Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Senator Byrd:"We Cannot Treat Americans As If They Are Children Who Must Be Fed A Fairy Tale"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 08:25 AM
Original message
Senator Byrd:"We Cannot Treat Americans As If They Are Children Who Must Be Fed A Fairy Tale"
Byrd: Tell America the true cost of the war
by Carnacki
Wed Jul 11, 2007


Now that the Iraq war is costing the United States $10 billion per month (plus an additional $2 billion per month for Afghanistan) when the neocons were testifying on Capitol Hill before the invasion the entire war would cost $10 billion, it is worth returning to the words of wisdom from Senator Byrd.


From his Feb. 26, 2003 speech:
http://byrd.senate.gov/speeches/byrd_speeches_2003february/byrd_speeches_2003march_list/byrd_speeches_2003march_list_3.html

..................

This is a dangerous and damaging game the Administration is playing with the American public. Glossing over the cost of a war with Iraq may make it easier to win short-term support. But without any serious attention to costs, the American people cannot be engaged in a fulsome public discussion about the eventual wisdom of undertaking this war. Public support cannot be sustained to accomplish our post-war goals in Iraq if the nation has been misled about the duration and difficulty of such a conflict. We cannot treat the citizens of this nation as if they are children who must be fed a fairy tale about fighting a glorious war of "liberation" which will be cheap, short and bloodless. If the President is going to force this nation to engage in this unwise, potentially disastrous, and alarmingly expensive commitment, he must lay out all of the costs and risks to the nation.


What is particularly worrisome is how naively the idea of establishing a perfect democracy in Iraq is being tossed around by this Administration. If the Administration engages in such a massive undertaking without the American people understanding the real costs and long-term commitment that will be required to achieve this bucolic vision, our efforts in Iraq could end with chaos in the region. Chaos, poverty, hopelessness, hatred - - that's exactly the kind of environment that becomes a fertile breeding ground for terrorists.

........................

The American people are willing to embrace a cause when they judge it to be noble and both its risks and its benefits are explained honestly to them. But if information is withheld, long-term political support can never be sustained. Once the order is given and the bombs start falling, the lives of American troops and innocent civilians on the ground hang in the balance. Once "boots are on the ground," concerns about the monetary cost of war necessarily take a back seat. This nation will not shortchange the safety of our fighting men and women once they are in harms way.

...............

In a democratic-Republic, secrecy has no place. Hiding information from the public to rally support behind a war, at the very time when the government should be striving for maximum trust will eventually undermine our nation's strength. This conflict will be paid for with the people's treasure and the people's blood. This is no time to affront that sacrifice with beltway spin and secrecy.


much more at:
http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/7/11/82851/1586
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Drum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 08:28 AM
Response to Original message
1. Bravo Senator Byrd!
:thumbsup:

Recommended!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Toots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 08:29 AM
Response to Original message
2. And boy howdy did Republicans hoot at him..
:shrug: All they know is LIES so what else is new.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 08:33 AM
Response to Original message
3. Why hasn't this man retired yet? I really wish he would. nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sal Minella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 08:40 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. Why?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 08:50 AM
Response to Reply #5
9. I simply do not understand the adoration for a man I view as a racist and homophobe...
simply because he is right one issue. It seems to me that it is comparable on a much smaller scale with those that claim that Hitler did some good things. This man has a long history of hatred toward racial minorities and homosexuals. But he is right on the war, so he gets a pass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Toots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 08:53 AM
Response to Reply #9
13. Hitler did a great number of good things but they certainly are no match for the evil
I think you need to do some more research into a lot of things.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 08:55 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. Does Senator Byrds "good things" outweigh his "evil"? nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
koopie57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 10:04 AM
Response to Reply #14
24. Yes
No offense but maybe you should update your resource material. You must never have heard him speak on the senate floor. My favorite is when he pulls the constution out of his pocket.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 10:13 AM
Response to Reply #24
27. Apparently, civil rights are not covered in his copy. nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
InkAddict Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 11:13 AM
Response to Reply #27
58. He is free to personally despise whom he chooses
as long as he does so while following the laws of public behavior or seeks to change the laws in a lawful manner and at the appropriate level of governance. Serving in Congress is exactly the place to walk the walk. The greater mind of We, the People, in what, up until Y2K, had been a fairly reliable system of checks and balances will prevail against illogical personal discriminations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Toasterlad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 07:18 PM
Response to Reply #58
92. Sorry, That's Blatant Nonsense.
As a representative to the United States Senate, he is obligated to represent ALL Americans fairly. By the very definition of the word, he is biased against someone he despises. Your faith in democracy notwithstanding, people in positions of power who hold bigoted beliefs retard progress, and you can't count on their constituents to remove them. The wonderful people of North Carolina elected Jesse Helms to the Senate five times.

