Kerry Is Squeezed on Iraq Policy (Dems moving towards withdrawal)

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/2004/la-na-kerryiraq27may27,1,731544,print.story?coll=la-home-headlines

Sen. John F. Kerry faces a stark new challenge in the campaign skirmishing over Iraq: As President Bush has moved toward his position, the Democratic Party is moving away from it.

From one side, Kerry confronts calls from growing numbers of Democrats to establish a deadline for withdrawing U.S. forces from Iraq. That idea will receive a major boost today when Win Without War, a coalition of 42 liberal groups, announces a campaign that will urge the U.S. to specify a date for ending the American military presence in Iraq.

From the other direction, Bush has come much closer to Kerry's view that the U.S. should rely more on the United Nations to oversee the transition from occupation to a sovereign Iraqi government — thus blurring the contrast between the two men.

Over the long term, these shifts in Democratic attitudes and Bush's strategy may pressure Kerry to break more sharply from the administration's course on Iraq, a step he has steadfastly resisted.

...in his previously announced position if he wants my vote. See my sig....

move closer to your position on Iraq, you'd rather see Bush reelected? This is what you are saying.

I want us out of Iraq as bad as anybody, but the general state of war that Bush has declared is not just against Sadam, various Iraqi or other militias, OR Bin Laden/al Queda.

He has declared war on women, civil liberties, the environment, organized labor, any system of belief or non-belief in God or spirituality that does not substantially comport to his own. etc.

To take this war to the "terraists," as he and Karen Hughes define them, he has employed the likes of Ashcroft, Rumsfeld, Norton, and Cheney. It is worth voting for Kerry just to get rid of those miscreants!

Bush & Co. must go. PERIOD!

:kick:

Stand behind something that actually means something.

Note the hysteria in these posts. Fear is an effective tool for more than the threat of the terrorist. Why is it then, if Bush is so horrendous, that Kerry seems to diminish the distances between his position and Bush's and maybe quibble over only the details? With each passing day, Kerry presents himself as less of an alternative.

The man has no vision.

You have no vision I looks like to me. Bush is sinking like a rock in a pond. If Kerry makes a statement about Iraq today and it does not fit the state of events 6 months from now or even 1 month from now Bush will use it against him. The events in Iraq are changing daily. The repubs are hoping Kerry falls into the trap.

Gore got it right. Kerry should wait until he is elected and based on what is going on at the time, present a plan to end the war.

Sorry, I prefer a leader who is leader enough to say it. Otherwise he is still part of the problem of hoisting this sham up.

Before the Iraq War, Axis of Evil, or even 9-11, Bush had shown himself to be less than incompetent.

He has simply declared war on women's rights, the environment, organized labor, the working class in general, and more.

What I am suggesting is that for these things alone he deserves to be booted out.

Even if Kerry had EXACTLY the same position as Bush on the War in Iraq, he would deserve to be elected over Bush.

This is not hysteria, it is simply fact.



:dem:

victory by voting for Nader? Or maybe you won't vote at all, thus handing the election to the Republican right-wing voting machine? Please be sane about your threats. I respect your anti-war stand. Let's move in that direction and not cut off our nose to spite our face.

:shrug:

Just finished reading Mo Dowd column for tomorrow - poor dems are worried that Gore doing damage to Kerry/party. Here's what she said about scaredy cat democrats:

John Kerry's advisers were surprised and annoyed to hear that Mr. Gore hollered so much, he made Howard Dean look like George Pataki. They don't want voters to be reminded of the wackadoo wing of the Democratic Party. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/27/opinion/27DOWD.html?hp

I heard Al Gore yell a tad, he DID NOT YELL FOR AN ENTIRE HOUR as the press or the democratic head honchos and Kerry aides would have us believe.

They still continue to Gore, Gore - or ignore Gore - and I am sick and tired of being labled as part of THE WACKADOO WING OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

I'm wacky because I hate Bush for his war, foreign policy, domestic policy and everything else he touches that turns to SHIT.

The wacky one's are the RIGHT-WINGERS who continue to support every failed policy of the unelected fraud.

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

Knowing Dowd, she invented the "John Kerry's advisors were surprised and annoyed ..." statement out of thin air.

Dowd hates Gore.

I don't believe anything she makes up about Kerry's advisors.

from the same paper urging Kerry to move Deanward?

When are men going to look at themselves in the mirror?

Why are they too ashamed to admit they're WRONG?

The courage to admit you're wrong can be the most uplifting experience a man could experience.

The truth always sets you free!!!

specific target dates like bushco, which is ridiculous. Kerry could list conditions for when specific events could take place without being specific about an overall plan, and these particular events could be tied to things bushco obviously can't accomplish, like arriving at an agreement with the UN to trade places.

Look! You're either WITH ME or AGAINST ME!

and do precisely as Al Gore said...

The dem party is slovenly infiltrated with Bush moles!

Is that what you're saying?

I hope not. Dissent is healthy and very American.

Specifically, the divisiveness of the Democrats.
At this point in time, they should iron out their
differences out of the public eye.
If the Dems intend to Win in November.
It would be worth their while to present
a united front. imo-

If you disagree, please tell me why.

It may not be for the same reasons as you - I believe the DLC is the primary route of Republican infiltration into the Democratic party - but yes, there are a number of people with questionable commitments to progressivism in the Democratic party.

The "New Democrats", in particular.

(Cue DLC apologists in 5...4...3...)

Which is it going to be, Senator Kerry: "Stay the course," or end the war?

to any plan that he may promote for Iraq, by saying that we don't know what the situation will be like by the time he becomes pResident and he will have to make a full assessment then.

Who knows if Bu$h gets desperate enough, he might have already brought the troops home by then. Or Iraq might be a nuclear wasteland. We just don't know what this misadministration will do between now and then.

It's May and we have no idea what the situation will look like come Nov. Don't get locked into a strategy expectation that may be moot by the time you come to office.

And I'm not sure a "so sorry, we're going home now" strategy is what we really should do. A civil war follwed by a Napoleon-type leader emerging could have us going back bigtime, and that's just one of the many possible unpleasant outcomes.

Unfortunatly, staying is also leading to disaster. The whole mess needs to be handled with more subtlty than campaign rhetoric is capable of, IMO.

The election is many months away. A whole lot can change in that time. Why should Kerry make a policy stand now? It seems that BushCo will do anything to stay in power. I suspect that they will make any deals with Iraqi factions that they can to keep the killing of US troops down. Rumor has it that they are trying to make a deal with al Sadr to have his forces be security. Who knows what they are offering him? It wouldn't surpise me if they offered him one of the two VP slots. That's about all it would take for BushCo to declare another "Mission Accomplished".

The torture scandal is almost a fading issue. It has been exposed now and it seems that the American people are weary of it. The Cover Up is in full mode and even Congress doesn't want to push it now. If there are minimal deaths of US troops within two months before the election the Iraq situation will have been nuetered. Yes, it is awful to think that the death and injury count is a huge factor but does any here think that it isn't?

The press issues these statements about what he should be doing and everyone jumps on the bandwagon.

Don't forget how many time Gore went through this and fell for it; his clothing, the debates, etc.
The hell with the press.

what else could it be after the Convention fiasco?
OUT OF IRAQ NOW.

:eyes: