Krugman: They Told You So

[tpsbmam]

There have been many threads here about potential 2008 candidates. As usual, there's lots of disagreement about many issues with them and among those issues is who voted for/supported the war and who didn't. My political support goes to those who got it, not to those who didn't. I don't support Hillary for a variety of reasons, this being one of them. It has nothing to do with her being a woman or a DLC'er (though that doesn't help her) or a Clinton, it has much to do with judgment (among other issues).

This is where I struggle with ALL legislators who voted for the war. There were plenty who did get it and voted against it (or would have were they in Congress at the time). They spoke out against the war and were reviled because of their candor -- they were called all kinds of names, the majority calling them unpatriotic cowards. For me, it comes down a few things, judgment and conscience among them. As Krugman says in his last paragraph (referring to those with the courage to speak out against the war before it began).

We should honor these people for their wisdom and courage. We should also ask why anyone who didn’t raise questions about the war — or, at any rate, anyone who acted as a cheerleader for this march of folly — should be taken seriously when he or she talks about matters of national security.

Here is part of Krugman's "partial list" of those who should be honored for speaking out and/or voting against the war (it includes HW Bush and Scowcroft, who got it during his administration -- clipped to comply with board regulations):

Representative Ike Skelton, September 2002: “I have no doubt that our military would decisively defeat Iraq’s forces and remove Saddam. But like the proverbial dog chasing the car down the road, we must consider what we would do after we caught it.”

Al Gore, September 2002: “I am deeply concerned that the course of action that we are presently embarking upon with respect to Iraq has the potential to seriously damage our ability to win the war against terrorism and to weaken our ability to lead the world in this new century.”

Barack Obama, now a United States senator, September 2002: “I don’t oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.”

Representative John Spratt, October 2002: “The outcome after the conflict is actually going to be the hardest part, and it is far less certain.”

Representative Nancy Pelosi, now the House speaker-elect, October 2002: “When we go in, the occupation, which is now being called the liberation, could be interminable and the amount of money it costs could be unlimited.”

Senator Russ Feingold, October 2002: “I am increasingly troubled by the seemingly shifting justifications for an invasion at this time. ... When the administration moves back and forth from one argument to another, I think it undercuts the credibility of the case and the belief in its urgency. I believe that this practice of shifting justifications has much to do with the troubling phenomenon of many Americans questioning the administration’s motives.”

Howard Dean, then a candidate for president and now the chairman of the Democratic National Committee, February 2003: “I firmly believe that the president is focusing our diplomats, our military, our intelligence agencies, and even our people on the wrong war, at the wrong time. ... Iraq is a divided country, with Sunni, Shia and Kurdish factions that share both bitter rivalries and access to large quantities of arms.”

http://select.nytimes.com/2006/12/08/opinion/08krugman.html?pagewanted=print

(Edited to add the link I forgot.)

[Loge23]

1. Along with many here...

I totally agree with Krugman's excellent column today, as quoted in the lead post here.
There were also quite a few on this board who were appalled by the invasion and have steadfastly opposed it since.
We too have been vilified by some of our co-workers, relatives, friends, etc.

I don't want to thumb my nose at these people - it's always right to be on the side of peace.
I just want it to end.
The only retribution I want is the swift impeachment (and possible indictment) of the current administration.

[Hissyspit]

13. .

[Cha]

44. Amen~

Brotha!

[papau]

2. I agree excellent judgment was shown by those that opposed the IWR & I agree Hillary has made 2 bad

judgments over the last 13 years -

FIRST

She allowed herself to be shouted down when she was the single payer national health supporter in the room and Bill was agreeing with his advisor's that he should not fight the insurance companies as he could not win and get anything passed, but should instead start up a task force that would recommend a "universal coverage" with "lower premiums" via group purchases from insurance companies. When the task force was later started, single payer national health was a forbidden topic, as per Bill's orders.

SECOND

She again leaned on Bill who forgot his own response to uncertain intel about Iraq, and only remembered that there was such intel, with Hillary then assuming honesty from W Bush meant she should support a resolution that OK'd force as a negotiating tool and means of last resort to avoid a nuclear armed Iraq arming terrorists - again ignoring the UN weapon inspectors word in favor of Bush's word.

I will wait to see what Hillary says on each of these in the future - and if she has reasonable statements on the past, and does not duck the questions, and comes with a positive plan for the future, she will have my support.

