Reply #11: Hammer, meet nail [View All]

[MadHound]

I hear you Rich, and I've been saying the same for months now. Yet all I get in reply is the "lesser of two evils" arguement.

The sad fact of the matter is that Kerry's position on the war is only slightly better than Bushco's. He probably won't invade another country if he gets elected(whereas Bush probably will), but that is about the extent of the difference. He has already stated that he will continue to pour more men and money into the Iraqi quagmire, with only a vague promise to pull out of Iraq at somepoint before his first term is up. And a large part of me doubts even that promise.

I think what Kerry is going to do is similar to what LBJ did. He will gradually enlarge the war at the behest of his corporate masters, and then blow it wide open as '08 approaches in a political move to outhawk the chickenhawks. After all, he can't appear to be "soft on terror" with an election coming up. And as his unrelenting prosecution of the is made clear to even his most ardent supporters, they will stay home in droves out of a sense of betrayal, and thus Kerry will lose.

We as Democrats need to hold Kerry's feet to the fire NOW, and force him to come out with a firm plan and timetable for getting out of Iraq. Waiting until Kerry is already in office is foolish, for once there, he will have what he thinks is a mandate and doesn't have to listen to dissident voices. Now is the time to do a deal with him, when Kerry is needing votes and support and is willing to negotiate to get them. This type of negotiation and deal making is a standard and time honored political practice, but you wouldn't know that hanging around here. People are more than willing to forgive the blood on Kerry's hands, just to get ABB into office.