saying, ProSense Mar 2013 #9

Some of those quotes are from Democrats michigandem58 Mar 2013 #18

Full context shows much more caution. Howard Dean quotes make him sound pro-war, too. blm Mar 2013 #21

We're closing in on a war with Syria for the exact same reasons, they're using poison gas xtraxritical Mar 2013 #77

Exactly Proud Liberal Dem Mar 2013 #27

Thank you. Seems that many around here are just chomping at the bit to discredit Democrats......... George II Mar 2013 #51

Because many of the most visible and powerful Democratic leaders were complicit. n/t Egalitarian Thug Mar 2013 #53

The OP is a bunch of out of context and at least one fabricated quote. ProSense Mar 2013 #55

Even if that were true, that doesn't change the facts at all. Egalitarian Thug Mar 2013 #86

Perhaps because there are those of us Puglover Mar 2013 #61

OK ProSense Mar 2013 #64

If you are saying that some of this article is hyperbole. Puglover Mar 2013 #71

Why? Because they're trying to kill Obamacare by fracturing the Democratic base & "they" in this patrice Mar 2013 #81

Why were so many people able to see through Bush's lies... ljm2002 Mar 2013 #90

They ProSense Mar 2013 #91

So those two voted against the Iraq invasion... ljm2002 Mar 2013 #94

It's a reaction to posters like yourself, who constantly try to pretend it didn't happen. Comrade Grumpy Mar 2013 #131

...you mean Bush admin threat assesment didn't happen? regards uponit7771 Mar 2013 #135

So ProSense Mar 2013 #138

+1 uponit7771 Mar 2013 #132

It was a tough choice, politically. Those who chose wrong realized their mistake TwilightGardener Mar 2013 #4

Then what about the Democrats who voted against it in spite of the political consequences? This is still_one Mar 2013 #10

They possibly had less at stake, politically, for voting no. It's always TwilightGardener Mar 2013 #12

But what about the rewarding of those who were wrong over those who were right? Bluenorthwest Mar 2013 #15

Getting re-elected for the Senate (or elected President) is the reward. TwilightGardener Mar 2013 #25

"OMG, I can't follow my conscience, because then I won't be senator with all those perks anymore" Lydia Leftcoast Mar 2013 #30

To be fair, their IWR vote shouldn't have been made on the basis TwilightGardener Mar 2013 #33

It should have been made on the basis of opposing the WAR!!!! MNBrewer Mar 2013 #67

maybe it is not about the perks hfojvt Mar 2013 #63

There are some alleged Democrats who are a bit too quick to sign on to bad Republican ideas Lydia Leftcoast Mar 2013 #107

They only lied (or pandered to evil, take your pick) to get what they wanted! Romulox Mar 2013 #46

It was not a tough political choice. Not if you were sane and didn't beat the war drums for Bush Co. MNBrewer Mar 2013 #66

And still the UN inspectors openly said they had not found any evidence! Not once! dmosh42 Mar 2013 #8

Hans Blix for one. The cowards in Congress that voted for it, willfully ignored the facts, and still_one Mar 2013 #17

IWR vote preceded inspections. When Blix reported WMDs were not found and force would NOT blm Mar 2013 #26

Being "for it before he was against it" is not a virtue. It's talking out of both sides of his mouth Romulox Mar 2013 #49

"He did support an alternative bill...cutting some of President Bush's tax cuts" ProSense Mar 2013 #52

That was a year AFTER he had already voted in favor of the Iraq War Resolution. Romulox Mar 2013 #57

What the hell does that have to do with the fact that there were two different votes? n/t ProSense Mar 2013 #58

Kerry voted to support George Bush's war. He couldn't alter that with a pivot a year later. nt Romulox Mar 2013 #59

Oh please. ProSense Mar 2013 #62

What part of siding with findings of weapon inspectors as per his promise during IWR vote blm Mar 2013 #74

