Sen. Kerry makes Cindy Sheehan's Hall of Fame

[TayTay]

From meetwithcindy.org
http://meetwiththemothers.org/userdata_display.php?modin=50&uid=454

Sen. John Kerry

Meeting Status: Had Meeting
Answers to Cindy's Questions
1. What noble cause? “This is an artsy question that is hard to answer. However I can tell you that a war based on lies is not noble, but a war based on bringing freedom to people is noble.”
2. How many more lives? “If we can not achieve the goal of bring freedom, I do not want to see any more lives lost in this war.”
3. How many lives are you personally willing to risk? “I will say the same thing. If this war will not bring freedom to the Iraqi people I am not willing to personally risk any lives.”
4. What are you doing to bring our troops home? “I believe that we are in a critical two month stage right now. The Iraqi people are supposed to have an election in December.”

Other comments made to Cindy during the meeting:

-He told Cindy “What you are doing is saving lives.”
-“I can not tell you how much I hate what he (Bush) has done.”
-“Rumsfeld is a disgrace.”
-“There are countries that will not become involved with Bush.”
-“What we are doing now has hurt the strength of our military.”

[TayTay]

1. PRO FAVOR: Cnn someone please post this in GD

I have to go right now.

It's all public record and on the net site for Cindy Sheehan.

[ray of light]

2. done

[ginnyinWI]

10. here's the DU link

for easy reference

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4916193

[emulatorloo]

20. Great thread in general -- still don't get why DU'ers love to repeat ROVE

talking points. . .

[Mass]

21. Particularly the fact that he never stated he was against the war

I dont know what "The wrong war at the wrong place at the wrong time" means. Probably that he was for it?

[TayTay]

22. Just tried an experiment

THe opposing forces on these Iraq threads assume that they are correct and that everyone who doesn't agree with them has to 'prove' their position to them.

I just posted this in reverse. I asked a noted spanish dove to prove to me his point of view or else I would assume it was kant. Just wanted to reframe the argument and use their logical arguing structure against them.

To wit:
Posit 1: I am right and you have to prove to me that your guy or gal is living up to my standards.
-- This cedes the moral argument to your opposition up front. There is no reason to believe that their position is morally correct or that you have to live up to it. They are just as likely to be 'full of shit' as the next person. Question the base of the question, why do they think they are right and strongly express that you don't grant this.
Posit 2: We have to prove that DemX is right and not wrong.
-- Again, who are they to say that because DemX believes a certain thing or has expressed concern about IssueX that he or she is morally wrong. I dispute the base assumption on this argument. How dare some person on the 'net tell me that because their unsupported and undocumented argument feels right to them that it automatically morally condemns mine. Stupid people.
Posit 3: All right thinking people know this and all moral authority rests with the questioner.
-- Duh! We always fall into this trap. We end up arguing from a deficit. Question the credentials of the quesitoner. We need to start turning the tables on these people and asking them their own questions with a healthy does of 'Who died and made you God" and "reasonable and intelligent and moral people disagree with you."

These people are beginning to get really irritating. Just because they think they are right, doesn't make them right or even intelligent. I refuse to cede the moral ground anymore. These people suck at debate and are basing arguments on leaky foundations that can't support the superstructure of their arguments. They can all bite me.

[karynnj]

23. That is amazing and it does turn everything on its head

In an odd way, this might be what bothered me on the entire Sheehan hall of fame/shame. While I'm glad she ruled Kerry on the good side, she is an example of what you are talking about. I know this is not PC here, but I really don't like her setting her self up as judge and jury for the Senators.

[TayTay]

24. There is no one on DU who is any better or worse than me

I am not the be all and end all of the universe. I make mistakes constantly and am constantly trying to find my way through the maze of info and stats and whatnot out there in the world.

Well, damn it, so is everyone else. And while I acknowledge my own 'right to be wrong' (and the corresponding responsibility to learn from that) I'm going to hold others to that standard as well.

Who died and made these people Gawd? Why should I have to approach them on bended knee as though I have to prove something to them. LEt them prove their argument to me. Again, from the depths of my Masshole soul, they can bite me.

[paulk]

26. it's nice to see you taking some of these people on over in GD

I thought your exchange with that "upset american" was particularly good. It's really hard to have any kind of meaningful exchange with those types. As you say upthread, it's not only that they don't know how to debate, it's also that they won't argue honestly. They won't give you the courtesy of acknowledging that your POV might be based in a reality just as valid as theirs. It's beyond irritating. After three years of dealing with these types, I find myself resorting to treating them with only contempt, which isn't good - they need to be drawn out. Their argument needs to be shown for the foundation less crap that it is.

