Kerry faces battle for antiwar bloc's vote

[54anickel]

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/04/23/kerry_faces_battle_for_antiwar_blocs_vote/

Senator John F. Kerry may have won the contest for the Democratic presidential nomination, but he still faces a fight for the hearts and minds of the party's antiwar wing.

With violence surging in Iraq, voters who want a quick end to the US-led occupation are shaping up as a potentially critical constituency, and Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader is making a direct pitch for their support in November.

Meanwhile, Representative Dennis J. Kucinich of Ohio, a vocal war critic, continues to campaign in the hope of exerting influence at the Democratic convention in July.

snip>

Kerry's campaign declined to respond to Nader's specific criticism, but campaign spokeswoman Kathy Roeder said, "If people want to beat George Bush in November, they should vote for John Kerry."

That sentiment is expressed by leaders of several liberal advocacy groups, who support Kerry despite the unease of many about his support for the Iraq resolution....

more...

[LynzM]

1. How can anyone who's anti-war support Bush?

Who's actually taken us INTO a war, as opposed to Kerry, who has actual plans and thoughts about how to get us out of one? I understand that he's not the idea peace candidate, but he's sure as heck gotta be better than Bush!

[54anickel]

2. Support Bush- no, stay home on election day - possible, vote for Nader

or write-in - maybe as well.

[onehandle]

3. IMO, That's supporting Bush. nt

[54anickel]

10. Exactly, that's your opinion. I don't expect many, if any, DUers to take

that road. But there are many Dems out there that are disenchanted who might easily stay home or use their vote to voice their disdain by selecting Nader or writting in their favorite candidate.

[truthspeaker]

11. and what do you see as the likely outcome of that action?

[FlemingsGhost]

12. A clear conscience.

All the rest is an illusion.

[54anickel]

19. Unfortunately, a victory for Shrub. I think that's why Rove is trying to

open old wounds from Kerry's anti-war days of Vietnam. Sort of gets Kerry stuck between anti-war folks and some Vietnam vets.
I don't necessarily think it will work, nothing Rove has come up with besides stealing the last election has. But, it does make Kerry appear to waffle a bit to both sides.

[Zirconia]

26. war dead photo

FYI, becareful using that photo. This is of the Columbia Crew from 2/1/2003 not Iraq war dead.

[robbedvoter]

38. You mean, other dead Americans hidden from sight? And your point is?

[juajen]

42. There is no way to reason with this thinking

Sometimes, in spite of our best efforts, people get the government they deserve, even if what they get is catastrophic.

It's like, "Gee, I haven't eaten for four weeks, but I simply won't eat those red beans, cuz, well, there's some onions in there."

Is "Cutting off your nose to spite your face" familiar?

Gotta get out of here! So long, folks.

[gate of the sun]

41. it's funny but the anti-war people get called out for criticizing Kerry

for voting to go along with bush and then we get called the traitors, Let's get something straight here. We are not to blame Kerry is, Kerry helped enable bush. Now you want us to vote for him and accuse us of aiding the enemy if we don't like what he did. It's a contradiction of terms to blame us. Give credit where credit is due. The truth is you want us to vote for someone who helped the enemy create an atrocity in Iraq. Let's just be straight about this. I'll vote for Kerry but I won't stop criticizing his actions when they are following in the footsteps of bush.

[w4rma]

22. That's basically 1/2 a vote for Bush. (nt)

[FlemingsGhost]

4. I will enthusiastically vote for Kerry if...

He selects an anti-war running mate.

-0r-

He admits that his IWR vote was a mistake.

Don't really see it happening, but all things considered I am demanding credibility and accountability before anything else...

[Larkspur]

5. Kerry already voted for Bush when he voted for IWR

He helped give Bush carte blanche to go to war. He only quibbled with Bush on the how, not the why.

If Kerry wins this November, it could be ironic for Kerry to be the man to "tell the last man he died for a mistake." Kerry's IWR vote will be an albatross around his neck, just as the war is an anchor around Bush's neck.

I'll vote for Kerry in November because my choices are 1) a disaster in Bush and 2) unpalatable in Kerry, but like Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., I'll criticize him like King did Lyndon Johnson on the Vietnam war -- "The greatest purveyor of violence in the world today is my own government." April 1967. I will never allow Kerry or his supporters to have peace over this issue.