[CTyankee]

3. My RW colleague is now saying "Well, hindsight is 20/20."

These great quotes prove that it is NOT hindsight. It was pre-sight. We knew what was going to come out of this. We reviewed the facts and fit them to the situation. We didn't make up our own "facts" to fit the situation we wanted.

P.S. This guy still thinks there were wpm in Iraq. I reviewed history for him and told him not to believe me, go look it up. He had no response.

[Nutmegger]

7. Hell I knew it was going to be a mess

yes I was smeared and called "un-American". If we seen this, they making the decisions should have seen this as what it was: An endless was that will suck the blood out of our good name and money out of our Treasury.

And don't forget the DSM that is never mentioned in the M$M!

[AnneD]

35. Don't feel lonely Nutmeggar.....

forget that I served in USAR for 8 years, forget that I have had a copy of the Constitution, BOR, and the DOI on my wall since I had my own place-I was unAmerican and a terrorist to boot. I guess if they had used their brains, they would have been unAmerican terrorist too.:eyes:

[Pachamama]

62. We were all smeared as Un-American, Un-Patriotic, as being with the Terrorists...

We all looked at the information being provided to us and to remembering the lessons of history and we were smart enough to see that 2-2=ZERO (as opposed to the Administration that wanted everyone to believe that the same facts and equation would equal as Wolfowitz said "A War that paid for itself with the oil revenues".) This administration would then tell the American public that we just had to believe them because they had more information. And yet, the people who had been in a position both in the past and present who had access to information and who were bold enough to speak out too, they were smeared as being un-patriotic and un-american.

This whole War of Choice, based on cherry-picked intelligence and completely ignoring very key warnings, this War based on many lies, has been a victory only for the actual terrorists who hate America and for the Corporate War-profiteers that put this President and his Administration in power. For their profits (hello Halliburton, Blackwater etc.)we have all had to pay the price in this evil War with our children's blood, the Iraqi's blood, and the Billions and Billions (maybe soon Trillion+ ) in dollars that have been badly needed here at home and instead will burden our children's future with a huge debt bill. Our reputation in the world has been destroyed. Just like when you lose your virginity, you can't go back to ever being one again. We were a country seen in the world for the memory of WWII and what we had done there. We were seen as a nation that would never have invaded another pre-emptively. We were seen as a nation of laws. Now we are seen as an aggressor, an occupier.

We all saw it coming and yet we were smeared. Now when its such an obvious failure, the GOP naysayers call it "20/20 hindsight". Bullshit. We saw as clear as day what was happening and we remembered history's lessons, we remembered we were Americans and what that meant. And yet they were the ones who ignored all that. As far as I've ever been concerned, it was them that forgot what it meant to be American and our Declaration of Independence, our Constitution and our Bill of Rights. We never forgot those things. It's all that we thought about.

[Jacobin]

9. What a cop-out. Decent foresight was all you needed

over a hundred good and decent dem congresscritters voted against the IWR.

[CTyankee]

16. Well, this guy had the lamest look on his face as he said it!

Grasping for straws. Pathetic.

[Kellyiswise]

23. It's about "insight" and "foresight" not "hindsight."

Even with hindsight we have our unesteemed VP and Pres. still saying it was the right thing to do and that they would do it all over again. THAT'S THE REAL POINT AND MESSAGE OF THIS bought and owned administration.

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

30. You co-worker is ignoring millions who marched against this war

Before it ever started.

We were in DC marching to prevent a war. That was unprecedented.

[Stargleamer]

37. Shove this in his face. . .

<http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2883414>

There were plenty of people predicting just what happened, and they were mocked by RW idiots like him.

[Jade Fox]

69. "Pre-sight", not "hindsight"....

Excellent.

[wisteria]

4. Of that list, how many were faced with REALLY having to make this

important decision, to vote for or to vote against the IWR? It is easy to state what ones opinion is, free of burden,and state what "I" would do, when not having to suffer the repercussions of a vote for or a vote against. How many actually had to face the difficult decision that may have come down to protecting our country or taking a risk and exposing our country to danger? The IWR vote could have been as right- perhaps, as it was wrong. I can not fault anyone who voted to allow our current president the right to protect us from harm. It was a vote for caution and required that the president act according to the steps laid out.

