How the GOPmedia keeps Dems divided....EASILY (today's example)

[blm]

Read this headline

Kerry cautious on probing `Downing Street Memo'



NOW READ THE ENTIRE, very short STORY....It only reports what Kerry is doing and has NO FACT THAT POINTS TO HIM BACKING OFF ONE BIT.

They want YOU ALL to assume that his urging support for an inquiry from other senators is inaction, but, it's actually proper senate protocol. They want you all dumping on him to take down his credibility on this action so he DOESN'T GET SUPPORT FROM OTHER SENATORS.

The GOP reads forums like this and know how easy it is to inflame. They were doing it to Dean and Clark all last week, and now back to Kerry.

By Noelle Straub
Monday, June 20, 2005 - Updated: 03:07 AM EST

WASHINGTON - Walking a tightrope on a politically charged issue, Sen. John F. Kerry vowed weeks ago to raise the controversial ``Downing Street Memo'' as an issue in Washington, but has since publicly held his tongue on the matter.

Instead, Kerry has been enlisting other senators to sign onto a letter to the Senate Intelligence Committee seeking answers about the memo, aides said.
<snip>

``I think it's a stunning, unbelievably simple and understandable statement of the truth and a profoundly important document that raises stunning issues here at home,'' he added. ``And it's amazing to me the way it escaped major media discussion. It's not being missed on the Internet, I can tell you that.''

But Kerry has not been vocal about the issue since then, raising it neither in a floor speech nor in the media. Kerry spokesman David Wade insisted the administration needs to answer questions about the memo.

"It's not too much for Americans to expect a thorough explanation of the Downing Street memo,'' he said. ``The administration and the Washington Republicans who control Congress scoff at the idea of congressional oversight, and insult Americans by brushing off even the most basic questions about pre-war intelligence and planning for the aftermath of war.'




http://news.bostonherald.com/politics/view.bg?articleid=90090

Kerry is not backing off. He's working the DSM in proper senate channels so an investigation can happen, instead of just talking it up to let the media play it as a political stunt based in sour grapes.

[iamjoy]

1. Isn't This What Good Prosecutors Do?

I would think a GOOD prosecutor would not grandstand in front of television cameras, but quitely gather evidence to nail the guilty party.

I mean, that's just a hunch.

[blm]

2. I think they're either trying to goad him or scare off other senators from

supporting him when the knee-jerkers among the Dems jump to help Murdoch's rag Herald discredit Kerry as a spokesman.

[longship]

3. Hmm!

Kerry is not backing off.

All evidence to the contrary notwithstanding.

[blm]

5. He's working it in the senate to get an actual inquiry there. Is that NOT

what people want to happen?

Are you mad about his action because you want NO Senate inquiry or investigation of Downing Street?

What happened to logic? It got spun out of the equation by RW rag headlines. They couldn't fool the public with the hysterical "Kerry calls for impeachment" headlines, so now they say he's not doing anything.

All bait for the kneejerk crowd on both sides.

[longship]

6. At a critical point

when the RW nuts are attempting to defuse the issue by portraying it as a fraud, or as old news I would think it might be appropriate for somebody to speak up against the great RW wind machine.

John Kerry, arguably one of the Democratic leaders, could do much for his party by showing leadership and speaking out against the outrageous statements of the opposition. The fact that he specifically mentioned that he was going to make a public statement last week, and didn't makes it look like he has dropped the ball. Until he mentioned that he was working behind the scenes we all waited with baited breath for this promised statement.

I would hope that he would consider the tactical advantage to responding appropriately at some time soon.

[blm]

7. They just STARTED the "fraud" crap yesterday. Do you WANT a Senate inquiry

or is immediate noise more satisfying to you? You do know that it was Kerry's attack on the media's inexplicable silence that forced most of the media to even focus on the DSM. Or did that story fall into the DU buzzsaw where only RW myths about Kerry are nurtured?

Do you know it took Kerry a FULL YEAR to get other Dems to go along with an inquiry into IranContra?

It probably won't even take two weeks to get the Dems onboard with Kerry for DSM, but, that won't stop smaller minds from bashing the ONE SENATOR working to make the inquiry happen.

[blogslut]

8. here here

...Kerry also made nice with Jesse Helms to get Iran/Contra before the Senate. That's friggin shrewd! Read about it

here:
http://www.boston.com/globe/nation/packages/kerry/062003.shtml

here:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/2004/07/22/kerry/

and here:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2004/0409.sirota.html

Have faith, my children. We will have our day.

[Just Me]

4. Yeah. I fret everytime we fall for that crap.

And, we do, every single time!!! Drives me nuts how we are so easily incited into Dem-bashing! :banghead:

[blm]

9. I think it comes from those who don't exactly know HOW congress works and

what processes they go through to MAKE something happen.

The Senate is always the body to work more slowly and deliberatively and THAT is one of the reasons they were given the right to filibuster where the congress was given the duty to draw up impeachment and hold hearings with the Senate given the final vote after the house.

[leftofthedial]

10. I'm glad Kerry is getting the protocol right

Meanwhile, 10 or 12 more Americans have died in the war that Kerry enabled because he trusted the bushturd instead of getting the facts right in the first place.

We all knew the bushturd was lying. But Kerry and most of the other Dems didn't?

yeah, right.

Kerry is doing EXACTLY what he has been doing all along.

[blm]

11. So you don't agree with Bonifaz that Bush can be impeached because he

issued an official statement that it was necessary to force a military action to protect our national security, as per the IWR?

The mistake alot of Dems made was in going along with the Rovian media spin that IWR was a blank check that allowed Bush free reign. That was spin to keep Dems divided and blaming the IWR instead of Bush's failure to IMPLEMENT the IWR according to its guidelines.

The IWR, if implemented HONESTLY, would have prevented military action. Bonifaz recognizes this, and stressed in his DSM testimony last Thursday that as per the IWR that demanded weapons inspections FIRST and demanded a letter of explanation as to Bush's determination that war was necessary and unavoidable, Bush issued a FALSE STATEMENT to congress....an OFFICIAL FALSE STATEMENT, which is a crime of office and an impeachable offense.

[leftofthedial]

12. I don't agree that bush can be impeached, period

there is no political will to impeach him

Everyone involved at the time knew that war was a foregone conclusion once IWR passed. To say otherwise now is disingenuous.

[blm]

13. And so Bonifaz and anyone believing in civic channels and protocol should

shut up and go away?

[leftofthedial]

14. no

they can keep playing whatever games they believe in

and we can keep pretending it matters

meanwhile, in reality land, 2000 was a coup. They will provide us just as much of the facade of democracy as is necessary to stave off full-scale armed revolution and no more.