[blm]

7. Biden-Lugar was quibbling HOW to go to war.

You were FINE with that since that was Dean's position. I will never allow any supporter of Biden-Lugar to have peace over this type display of hypocrisy.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

17. I have to agree that Dean's support of Biden-Lugar made him....

"Defacto Pro-War".

I was and still am opposed to this ILLEGAL WAR!

[emulatorloo]

9. Blah Blah Blah Blah - IWR was not an up-down vote on war

and you probably know that, but it sounds so much more sophisticated to pretend that this war is the fault of Dems and not the fault of Bush/Colin Powell et al who claimed they were uniters when they were nothing but, who used the great feeling of bipartisanship that existed after 9/11 for their craven needs, who told the senate that they needed this IWR to go to the UN and put diplomatic pressure on Saddam, who promised JK and others that War would be the **** last resort ****, and only w a true multilateral coalition.

Was I thrilled w IWR? No. Do I find the people who voted blameless? No. Did some dems vote against it? Yes - good for them.

Can I understand that the majority of responsibility for this mess lies with Bush and less with those who were manipulated by Colin Powell? Yes. The bottom line is that Bush is responsible for the Iraq war - Bush wanted it from day one, and they did what had to do to get it.

At any rate, good for you that you are going to vote for Kerry. Good for you that you will criticize him after he is elected if he merits it. That's the way it ought be, and I'll be right there w you.

[truthspeaker]

6. this anti-war Democrat will vote for Kerry

But I will then hold him accountable. If he doesn't wise up we'll make him think LBJ had it easy.

[Vladimir]

8. The correct course of action IMO n/t

[Borgnine]

13. There's no conflict for me.

I was and still am as anti-war as they come. I attended the D.C. protests back in early 2003. I wrote letters to the editor of my local paper denouncing it. I got into huge shouting matches with family and friends over it. To this day, I still proudly wear my peace button.

Yet, yesterday I donated to Kerry's campaign and I finally ordered my Kerry bumper sticker. I'm going to proudly vote for Kerry in November, because THIS IS BUSH'S WAR. Yes, Kerry voted for the IWR, but BUSH WAS THE ONE WHO TOOK US THERE. Nader has a right to run, blah blah blah, but I'm not naive enough to believe that a vote for Nader isn't a vote for Bush. With Bush, the same course of action in Iraq will continue through 2005 and beyond. The draft might return. Looking further down the road, Iran and Syria will be on the PNAC hitlist. Kerry was wrong to vote for the IWR, but with him in office, he won't let the Amerikkkan imperialism go on any further. With a Bush or Nader vote, the sky's the limit.

There shouldn't be any conflict at all.

[FlemingsGhost]

15. Seeing as you got your crystal ball out...

Will the Red Sox win the Series this year?

"Kerry was wrong to vote for the IWR, but with him in office, he won't let the Amerikkkan imperialism go on any further."

Really? You know this... how?

By the way, "Amerikkkan imperialism" began long before George W. Bush came to town. And it's likely to continue in some way shape or form in the future.

[Borgnine]

16. It's a sure thing with Bush...

...do you really want to take the chance that there's no difference between the two?

[Voltaire99]

21. Sorry, it's not enough to wear a peace button.

I'm going to proudly vote for Kerry in November, because THIS IS BUSH'S WAR. Yes, Kerry voted for the IWR, but BUSH WAS THE ONE WHO TOOK US THERE.

Wars seldom if ever begin in a cultural or social vacuum, and Iraq is no exception. You ignore this when you assert, without basis, that Bush "took us there." To the contrary, he rode on a wave of popular support, much of it produced by politicians like Kerry and Hillary who announced their wholehearted endorsement for invasion. Responding to these endorsements, a two-thirds majority of the public agreed.

The awful truth is that this war is a bipartisan creation, avidly stoked by both parties and the media, and no serious critic of the war will lay blame for it solely at the feet of the Bush administration. While it's true that PNAC had been lusting after Iraq for a decade, it was Democrats and Republicans together who consummated that wet dream.