Now, I know that Feingold faced a vote, Palosi faced a vote,and Re. Spratt. The others however, could say anything they wanted free from the burden of ACTUALLY HAVING TO COME TO A DECISION AND TAKE A STAND THAT MATTER.

So, I don't buy into the assumption that Obama,Gore or Dean would not have voted for the IWR if having to actually make that decision. It is easy to say what you would do, when you really don't have to do it.

What should matter are those leaders who erred on the side of caution and have since fought to make right a wrong.

[bvar22]

17. Over 150 Democrats DID have the wisdom to "see through"

the bullshit and vote AGAINST the War on the Iraqi People. Many were up for re-election in contested seats (Paul Wellstone) and chose to do the right thing over political Expediency.

Anyone can do the right thing when its easy. I want my leaders and represenatives to do the right thing when it is difficult.

[Pale Blue Dot]

18. Bravo.

:thumbsup:

[Morgana LaFey]

21. And (a) be competent enough to know the difference and

(b) have enough character to NOT put political calculus ahead of everything else.

Right freakin' ON.

[ninkasi]

41. Exactly!

I also want my leaders to do the right thing because it's right, and not place their political careers ahead of the greater good of the American people. Yes, it's very often difficult, but one of the first things they must consider is whether their decisions are moral, and right. Voting a certain way because you think it will help you get reelected is the wrong reason for that vote.

[NNadir]

54. Opposition to the war propelled Howard Dean to national prominence.

I remember well the first meet-up. It sounded crazy. It was some Starbucks somewhere, like ten people, all feeling like shit about the war. We were lead by a gay man and his lover.

We did not prevail in the Presidential contest, but the booby prize, the Party and thus the Congress, was some reward.

[TankLV]

55. Fucking BULLSHIT times a THOUSAND!

What more do you need?!?!

YOU are a prime example of those WE had to deal with then and NOW!

WE knew the repukes were LYING the moment it fell from their fucking mouths.

Period.

End of story.

Any INTELLIGENT person could have done the same as US, dammit!

And as far a "trusting the pResident" - you mean the one that STOLE the office, inspite of over a half million MORE who voted for the WINNER?! The scumbag that NEVER could accomplish anyting back then - had a string of FAILURES to his record and NOT ONE SUCCESS - THAT pResident?!

YOU are one of the prime examples of why we are in this goddamn REPUKE responsible mess!

YOU!

You hear us?!?!

Goddammit I give up with people like you...

[diane in sf]

58. Don't forget

the pResident's stock frauds in the 80s!

[BurtWorm]

5. kick

[Missy Vixen]

6. The decisions the person elected in 2008

will face require massive backbone, a cast-iron stomach and the courage to take an unpopular stance. Those who would not speak out against the war don't show me a lot of courage. If they can't take a stand on this, how will they have the courage to be truthful with the American people about the mess we're in after *, formulate a plan to fix it, and move forward with it?

Julie

[Jacobin]

8. Hear hear!

:toast:

I think they should be honored for taking correct positions that were unpopular at the time.

That shows true leadership and statesmanship as opposed to political pandering.

These are the types of people who should be honored, thanked for the service and who should go on to higher positions.

They have convictions, good judgment and are not afraid of criticism from the screaming hordes.

:toast:

[Cha]

45. Special HOnors to them

and to us! :toast:

Especially with the damn corporatemedia shoving the drum for WAR ON Iraq down everyone's throats who tuned them in.

[IndyOp]

10. My opinion of Barak Obama just rose... Although Al & Howard & Russ are

Da Bomb!

I am too disappointed in Pelosi's statement that stopping supplemental funding (an additional $160 Billion) is "off the table" -- to include her with Al & Howard & Russ.

:thumbsdown:

[Gregorian]

11. Wow. Obama does have the fire.

I was just getting ready to post the same thing. And you had already posted it.

Every once in a while, I get a real sense of optimism. I suppose I'm learning that our Congress isn't totally asleep.

[IndyOp]

12. I find myself afraid to hope that our Congress isn't totally asleep...

Can they navigate the coming economic collapse, while simultaneously getting our civil rights back, dramatically altering our international policy, and tending to human needs? Can we?

:scared:

[Gregorian]

14. There's something healing about disaster.

I'm probably one of the few who see it that way. Having worked in operating rooms and having also been the roofing contractor who patches up the roof leak, I have experience with disaster.