Try not to get burned out! That's the real danger of GD. I know that I would like to have a debate on the idea that Iraq was "all about oil". I don't believe this - I've thought about this a lot and could come up with several good arguments against it. But I'm not willing to pull my sources together and take the half hour it would take to make the argument - when I know that 9 out of 10 replies would be the usual knee jerk nonsense and the other would be "nobody believes your bullshit anyway", like I got the other day. That really hurt my feelings... :cry: Well, maybe not. But, still, it would be nice to have an honest debate every now and then - I'm always willing to have my opinion swayed.

.

[TayTay]

29. The arguments are kind of useless

And i did this one as an 'experiment' as I posted above. (Easy arguments, no heavy lifting involved.) I guess I felt like debating and forcing an honest answer, maybe I was celebrating tomorrow's one-year anniversary of the first Kerry-Idiot debate from last year.

Kerry is clearly not pro-war and clearly not pro-stay the course. It is idiotic and mentally weak to argue that he is. He has:

Asked for an investigation into the DSM. (If you can think of a stronger way to show that 'we were lied to' than an investigation into the DSM, then please let me know.)

Kerry clearly stated that the US must declare it has no plans for a permanent presence in Iraq. (This is one of those things that must be made clear so that we can safely get out. Not inverse logic, think about it.)

The US has to find allies in the world. We cannot afford, by blood, treasury, loss of international prestige and influence and so forth to stay the way we are and continue on this course.

Kerry is thinking forward and trying to figure out what happens if any of these things happen:

We get out and Iraq collapses.
We get out and Iraq stabilizes and offers the US a limited role back into Iraq as an ally.
Iraq fractures into three territories and these territories feed a general impulse to civil war in the Muslim world.
We stay and the US fractures along lines of support the war/end the war.
We stay and 'win the war on terra.' (Stop laughing, it's only a theoretical option.)

There are, of course, more things that might happen. As a Sen, Kerry has to think of all these things, and the damage being done to the US military and the abandonment of the Troops once they come home and face medical, financial and emotional problems. That's a lot to think about and it makes the issues anything but grey. (If it was easy, That Friggin Idiot would have done it by now. Kerry is actually smart and knows it's never easy.)

[emulatorloo]

30. This is a really thoughtful post -- you are dead on and I appreciate it

SOOOO VERRRRY MUCH. . .

Thanls. . .

[emulatorloo]

31. I had a head to had w that one over Katrina . . . real short fuse

and really quick to resort to name-calling. And the names/accusations that come out are obscene and vile if you don't agree w his/her point of view. Fortunately somebody (not me) alerted on the posts and they got deleted.

[paulk]

32. yes....

that poster has a special place in my alert button..

or something like that...


jeez... the hall of fame thread... the most vile Kerry haters on the board are crawling out from under their bridges for that one...

[whometense]

25. I'm glad you said that.

I feel the same way. The whole "Meet with Cindy" thing has taken on a ring-kissing aspect that makes me queasy. I totally empathize with her position, and every time I hear her speak she moves me. But it feels to me like it's gone too far in some way that I can't put my finger on.

[karynnj]

27. I disliked it from the time she chose to call Hillary out

You know I'm not a fan of Hillary*, but I thought it was presumptuous. - With Bush, it was a little different because he was the one that lied to start the war. I think she did put a face on the loses, which he tried to hide. I think she makes a mistake any time she moves away from her basic issue. As a grieving mom, she is sympathetic - rating and ranking politicians leaves me a bit leary.

Although there is something in common, she is not the Iraq war John Kerry. He politely went to Congress and tried to make his case based on issues - just as a congress person would. He was someone likely already destined to be in government who understood the rules.

I am glad Kerry saw her, because it would have been hypocritical for him to refuse after his pretty mild comment to suggest Bush should talk to her. I am not surprised that she liked him because, thinking back to the funeral he and Kennedy attended, his emotions were pretty easy to read and she would at least know any words of condolence were sincere. It also seems that she took what she wanted from what he said.

* speaking of the Clintons - if you haven't seen today's Nora Ephron op-ed on the President who broke her heart - I think you'll like it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/29/opinion/29ephron.html
and it's not behind the wall at the NYT

[whometense]

28. I'm glad Kerry saw her too.

And I'm sure she did get something from the visit. Your point is well taken that she soes best when she sticks close to her issue. As a bereaved mother there is really nothing anyone can say that diminishes her impact or credibility on that subject.

But - and I often feel this way on this forum, being much less wonky than a lot of you - it's important to know your own limitations. As a lobbyist she's a lot less sympathetic. And she clearly is too much of a political naif to be passing judgement on congresspeople.

[globalvillage]

33. Canonization can't be too far away.

The whole 'Cindy' thing has taken on a life of it's own. Sorry, I feel for her, and I admire what she's doing, but a little perspective would be nice.
She seems like a good person to me, but the Sanctification of Cindy is a bit much.
Heresy, I know. Too bad.