There are many good reasons to vote for Kerry. This, alas, is not one of them. He was wrong on Iraq then; he is wrong now. Unless and until his position shifts, which is what you, as a proponent of peace, should be trying to effect, he remains part of the problem. Your flaunting of a peace button is meaningless in this context when it is Kerry, after all, who wishes to send 40,000 more US troops to Iraq. That's war, my friend, not peace.

[Borgnine]

23. Okay, fine, don't vote for Kerry.

Yes, perhaps Kerry was part of the problem. But how does Bush remaining in office solve a damn thing? Yeah, I know my peace button is meaningless. It won't stop the war. Neither will voting for Nader or abstaining.

Kerry was not my candidate, but I'm supporting him because he's not a part of the PNAC agenda. I'm a proponent of peace, but I know at present time we'll never get a pacifist elected. Perhaps I'm whoring out my beliefs for voting for an unpure candidate, but so be it. If Bush remains in office, at least I know my vote didn't help put him there. With Bush there will be more unjustified wars. At least we have a shot with Kerry.

And as you said, Kerry is right on a lot of issues outside of the war, so why do nothing and the man who's wrong 100 percent of the time remain where he is?

[54anickel]

24. I agree with your statement. I think people should be attempting to

contact Kerry on this, push the issue with him to take a stand rather than touting the Vote for Kerry, he's better than Bush. Too many, outside of DUers he's not.

[demoman123]

25. Did Kerry say this?

"...it is Kerry, after all, who wishes to send 40,000 more US troops to Iraq." Not that I doubt it, but I'd like to see a source.

[demoman123]

28. I found the source for the Kerry remark about "40,000 troops"

He made this comment on September 1, 2003. But what he said was that the army should grow by 40,000 troops, but that he would not send more troops to Iraq.

"Senator John F. Kerry said yesterday that he favors expanding the Army by roughly 40,000 soldiers to relieve troop strain, and would spend whatever it takes to stop the guerrilla warfare in Iraq. But Kerry said he would not send more US soldiers into the country, preferring international troops that include a corps from Muslim nations."

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2003/09/01/kerry_says_army_should_grow_by_40000/

[IndianaGreen]

29. John Kerry: "I will add 40,000 active-duty Army troops"

And to replenish our overextended military, as President, I will add 40,000 active-duty Army troops, a temporary increase likely to last the remainder of the decade.

“Fighting a Comprehensive War on Terrorism”
Remarks by Senator John Kerry at the Ronald W. Burkle Center for International Relations

February 27, 2004

University of California at Los Angeles

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2004_0227.html

[demoman123]

30. I wonder if he's changed his mind and would now send them to Iraq

He doesn't actually say this, but....

[Borgnine]

39. Also, let me add...

...that I'm not a single-issue voter like so many here seemingly have become. In addition to the war, the Bush Administration is anti-environment, anti-choice, and organizes their policies around the Old Testament. Again, why let those who are wrong one hundred percent of the time remain in power because Kerry doesn't walk on water?

[not systems]

14. I'm for Kerry regardless...

Bush is a disaster in many areas not just one.

1) Choice
2) Equal rights
3) Environmental protection
4) Economic fairness
5) Education access
6) Separation of church and state.

I will vote against Bush and for Kerry.

I don't agree with Kerry on the war.

US out now!!!

[DoYouEverWonder]

18. What a crock of shit

like the anti-war vote has any other choice? Like millions of people who marched and protested before the war in freezing cold weather are going to stay home on election day? Yeah, right.

[Dr Fate]

20. He gets a pass from me...

I opposed the war and did not support Kerry in the primaries...

But Kerry gets pass from me- Because his foriegn policy is miles ahead of Shrub...

I think we need to put our differences aside and support Democrats and the Democratic candidates in 2004. Removing the extremists will be a positive step.

Despite any disagreements I would have w/ Kerry- he is intelligent, brave and certainly his own man- he will be a refreshing change from the Cheny/Ashcroft/Scalia/Rove, etc crowd...