In an economic meltdown, we're all in the same boat. And I don't think there is any point, nor even any ability, for the government to be as malicious as they've been. After all, it IS about consuming. And we may be doing a lot less of that shortly.

In disasters, and I'm refering to those that happen to people with wealth, egos shrink. That is all one needs to know. Even the richest man in town has all of his belongings under his roof. Even Cheney has to surrender to the surgeon's ability.

I think the abscess is complete. Let the healing begin. It's ugly, but it leads to a new day.

Time to sober up, America.

[IndyOp]

15. Your thoughts are familiar to me...

Perhaps mine are even a bit more extreme:

More than once I've thought that if the US *has* to have an economic meltdown - a really disastrous one - to stop the many decades old War On The Third World, then I shall root for an economic meltdown. That is hard because I know that poor people in the US will die as a result, suicide and family turmoil will be inevitable, violence will rise... My security will be threatened by such a meltdown as I am financially nowhere near being capable of getting through such a period unscathed.

I think of the U.S. as a raging alcoholic. In fact, I agree with a country song I heard once that portrayed the US as a "drunken 15-year-old waving a pistol around in other people's faces"... :(

Raging alcoholics have to hit bottom before they will recognize where they are and begin recovery. We've got to hit bottom - I am just hoping we can line the bottom with the wealth of the U.S. citizens who are super-rich so that the rest of us won't be hurt terribly.

I so wish to be one nation among other nations -- 5% of the world's population, all of our military inside our borders, with respect for all.

[krispos42]

72. I do not know, and it worries me

We have the wheel, but the Republicans are still going to be hanging onto the spokes, bitching the entire time.

[never cry wolf]

24. Here's the full text of that speech

Remarks of Illinois State Sen. Barack Obama Against Going to War with Iraq

October 26, 2002

I stand before you as someone who is not opposed to war in all circumstances. The Civil War was one of the bloodiest in history, and yet it was only through the crucible of the sword, the sacrifice of multitudes, that we could begin to perfect this union and drive the scourge of slavery from our soil.

I don't oppose all wars. My grandfather signed up for a war the day after Pearl Harbor was bombed, fought in Patton's army. He fought in the name of a larger freedom, part of that arsenal of democracy that triumphed over evil.

I don't oppose all wars. After September 11, after witnessing the carnage and destruction, the dust and the tears, I supported this administration's pledge to hunt down and root out those who would slaughter innocents in the name of intolerance, and I would willingly take up arms myself to prevent such tragedy from happening again.

I don't oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne. What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income, to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.

That's what I'm opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.

Now let me be clear: I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power.... The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him. But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors...and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.

I am not opposed to all wars. I'm opposed to dumb wars. So for those of us who seek a more just and secure world for our children, let us send a clear message to the president.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let's finish the fight with Bin Laden and al-Qaeda, through effective, coordinated intelligence, and a shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, and a homeland security program that involves more than color-coded warnings.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let's fight to make sure that...we vigorously enforce a nonproliferation treaty, and that former enemies and current allies like Russia safeguard and ultimately eliminate their stores of nuclear material, and that nations like Pakistan and India never use the terrible weapons already in their possession, and that the arms merchants in our own country stop feeding the countless wars that rage across the globe.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let's fight to make sure our so-called allies in the Middle East, the Saudis and the Egyptians, stop oppressing their own people, and suppressing dissent, and tolerating corruption and inequality, and mismanaging their economies so that their youth grow up without education, without prospects, without hope, the ready recruits of terrorist cells.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let's fight to wean ourselves off Middle East oil through an energy policy that doesn't simply serve the interests of Exxon and Mobil.

Those are the battles that we need to fight. Those are the battles that we willingly join. The battles against ignorance and intolerance. Corruption and greed. Poverty and despair.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2850723#2864510

[mcking]

34. Thanks for that, NCW

He was exactly right. My willingness to consider Obama in '08 just rose exponentially.

[freefall]

51. Wow! Mine too. He had it exactly right. n/t

[Cha]

47. I don't think the bushits would like this

one very much.. "You want a fight, President Bush? Let's fight to wean ourselves off Middle East oil through an energy policy that doesn't simply serve the interests of Exxon and Mobil."

[LSK]

29. neither Russ nor Howard are running n/t

[TankLV]

57. And MY opinion of Obama just skyrocketed to new highs.

I can never again say I don't agree with anything he says...