Was there even a *kernel* of a point, here? nt Romulox Mar 2013 #87

Kerry sided with findings of weapon inspectors and against use of force. blm Mar 2013 #99

His "siding" has no force of law. His vote for WAR most certainly did. nt Romulox Mar 2013 #100

BS. 1991 UN Res covered Bush on Iraq war. Kerry voted for weapon inspections and blm Mar 2013 #106

And yet Kerry voted for the IWR! Again, you're proud of yourself for arguing two sides. Romulox Mar 2013 #164

You blindly attack the lone IWR voter who stood with weapon inspectors blm Mar 2013 #175

He voted for War. He got War. It was disastrous. A man of integrity would accept fault. nt Romulox Mar 2013 #179

He promised to stand with results of weapon inspectors. He did so. blm Mar 2013 #185

He promised one thing, but voted for another--namely, WAR. Deal with it. nt Romulox Mar 2013 #186

Rove took full advantage of YOUR lax of discernment and that of the corpmedia, too. blm Mar 2013 #70

Karl Rove didn't make John Kerry vote for George Bush's war. Neither did I. Romulox Mar 2013 #88

Kerry promised during vote that once weapon inspectors were in and reporting findings blm Mar 2013 #96

His "promise" isn't a law. The Iraq War Authorization (which John Kerry voted for) is. Romulox Mar 2013 #97

IWR wasn't a law that took the nation to war, either. Bush could've gone in w/1991 blm Mar 2013 #104

Of course it was. I won't argue an alternative history with you. nt Romulox Mar 2013 #105

Weapon inspectors proved there was no threat - Bush invaded anyway. Just as planned. blm Mar 2013 #111

This is revisionist nonsense. Verbosity won't save it. John Kerry voted to authorize WAR. Romulox Mar 2013 #165

Actually ProSense Mar 2013 #167

That's how "voting" works. Pity John Kerry voted for the IWR, which passed! Romulox Mar 2013 #168

You know how ProSense Mar 2013 #170

That doesn't change Kerry's vote to authorize WAR in 2002. Romulox Mar 2013 #171

How ProSense Mar 2013 #172

This is dumb. I'm not going to argue an alternative history with you. nt Romulox Mar 2013 #173

As noted - you have no ability to DISCERN blm Mar 2013 #174

You say that like it's a magic word that makes up for a bad argument. nt Romulox Mar 2013 #180

Nope - hoping you begin to display some discernment instead of blm Mar 2013 #181

Your argument is awful; John Kerry voted for war in 2002. All else is spin. nt Romulox Mar 2013 #182

Not an argument - it's FACT. You just hate to admit that Kerry showed blm Mar 2013 #184

John Kerry's 'AYE!' for the Iraq War Resolution is indeed a fact. A sad, sad, blot... nt Romulox Mar 2013 #187

Question: ProSense Mar 2013 #19

The OP is very different from your rightwingnews michigandem58 Mar 2013 #23

"So, no, it's not a 'direct reprint'. But it does appear the quote belongs to Graham." ProSense Mar 2013 #29

Why do you source rightwingnews? michigandem58 Mar 2013 #43

It's the source of Graham's and other quotes in the OP. Why did you fabricate Kerry's quote? n/t ProSense Mar 2013 #50

rightwingnews was your source, dear michigandem58 Mar 2013 #145

"The quote wasn't fabricated, just confusion over whether it's Kerry or Graham." ProSense Mar 2013 #146

There are a dozen and a half quotes from prominent Democrats michigandem58 Mar 2013 #147

It's obvious ProSense Mar 2013 #148

...................that ProSense is reaching michigandem58 Mar 2013 #155

Now you're just being disingenuous. ProSense Mar 2013 #156

Glad you agree it was Kerry michigandem58 Mar 2013 #163

Yes, ProSense Mar 2013 #169

Why not? Especially if there are similarities in attacks coming from "different" directions, e.g. patrice Mar 2013 #125

Is this related to possible Dem nominees in 2016? djean111 Mar 2013 #32

Never underestimate though, the value of leaders who actually have a CLUE ProfessionalLeftist Mar 2013 #36