[TayTay]

14. Thanks for posting this!

I onestly had to leave work and just had time to post here (and it should go here first, don't ya think?)

I am not on the net from around 4:00 pm - 8:00 pm. Thanks for tackling the wholly odd and unnecessary shitstorm in GD. You guys are the best!

(And I love the icon of the old grumpy guy shaking his fist.)

Oh, and now we know who wouldn't support Kerry if he:
cured cancer,
invented a renewable substitute for gasoline that actually repaired global warming,
made a lasting peace in the Middle East, and
found a way to pay for every kid in America's education.

Sigh! Some people are just haters.

[whometense]

3. Just excellent

some floaties for John - WHO NEVER LETS US DOWN.

:loveya: :loveya: :loveya: :loveya: :loveya: :loveya: :loveya: :loveya:

“I can not tell you how much I hate what he (Bush) has done.”

[ginnyinWI]

9. he never does, does he?

Our hero. :loveya: :loveya: :loveya: :loveya: :loveya: :loveya:

[FreedomAngel82]

18. Yep

:loveya:

[politicasista]

4. Some are saying that they didn't see his name

But Dean's was on there.

[Mass]

5. What?

[fedupinBushcountry]

7. Well they are lying

Dean's name is not on either list. I think they are a bit jealous. I'm glad Cindy was pleased with JK, and I know that probably much more was said, that made her believe that John Kerry did not vote for war. I wish I was a fly on the wall in that meeting.

Here is the link to the fame and shame list:
http://meetwiththemothers.org/hall.php

Oh to our man thank you, and plenty of :loveya: :loveya: :loveya: :loveya:

[politicasista]

16. I was thinking that too.

Kudos to Kerry. :loveya: :yourock:

[Mass]

6. How does she dare? Cindy is a traitor!

:sarcasm:

This is the reaction of a couple people in GD.

[karynnj]

11. They are so immature

Obviously, Cindy both appreciated what Kerry had to say and thought he was sincere. He is preparing a speech on Iraq and is not going to give a black/white answer.

It's hillarious that they are actually posting more on Dean where Dean and Cindy differ somewhat on their statements. (I hope Kerry doesn't issue one.)

[Mass]

13. I was surprised by Dean's statement.

His call to support Cindy whatever your opinion on the war is is so weird.

She is not looking for personnal support. She is trying to stop this war. I understand that she could not have liked it. But, once again, consider who said that. The same people who said that Kerry was going to drop the Cobb-Badnarik suit.

[karynnj]

15. It seemed patronizing to me

I don't know why he put out a letter in the first place.

Kerry's most interesting comment was that she was saving lives. I would take this to mean that by increasing the number of people upset by the war, Bush may be more amenable to an exit strategy. Is this reading too much into it?

The question on noble cause was known ahead, so he had time to plan an answer. His answer is very complicated, - probably because it parallels his position (the war was wrong, but we need to laave things stable)and because he doesn't want to hurt anyone who accepts it's for freedom. He knew the answer would be publicized, so brutal honesty had to be balanced by compassion for those who need to believe this. As to freedom, Iraq's theocracy that is likely to result may be really less free than Saddam's Iraq.

[sandnsea]

8. I'm so glad she gets it

You don't have to support any of Bush's bullshit or his "strategy" in order to hope for a successful outcome in Iraq. I'm hoping for a very clear speech soon!!

[paulk]

12. where'd you get that grump shaking his fist???

that is such a perfect comeback!!

[sandnsea]

17. I think I got carried away

But I got it here, I stole it. I'm going to upload it so at least I don't use their bandwidth anymore.

http://www.fansofrealitytv.com/forums/misc.php?do=showsmilies

[karynnj]

19. You were perfect

What else could you say to that poster? It was amusing. You know that the Deaniacs there were waiting for her to put him in the hall of shame or nowhere, which I think is what happened with Hillary. I don't see her name in either list.

Then to top things off, there were reports that she was not completely impressed by Dean. But that didn't stop the hundreds of posts (on various threads) about how amazing Dean's letter was.

[LittleClarkie]

34. I can't believe someone question there even being a Hall of Fame

Ignorant assholes.

[TayTay]

35. They have not yet healed from the primaries

They will never heal. They hate Sen. KErry because he beat the Great Vermont Hope last year and they are ascribing demonic powers to Kerry, cuz no normal human could have beat the Battler from Burlngton. Sigh!

It's not true. And Dean lost because he never got beyond his single issue, he was perceived as too mean and a little bit nutty and Kerry won fair and square and whipped his butt good.

Stay away from there. And especially stay away from the red-meat that Kos puts out when he is planning on how to make his upcoming book about how the Great Vermont Hope lost. That is just trouble.