I must now pay more careful attention to him...

[bvar22]

19. The Democratic Party "Honor Roll"!!!

These are the Democrats who had the courage to vote AGAINST the Iraq War Resolution.
They were called "Traitors", "Un-American", "Unpatriotic", and "Cowards". This was NOT a popular stand at the time. Many were up for re-election.

The Democratic Party Honor Roll
These Democrats should be remembered for their principled stand against the WAR Machine.

IWR

United States Senate

In the Senate, the 21 Democrats, one Republican and one Independent who courageously voted their consciences in 2002 against the War in Iraq were:

Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii)
Jeff Bingaman (D-New Mexico)
Barbara Boxer (D-California)
Robert Byrd (D-West Virginia)
Kent Conrad (D-North Dakota)
Jon Corzine (D-New Jersey)
Mark Dayton (D-Minnesota)
Dick Durbin (D-Illinois)
Russ Feingold (D-Wisconsin)
Bob Graham (D-Florida)
Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii)
Jim Jeffords (I-Vermont)
Ted Kennedy (D-Massachusetts)
Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont)
Carl Levin (D-Michigan)
Barbara Mikulski (D-Maryland)
Patty Murray (D-Washington)
Jack Reed (D-Rhode Island)
Paul Sarbanes (D-Maryland)
Debbie Stabenow (D-Michigan)
The late Paul Wellstone (D-Minnesota)
Ron Wyden (D-Oregon)

Lincoln Chaffee (R-Rhode Island)


United States House of Representatives

Six House Republicans and one independent joined 126 Democratic members of the House of Represenatives:

Neil Abercrombie (D-Hawaii)
Tom Allen (D-Maine)
Joe Baca (D-California)
Brian Baird (D-Washington DC)
John Baldacci (D-Maine, now governor of Maine)
Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisconsin)
Xavier Becerra (D-California)
Earl Blumenauer (D-Oregon)
David Bonior (D-Michigan, retired from office)
Robert Brady (D-Pennsylvania)
Corinne Brown (D-Florida)
Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio)
Lois Capps (D-California)
Michael Capuano (D-Massachusetts)
Benjamin Cardin (D-Maryland)
Julia Carson (D-Indiana)
William Clay, Jr. (D-Missouri)
Eva Clayton (D-North Carolina, retired from office)
James Clyburn (D-South Carolina)
Gary Condit (D-California, retired from office)
John Conyers, Jr. (D-Michigan)
Jerry Costello (D-Illinois)
William Coyne (D-Pennsylvania, retired from office)
Elijah Cummings (D-Maryland)
Susan Davis (D-California)
Danny Davis (D-Illinois)
Peter DeFazio (D-Oregon)
Diana DeGette (D-Colorado)
Bill Delahunt (D-Massachusetts)
Rosa DeLauro (D-Connecticut)
John Dingell (D-Michigan)
Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas)
Mike Doyle (D-Pennsylvania)
Anna Eshoo (D-California)
Lane Evans (D-Illinois)
Sam Farr (D-California)
Chaka Fattah (D-Pennsylvania)
Bob Filner (D-California)
Barney Frank (D-Massachusetts)
Charles Gonzalez (D-Texas)
Luis Gutierrez (D-Illinois)
Alice Hastings (D-Florida)
Earl Hilliard (D-Alabama, retired from office)
Maurice Hinchey (D-New York)
Ruben Hinojosa (D-Texas)
Rush Holt (D-New Jersey)
Mike Honda (D-California)
Darlene Hooley (D-Oregon)


These Democrats should be remembered for their principled and unpopular stand against the WAR Machine.

[KoKo]

32. Thanks for List but the House Members after "Letter H" got cut off in your

post...:D I was looking for my two congressmen's name when I realized it stopped at H and I know they voted against it.

Do you have the link for this list. I lost mine and it's something I want to print out and keep nearby in the coming years..

[bvar22]

43. Oops. My Bad.

How could I miss that!:blush:


Here is the complete (I think) list of Democrats in the House who voted AGAINST the IRW.