[MasonJar]

27. I am sorry, but this is totally freaky. Some people are so hung up

on the war that they forget the whole picture. The result of that is the re-selection of Bush, a loser in every way, who will not allow stem-cell research, is systematically raping the environment in the whole world, is assisting the increase of aids through his born-again agenda, never reads a book or a newspaper and would not understand the words if he did, opposes pro-choice, will elect judges which will overturn every decision for the individual rights, is taking away our freedom, is cutting veterans' benefits. closing their hospitals, making pay for their own meals when wounded, ruining their lives, increasing the deficit with every passing day, shorting funds to first responders, refusing to ever tell the truth when lies will suffice, giving the world (especially US) to his contributors. Need I continue. On the other side is a man who has devoted his life to being a statesman. He has been to war and opposed the war. He is for women's rights, is an environmentalist, is a liberal in every sense (check out his voting record on other issues besides the war.) Staying home or voting for Nadar is playing into the Bush agenda. That makes me sick. I personally cannot live in a country which votes to let an imbecile in office.

[duvinnie]

31. Neither Bush nor Kerry

have my vote.

I realize Kerry probably would never have handled Iraq the way
the R's did, but now that wer are there, Kerry would be just
as savage as anyone.

Sorry, JFK cant have it both ways here.

[murielm99]

32. Then Bush* has your vote. It is that simple. n/t

[idontwantaname]

33. PRO-WAR DOES NOT HAVE MY VOTE.

be it bush or kerry... theyre both the same when it comes to imperialism.

[Lindacooks]

34. Wrong.

Senator Kerry would never have gone into Iraq in the first place. You seem to conveniently forget about PNAC and the BFEE's plan of world domination, now in place. President Kerry will NOT continue that insane plan.

[IndianaGreen]

35. Kerry: "I think the way the president went to war is a mistake."

Let's not forget Clinton's Iraq policy of bombings and embargoes that cost the lives of over a million children.

We can only speculate about what Kerry would have done differently if he had been President instead of Bush. Based on Kerry's own statements on this matter, a reasonable person can reach the conclusion that Kerry would have gone to war against Iraq, EXCEPT that he would have done it differently.

The sugar-coated imperialism of the Progressive Policy Institute is as imperialistic as the one advocated by the neocon PNAC. I don't know if Kerry has endorsed the PPI agenda.

Senator Kerry would never have gone into Iraq in the first place.

MR. RUSSERT: ...But the American people, I think, would like a yes or no answer: Do you believe the war in Iraq was a mistake?

SEN. KERRY: I think the way the president went to war is a mistake.

<snip>

MR. RUSSERT: But do you have a plan to deal with Iraq? This is what you...

SEN. KERRY: Yes.

MR. RUSSERT: This is what you wrote in The Washington Post last Tuesday: "Our country has committed to help the Iraqis build a stable, peaceful and pluralistic society. No matter who is elected president in November, we will persevere in that mission."

SEN. KERRY: Yes, we will.

<snip>

MR. RUSSERT: If you were elected one year from now, will there be 100,000 American troops in Iraq?

SEN. KERRY: It depends on what the situation is you find on the ground on January 20th of 2005.

Transcript for April 18
Guest: Sen. John Kerry, D-MA, presidential candidate NBC News

NBC News
MEET THE PRESS
Sunday, April 18, 2004

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4772030

[wabeewoman]

40. You'll like the wars bush

starts with Iran, Syria and North Korea that President Kerry would not start.

[cambie]

36. Once there was a website

,over across the river, where good people came from everywhere to speak and listen to the truth. That is long passed. If Dems are in power next year and more troops are sent, will there still be decent here?

[robbedvoter]

37. "A small ledge to stand on" - Howard Zinn If you hate war, you'll DO

something to get rid of these maniacs. Otherwise you are just blowing hot air.

[truthisfreedom]

43. Kerry has a wonderful opportunity to turn the tables on bushco right now.

he fought valiantly in 'Nam, and has the medals and reports to prove it. then he came back and strongly spoke out against an improper war. now, he has voted to allow the president to go to war, but the president has proven to be a liar and a cheat, who never intended to have justice done, but simply wanted to go to war as fast as possible for reasons never fully revealed to our country.

Kerry should make it clear that just as he fought for our country and then returned from that fight to expose the truth, he has voted for a war to protect our country and then, upon discovering the truth that that war was never intended to protect our country, but was designed to merely push forth the agenda of the PNAC, he has now spoken out against that war as well.

parallel action. two different times, worlds away from each other, with strange similarities and once again, an opportunity to use the truth for good.