sadly I lost respect for Kucinich since he opposes allowing Maliki

[donsu]

the right to speak his mind.

and Kerry too for wanting Israel to murder off Hezbollah.

[benburch]

1. Why listen to a puppet? nt

[donsu]

2. whose the puppet?

nt

[mike_c]

4. I agree with both perspectives but probably for different reasons...

...than most, but your comment nicely sums up why I agree with the "boycott al-Maliki" camp. I think his support for Hezbollah is perfectly natural and to be expected-- the entire Shiite world supports Hezbollah, for reasons that go WAY beyond its conflict with Israel, but at the end of the day he is still the prime minister of a puppet regime whose authority does not extend far beyond the American controlled Green Zone in Baghdad. He is a quisling, plain and simple, and he owes his continued ability to draw breath to the protection of U.S. military forces. He will say what his masters want him to say as far as Iraq is concerned.

[snappyturtle]

3. Maybe we should be grateful.....

for learning their true stripes now. How can there ever be peace with attitudes should as these?

[liberaldemocrat7]

5. Some brave woman in the house gallery yelled bring the troops home.

Good for her.

She got to say what alot of people want to say but get placed into "free speech zones"

[saltpoint]

6. I would very enthusiastically vote for either for president at the

drop of a hat.

Now more than ever.

There are a lot of power personalities in Washington. Of all stripes. Among them there are intelligent grown-ups, including Kerry and Kucinich, and then there are the whining crybaby PNAC 3-year olds in the Bush administration and its satellite strongholds and thinktanks.

I would expect to be in disagreement with any power personality, even ones I deeply respect and admire, but the distinction at hand, for me anyway, is whether I want grown-ups in charge of my government or vacuous nitwits.

I think I'll pick the grown-ups.

[karynnj]

7. Kerry's comments on terrorism, at least since 1997

when he wrote his book are far more thoughtful than "murder off Hezzbollah". In 2004, the Republicans mischaracterized them in the opposite direction saying that he was going after them as a law enforcement action. Their contrast was Bush's declared policy that he could attack any country that harbored terrorists - which is exactly what Israel is doing in Lebanon. Kerry's approach from what he said in 2004 would have been to work with Lebanon to push members of Hezbollah to disavow terrorist goals in exchange for being part of a recognized government and to eliminate those who continued to be hardcore terrorists AND to engage in terrorist activities. Needless, to say the man who was interested in international diplomacy as a 10 year old and whose first choice of committee was the SFRC, would have worked on the overall middle eastern problem diplomatically.

Note that that comment in the Detroit News is in a structurally weird sentence. The beginning of the sentence is about Iraq, then there is an ellipse (...) and the comment on Hezzbollah. The ellipse is supposed to be used when the words between the two pieces are known, understood, or irrelevant. Taylor Marsh, on her blog, called the reporter on it. She was told that there was much said between the 2 pieces of the sentence, but the article never made the print version of the paper. (a pretty weak, unprofessional response as she really having opened this needs to provide the context.)

I do disagree with Kuchinich - as I see value in listening to people I disagree with. I do understand that it is also a matter of giving him respect that with this comment Kuchinich feels he hasn't earned. Kuchinich does attend the SOTU, even though Bush has done many things to lose respect. Maliki is not close to perfect, he is someone who we need to work with - it is in our interest to have Democrats who have some persuasive connections with him. Although I disagree with Kuchinich, it doesn't diminish my respect for him.

[saltpoint]

8. Yes. No one had to show John Kerry where the Middle East was on a

map, as was the case with Dubya.

When the going gets tough, you put your best people in the line-up.

Kerry and Kucinich qualify.

Dubya most certainly does not.

[sandnsea]

9. Why shouldn't terrorists be killed?

I get called all sorts of horrible names for expressing frustration at the lack of condemnation of Hezbollah at DU - and then the first 3 posts I open this morning are sympathetic to Hezbollah. *sigh*

[welshTerrier2]

10. "i think it's important to hear from Maliki" - D. Kucinich

i'm watching Kucinich right now won Democracy Now ...

Amy Goodman asked him about Maliki's speech to Congress today and his response is contained in my subject line ...

[saltpoint]

11. I like your selection in radio programming, welshTerrier2.

Indication of a sound mind. :toast: :thumbsup: :hi:

[karynnj]

12. Thanks WT2

I'm glad he said that.

[Vidar]

13. Though I agree with you about Maliki, sadly we are running out

of Democrats to lose respect for.

[primative1]

14. A Bit Of Confusion Here ..

I was repulsed by the Democrats rallying around the "let Israel Kill all they want" cry. Did Kucinich actually join the "make Maliki submit" crowd? There seem to be two differnet stories here.

[donsu]

15. I'm not sure - caught the last of a press conf. this morning on c-span

that had him speaking against what Maliki said and his right to say it. it was on right before Wash. Journal

[KoKo]

16. You are mistaken...donsu....Here's a transcript of Kucinich from Democracy

Now where he says he is attending Maliki's speech. Maybe you mistook Kucinich for someone else. :shrug:

Here's link to transcript and his statement towards the end.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2742721

[donsu]

18. no it was Kucinich and I hope I'm wrong because I backed him for

pres.

maybe what I heard was him not liking what Maliki said and I missed hearing he still wanted Maliki to speak

[blm]

17. Kerry has wanted terrorist orgs. crushed since he first investigated BCCI

and his way of doing it was to deal with its root causes while tracking and cutting off their financial networks, and those still committed to violence will be struck with force.

You want to go on record that you side with Bush1 and that terrorist organizations and their financial networks were to be funded and protected?

Please describe YOUR BETTER WAY to deal with terrorism.

[win_in_06]

19. Dems are all over the map on this issue now.

Condemn Israel!
Support Israel!
Stop Terrorism!
Protect Hezbollah!
Release Saddam!
Respect Maliki!

[karynnj]

20. I hope at least 2 of those are jokes!!

[AtomicKitten]

21. The Dems all oppose Maliki speaking.

and WTF is that all about anyway? Because he dares to have a point of view that wasn't given to him by BushCo? Didn't we just force democracy on the Iraqis at gunpoint?

Jeez, I fear this is more BS posturing. Feh.

[KOBUK]

22. The only thing that I can agree with you is the using of

Murder and Hezbollah in the same sentence !