Neil Abercrombie (D-Hawaii)
Tom Allen (D-Maine)
Joe Baca (D-California)
Brian Baird (D-Washington DC)
John Baldacci (D-Maine, now governor of Maine)
Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisconsin)
Xavier Becerra (D-California)
Earl Blumenauer (D-Oregon)
David Bonior (D-Michigan, retired from office)
Robert Brady (D-Pennsylvania)
Corinne Brown (D-Florida)
Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio)
Lois Capps (D-California)
Michael Capuano (D-Massachusetts)
Benjamin Cardin (D-Maryland)
Julia Carson (D-Indiana)
William Clay, Jr. (D-Missouri)
Eva Clayton (D-North Carolina, retired from office)
James Clyburn (D-South Carolina)
Gary Condit (D-California, retired from office)
John Conyers, Jr. (D-Michigan)
Jerry Costello (D-Illinois)
William Coyne (D-Pennsylvania, retired from office)
Elijah Cummings (D-Maryland)
Susan Davis (D-California)
Danny Davis (D-Illinois)
Peter DeFazio (D-Oregon)
Diana DeGette (D-Colorado)
Bill Delahunt (D-Massachusetts)
Rosa DeLauro (D-Connecticut)
John Dingell (D-Michigan)
Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas)
Mike Doyle (D-Pennsylvania)
Anna Eshoo (D-California)
Lane Evans (D-Illinois)
Sam Farr (D-California)
Chaka Fattah (D-Pennsylvania)
Bob Filner (D-California)
Barney Frank (D-Massachusetts)
Charles Gonzalez (D-Texas)
Luis Gutierrez (D-Illinois)
Alice Hastings (D-Florida)
Earl Hilliard (D-Alabama, retired from office)
Maurice Hinchey (D-New York)
Ruben Hinojosa (D-Texas)
Rush Holt (D-New Jersey)
Mike Honda (D-California)
Darlene Hooley (D-Oregon)
Inslee
Jackson (Il.)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Johnson, E.B.
Jones (OH)
Kaptur
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kleczka
Kucinich
LaFalce
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Lofgren
Maloney (CT)
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McKinney
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Millender-McDonald
Miller
Mollohan
Moran (Va)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pastor
Payne
Pelosi
Price (NC)
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Rivers
Rodriguez
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Sabo
Sanchez
Sanders
Sawyer
Schakowsky
Scott
Serrano
Slaughter
Snyder
Solis
Stark
Strickland
Stupak
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Udall (NM)
Udall (CO)
Velazquez
Visclosky
Waters
Watson
Watt
Woolsey
Wu



My file was truncated :shrug: .

I'm crosschecking and adding first names and state ID.
Please holler if you see any errors.

[KoKo]

70. Thanks!

:hi:

[nuxvomica]

65. The most significant name on that list is Bob Graham

Remember how intelligence briefings were restricted to the leadership and the chairs of the intelligence committees? Graham was among that group so he was privy to all the best intel they had and he voted against the IWR. That should've been enough of a message to his colleagues.

[warrens]

20. This is why Obama is my personal fave

Barack Obama, now a United States senator, September 2002: “I don’t oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.”


That's not mincing any words, and I agree with every word there. And did in 2002.

[Cha]

48. So Obama was a state

senator before running for US Senate?

[never cry wolf]

68. Yes, 8 years in the Illinois state senate... n/t

[Kellyiswise]

22. I would like to give a shout out to Rep. Barbara Lee who stood alone

and faced the wrath of Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Hannity, and others and their brainless nitwit followers.

[EFerrari]

26. She got death threats. And let's not forget Dennis Kucinich either.

[OnyxCollie]

39. Remember how Kucinich was ridiculed for his Dept. of Peace?

How silly.:sarcasm:

[EFerrari]

40. Really. What a nutjob!

:sarcasm:

[Mass]

25. Interestingly, two of those in his list vote for the IWR

(Spratt and Skelton).

And I would assume that somewhere he is not opposed to Murtha speaking out.

I agree with Krugman, but I am not sure that he is saying what some of you are saying. His focus does not seem to be on the IWR, but on what people have said and not said before the war.

I think part of the issue is that so many who have been promoters of this war (the Kristal, Diamond, Gingritch, Perle, ...) are now trying to find a new life as posing as those who will get us out of there.

[Maat]

27. Thanks for the post.

It was great remembering the wisdom of those who opposed invasion, as I did.

[LSK]

28. there is only one clear choice in 08 for me and his name is Al Gore

I hope he runs.

[KoKo]

33. Yes...there's room for others as VP...but Gore's the only one who could

pull it all together and make the changes needed. Great connections, the most experience with Congress and Executive Branch, Father who was in Congress and Outside Experience.