I'm glad that Senator Byrd is against the war, and I'm sure he's done many wonderful things in the course of his career that, perhaps, indirectly benefited racial and other minorities along with the good white people he was really trying to help, but I'll be glad when all the old bigoted dinosaurs die out of congress. There might be some new young bigots coming along to take their place, but it's a lot easier to uproot a sapling than a hoary old tree.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Virginia Dare Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 09:06 AM
Response to Reply #9
17. Thomas Jefferson was a racist..
as were the vast majority of the founding fathers, I don't think we have a record of whether he was a homophobe or not, but I still admire them for their brilliance and the political gifts they gave us.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 09:09 AM
Response to Reply #9
18. "a long history of hatred"
Do you mean a SHORT history a LONG time ago? Or do you have something to back up your assertions about his "hatred?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 09:15 AM
Response to Reply #18
19. KKK in the 40's, against civil rights in the 60's, using n-word in this very decade...
yeah long history.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
koopie57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #19
25. 60 years have come and gone?
Edited on Wed Jul-11-07 10:08 AM by koopie57
Read a newspaper from this century maybe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 10:09 AM
Response to Reply #25
26. this decade is sixty years? thats interesting...nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
koopie57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 10:15 AM
Response to Reply #26
29. oh brother that is the best you can do
60 years have come and gone since the time you are talking about. A decade is 10 years. Stick with what you brought up in this thread unless you have nothing else to say. I have a feeling I won! *LOL*. Thank you.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 10:18 AM
Response to Reply #29
30. I mentioned his use of the n-word in this very decade. The post is still there...
Please explain what that statement means to you. Sixty years?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
koopie57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 10:23 AM
Response to Reply #30
33. Nope.
I don't want to *LOL*. Maybe you can explain what you think I meant since it seems to bother you so much!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 10:27 AM
Response to Reply #33
36. Not bothered at all. I can understand you reluctance to address...
his recent (this very decade) racism and homophobia, so you are simply going to pursue the course that my statement only covers events that occured 60 years ago. Perhaps you were unaware of his more recent "activity", or perhaps you are not concerned. I do not know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
koopie57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #36
77. Well,
prove it. Show me where you get this current information cuz I'm certainly not aware of anything. Your post count is rising very quickly today. I'd like to be directed to other post you have made today.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #77
78. You are certainly free to admire the man...
his voting record is available to all. Of course opposition to civil rights is meaningless when you oppose the war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
koopie57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 02:21 PM
Response to Reply #78
79. Thank you for allowing me to be free to admire the man,
I was growing concerned for a moment.

You talk so smart I figured you would have the information right at your fingertips and I don't need to review his voting record because I'm rather familiar with it. So I guess the proof is up to you.

Now, please explain how opposition to the war effects our civil rights. And also, you initially started out with Senator Byrd being a racist and KKK. So, now please explain how racism from the 60's has something to do with the war in Iraq?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #79
82. the point made by myself was that any admiration for this racist/homophobe is puzzling...
regardless of his position on the war. Pat Buchanan has always been against the war. Is it simply because Byrd calls himself a Democrat?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
koopie57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #82
84. Pat Buchanan ?
Pat Buchanan? You are comparing Pat Buchanan to Senator Byrd?

And I hardly think Senator Byrd simply refers to himself as a Democrat. He is a hard working Senator who is very much a Democrat. Pat Buchanan ... that's a knee slapper!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #84
85. the common ground between the two seem to be intolerance and opposition to the war.
the difference - ones a Democrat the other is not. Is that what fuels the admiration for Byrd? His party designation?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
koopie57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #85
90. Well Indiana Jones
You can't back up what you say and you are starting over from where we began. I suspect I have heard all your arguements and they seemed to stem from simple ignorance, at least in my humble opinion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 11:00 AM
Response to Reply #19
45. A long time ago -- and he's said he regrets both things.
Got a link to his use of the "n word" you reference?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 11:06 AM
Response to Reply #45
52. voting for Constitutional ban on gay marriage not long time ago...
does he regret that as well?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
koopie57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 02:27 PM
Response to Reply #52
80. Please stay on topic
or let us know when you are changing it?

You went from remarks by the good Senator from the 1960's to gay marriage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #80
81. the n-word statement, once again, was from this very decade. nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
koopie57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #81
83. Prove it! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #83
86. I supplied a link elsewhere. You are free to find it in this thread. nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
koopie57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 04:08 PM
Response to Reply #86
87. Where is it?
And I don't mean prove it by simply saying it. Prove it with something legitimate.