Yep. And, some of them are still trying to get the blood off their hands by claiming stupidity. Tierra_y_Libertad Mar 2013 #37

don't forget it was POLITICIZED. BEFORE a presidential election. pansypoo53219 Mar 2013 #39

So-called Democrats were essential to this crime. Without the complicit war mongers from this party Egalitarian Thug Mar 2013 #45

yep, so true, and thanks for saying so stupidicus Mar 2013 #54

Perhaps all those here looking for reasons to blame the Democrats and bashing them...... George II Mar 2013 #56

You mean the blank check to go to war? That one? MNBrewer Mar 2013 #73

No, the one that Congress voted for. George II Mar 2013 #93

AUMF? Yeah, the blank check MNBrewer Mar 2013 #95

The one titled "Authorization to Use Military Force in Iraq"? bvar22 Mar 2013 #130

I take it people haven't read it. George II Mar 2013 #150

Which of them ordered and planned the invasion, the occupation, or the transition? JoePhilly Mar 2013 #68

All them Dems who voted for it were lied to... Cooley Hurd Mar 2013 #75

Exactly.... FiggyJay Mar 2013 #80

They were in the Beltway Bubble Lydia Leftcoast Mar 2013 #114

EXACTLY!! uponit7771 Mar 2013 #137

Next up: Quotes from Democrats on why gays are terrible people. Spitfire of ATJ Mar 2013 #79

Guess what? We knew. BTW, how's the struggle for the RIGHT TO ORGANIZE going in Michigan? patrice Mar 2013 #84

Our retiring Senator, Carl Levin, is known as a ferocious champion of labor rights. Romulox Mar 2013 #89

I believe he also co-authored, with John McCain, the bad stuff in NDAA 2011, which is all patrice Mar 2013 #92

I wonder what this may have had to do with it. valerief Mar 2013 #85

What the owners want, the owners get. MrSlayer Mar 2013 #98

That would really mean something if George Bush jr. hadn't Rex Mar 2013 #109

Nearly all the quotes there are taken out of context - and have been used by the right to say that karynnj Mar 2013 #115

Exactly. Well said. nt stevenleser Mar 2013 #118

IMO, taking the quotes out of context was intentionally done to smear Democrats blm Mar 2013 #126

George Bush himslef made the claim many times. bvar22 Mar 2013 #143

No It wasn't karynnj Mar 2013 #154

Absolutely karynnj Mar 2013 #153

this is bullshit greenman3610 Mar 2013 #117

Please provide some documentation for your claim about Gore's speech. bvar22 Mar 2013 #141

Rational permutations: patrice Mar 2013 #121

Reminds of the Iran-Contra scandal, when Congresscritters were reporting that Lydia Leftcoast Mar 2013 #122

Yes! & then, think of all of the email that probably just gets dumped even though text-parsing is patrice Mar 2013 #123

Do you remember when after 9/11 and the Anthrax/Post Office Scares KoKo Mar 2013 #176

Facts are pesky things. Millions around the nation knew it was complete bullshit from Egalitarian Thug Mar 2013 #128

You may have your Invasions confused. bvar22 Mar 2013 #139

You are right. Keeping track of the betrayals can be taxing at times. Thanks for pointing it out. nt Egalitarian Thug Mar 2013 #140

I think ProSense Mar 2013 #142

Awww. bvar22 Mar 2013 #144

Thanks for the LIST! One point to add to it though... KoKo Mar 2013 #177

Anti-Democratic propaganda. gulliver Mar 2013 #149

NO LINKS OR CITES TO AUTHORITIES for those alleged statements. Your word? Honeycombe8 Mar 2013 #151

Edwards was right there along with Bush ... slipslidingaway Mar 2013 #162

He was nice looking and had a down to earth wife plus KoKo Mar 2013 #178

Hillary 2016--it's inevitable! nt Romulox Mar 2013 #166