He knows the way it works and he could bring some good folks in. No matter what the MSM will say about him...he's the One..

[The Count]

31. Agree. Does his list include Wes Clark? Who testified to Congress in 2002?

Just checking as I don't have Times select.

[phillysuse]

50. Krugman like the rest of the MSM and NY Times

is in denial about Wes Clark.

Of course he leaves him out. Wes isn't a politician, he's a leader.

A Supreme Allied Commander - i.e. in a class by himself.

And testified to the House Armed Services Committee in 2002 against the War in Iraq before it happened.

[tblue]

52. Clark was also the FIRST to say there is no military solution to Iraq, bring in the regional

players. Exactly what the ISG report says. But Clark's been saying it since at least 2003. He shouldn't just run for president, he should be required by law to serve 8 years as Commander in Chief.

Clark/Obama '08
Clark/Dean '08
Clark/Gore '08
Clark/Boxer '08
Clark/Sheila Jackson Lee '08
Hell, Clark/Spongebob '08

[phillysuse]

53. My favorite Clark quote from the 2002 HASC testimony

Clark testified before the House Armed Services Committee
alongwith Richard Perle on September 26, 2002


UNITED STATES POLICY TOWARD IRAQ
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/security/has269000.000/has269000_0.htm

My favorite quote from his VERY PRESCIENT testimony follows:

"Since then we have encouraged Saddam Hussein and
supported him as he attacked against Iran in an effort
to prevent Iranian destabilization of the Gulf. That
came back and bit us when Saddam Hussein then moved
against Kuwait. We encouraged the Saudis and the
Pakistanis to work with the Afghans and build an Army
of God, the Mujahedin, to oppose the Soviets in
Afghanistan. Now we have released tens of thousands of
these holy warriors, some of whom have turned against
us and formed al Qaeda.

My French friends constantly remind me that these are
problems that we had a hand in creating. So when it
comes to creating another strategy which is built
around the intrusion into the region by U.S. forces,
all the warning signs should be flashing. There are
unintended consequences when force is used. Use it as
a last resort. Use it multilaterally if you can. Use
it unilaterally only if you must."

THERE ARE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES WHEN FORCE IS USED!!!!

[Zodiak]

36. I was not aware of the quotes

but I am gladdened to see that my short list for '08 is included in that list. Gore, Dean (I know I'm dreaming), Obama.

[SquireJons]

38. Obama/Krugman 2008

Oh wait... I have Stewart/Colbert penciled in for 2008. Maybe they could be cabinet members.

[Cha]

42. Bonzai!

"Al Gore, September 2002: “I am deeply concerned that the course of action that we are presently embarking upon with respect to Iraq has the potential to seriously damage our ability to win the war against terrorism and to weaken our ability to lead the world in this new century.”

And Bonzai! "Howard Dean, then a candidate for president and now the chairman of the Democratic National Committee, February 2003: “I firmly believe that the president is focusing our diplomats, our military, our intelligence agencies, and even our people on the wrong war, at the wrong time. ... Iraq is a divided country, with Sunni, Shia and Kurdish factions that share both bitter rivalries and access to large quantities of arms.”


And ol' Barack didn't do so bad himself! "Barack Obama, now a United States senator, September 2002: “I don’t oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.”

[colorado_ufo]

46. I smelled many aged fish

when listening to all the neocons' justifications for going to war, from * on down. Anyone who paid attention could have spotted the lies and deceptions without benefit of hindsight. But those who were caught up in stars and stripes and bugles and drum rolls and vengeance - no matter that the target was wrong - were impossible to convince.

My views alienated a number of my husband's relatives, who have not spoken to me since. But the only reason I would want to talk to these people anyway would be to ask them, paraphrasing Dr. Phil: "So how's that war working for you?"

[Roxy66]

49. Anyone who wonders how we became so divided......

need not look farther than the perfect example>>>>> The Dixie Chicks!!!
They were just one example of piled on examples of so many being called "Anti-American", "Traitors", Un-American", "Treasonists", Terrorist-Lovers"...etc,etc!!! Anyone looking back on history can squarely pinpoint The Repug, Neo-con, Extremists for creating the hate and division which now hangs over our country. Let's not let that be lost in history...

[Viva_La_Revolution]

56. DU knew...

Why didn't they? :mad:



Book TV Schedule: December 9th - 11th
* Thomas Paine: Enlightenment, Revolution, and the Birth of Modern Nations
* Uberpower: The Imperial Temptation of America
* Insecure at Last: Losing It in Our Security Obsessed World
* Vice: Dick Cheney and the Hijacking of the American Presidency
* Night Draws Near: Iraq's People in the Shadow of America's War
* Veterans of War, Veterans of Peace
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2885368

[sandnsea]

59. Then why'd Al Gore say this:

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country...The President should be authorized to take action to deal with Saddam Hussein as being in material breach of the terms of the truce and therefore a continuing threat to the security of the region. To this should be added that his continued pursuit of weapons of mass destruction is potentially a threat to the vital interests of the United States. But Congress should also urge the President to make every effort to obtain a fresh demand from the Security Council for prompt, unconditional compliance by Iraq within a definite period of time. If the Council will not provide such language, then other choices remain open, but in any event the President should be urged to take the time to assemble the broadest possible international support for his course of action."

Cherry-picking statements and distorting the IWR vote will never change the fact that every one of the people in the OP thought Saddam had WMD and needed to be dealt with.

[ShortnFiery]

60. "needed to be dealt with" should NOT ever have included US withdrawing

the UN inspection team, then using the horrific "Shock and Awe" in our immoral and illegal preventive war. Damn all those chicken-little Senators who gave our blood-thirsty pResident this authority. :grr:

[sandnsea]

67. There are many who did not support that

Some people believe we have to stay, even though they were supposedly against the IWR. Which is why the vote isn't sufficient to judge somebody's view on the war.

[nuxvomica]

61. We should not nominate a war supporter in 2008

This has to be a litmus test. The field is still pretty wide with that constraint: Clark, Dean, Obama, Kucinich, Feingold, Gore, Hinchey, etc. The war supporters made a serious failure in judgment and/or courage by supporting the invasion and as Krugman points out there were plenty of voices in dissent. It's not like they couldn't have figured out the right stand early on.

[Pachamama]

63. I agree with you 200%!

Absolutely - from my opinion, whether someone in Congress or the Senate, who voted away their Constitutional authority to give War Powers for the invasion of Iraq is disqualified. That may include even people I think are great, but its truly for me the ultimate litmus test. I want someone who remembers the Constitution even under times of distress and duress. I want someone who has the courage to stand up when its not popular and remembers the Constitution instead.

I want someone who even since that vote, (non-elected official or not) who had the courage to speak out against this administration and this War of Choice and Lies, even, even when it meant they were accused as being un-patriotic and un-american and a sympathizer of the terrorists. That kind of person, in my opinion deserves to be our next President. And on that list of who qualifies with that Litmus test, are some amazing and awesome candidates.

My personal favorites...like you mentioned: Clark, Dean, Obama, Kucinich, Feingold, Gore, Hinchey, etc.

Personally, I really like the idea of a ticket that has Al Gore for President, and any of the above named people as his running mate. Al Gore has the experience as a Senator, 8 years in a White House Administration as VP, and he has a firm grasp on perhaps the most critical issue facing the survival of not just the US, but the World - global climate change and the environment. If he had any of those other people as his running mate (my personal choice: either Obama, Clark, Feingold or Dean) then that VP would have 8 years to be having that same experience in the White House and then become the next President.

Our country is going to need to heal after being run into the ground by the idiot boy king, Cheney/Halliburton and the Neo-cons. There has been so much divisiveness too which is why we need a fresh start and why I feel that Gore should be (finally) our President, as he should have been in 2000. And his running mate, whoever he or she should be, would be a person who is strong in character and who spoke out against this war that George Bush has dumped on us all.

[nuxvomica]

64. I would love to see Gore at the top of the ticket

Maybe he doesn't appear "alpha male" enough but all that image-conscious horse-hockey is pre-November the 7th thinking, IMHO. Folks have woken up and are looking for some substance in their leaders. Besides, Gore is a proven vote getter.

[Pachamama]

66. Can Al Gore win?

He has before.... :hi:

[mzmolly]

71. I wish I was a subscriber.

Thanks to Mr. Krugman for breaking this down for us.

To bad it's too late to recommend. But, it's not too late to :kick:

[neoblues]

73. Awesome info; thx... nt.