Just prove it!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #87
88. there is a link in this very thread. nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harlinchi Donating Member (954 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 09:42 AM
Response to Reply #9
20. IJ, as a Black man I'm glad he's still in the Senate!
I guess you speak for all gay Blacks. I can't even speak for all Blacks! From my perspective, though, the US is better served by Byrd remaining in the Senate!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 09:54 AM
Response to Reply #20
22. I make no claim to speak for anyone. Your post would seem to insinuate...
that opposition to racism and homophobia can only be expressed by those being oppressed. Perhaps this is an underlying reason for the denial of civil rights to a sizeable portion of our society. Perhaps if more "straights and whites" expressed outrage about the attitudes of men such as Senator Byrd, progress could be made. Perhaps some day it will be realized that our country is not better served by a person that supports denial of fundamental rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harlinchi Donating Member (954 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 10:23 AM
Response to Reply #22
32. I'm not sure which fundamental rights Sen. Byrd is against!
All I hear of and from him is that he supports the Constitution. I welcome any reasonable support from those who wish that Blacks and others receive fundamental rights. I don't see how castigating Byrd for actions taken and statements made many years ago while ignoring the importance of what he currently does will help. If I were a racist, I'd have to ask Byrd, "What have you done for me lately?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #32
38. Does Senator Byrd support a Constitutional ban on same sex marriage?...
I believe he does. This makes him a homophobe in my estimation. Coupled with his recent racist remarks, this forms the basis for my opinion of Senator Byrd.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harlinchi Donating Member (954 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 10:39 AM
Response to Reply #38
42. Thank you. That's an explanation, at least.
I am not familiar with his 'recent' racist remarks. I do not support changing the Constitution to deny rights, period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 10:43 AM
Response to Reply #42
44. 2001, on Fox News I believe, he used the n-word twice...nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 11:00 AM
Response to Reply #44
46. Link?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 11:04 AM
Response to Reply #46
49. CNN...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 11:05 AM
Response to Reply #49
51. You read the context, and the apology, right??? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 11:07 AM
Response to Reply #51
53. Context for flippant use of a racial slur? He seems to apologize well...
If the context make it acceptable, why apologize? He hasn't apologized for support of denial of civil rights to gays. Maybe he deems it acceptable for now. He'll apologize later, and all will be well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 11:09 AM
Response to Reply #53
55. It was an ANTI-racist statement.
And as you must know, since you seem to be over 9 years old, people often apologize when others are offended even unintentionally.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 11:13 AM
Response to Reply #55
59. As surely as his vote to ban same sex marriage was anti-homophobic. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 11:23 AM
Response to Reply #59
64. At least you're narrowing your focus now.
There's plenty of blame to go around for the stance against gay marriage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 11:27 AM
Response to Reply #64
66. My focus has remained constant: in my estimation he is a racist and a homophobe.
His words and actions throughout his career have shown this to be true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ieoeja Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #53
71. Yes, context makes a huge difference.
Edited on Wed Jul-11-07 12:33 PM by ieoeja
The term "n-word" is often used in place of the word "nigger" because repeated utterances of the latter is ugly and offensive. It is so because racists will use the word repeatedly in an otherwise acceptable manner while pretending ignorance of the fact that they are being offensive through its repetitiveness.

Their opposite but equal number is the individual who pretends to be offended even when the word is used within an acceptable context. According to their pretended stance, my use of the word above makes me a racist. These pretenders come in two categories. There are those who take a zero-tolerance stand against the word in an effort to stamp it out. And sometimes they are racists pretending to be anti-racist in a manner to make the anti-racist stance look stupid.

What neither category of pretender never, ever seems to learn (despite all the replies calling them out as liars) is that 90+% of their audience believe they are lying. They will keep right on going thinking they are so clever long past the point where the 90+% stop being annoyed and start being entertained by the pretender's obtuseness.

Then there really are people who would be offended that easily. To which I can only say, "there's just no pleasing some people."


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
koopie57 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 06:02 PM
Response to Reply #44
91. FOX news?.
You site something from FOX news and are not real sure about what you heard?

You are going to have to try harder than that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigmonkey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 10:33 AM
Response to Reply #9
39. Senator Sam Ervin was an ally of the good guys during Watergate.
He was a strict constructionist, and was unafraid and quite effective at countering the Nixon spin. He seemed almost indespensible at the time.

But, as I recall, he had a history, at that time of course a recent history, of opposing civil rights legislation. It's tragic in the human sense, but I distinctly remember the lesson it taught me about some of the pragmatism involved in politics. In the civil rights arena, he was my enemy, but in the fight against the imperial presidency, he was a valuable ally.

Byrd has repudiated his overt, conscious racism. He may still harbor unconscious racist attitudes that he can't root out, but to me that seems no reason to discard such a valuable ally. I'm willing to live with spotty behavior if this man has repudiated his racist past.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 10:40 AM
Response to Reply #39
43. He voted for a Constitutional ban on same sex marriage...
he used the n-word publicly as recently as 2001. Personally, I cannot overlook that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Matsubara Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 12:53 PM
Response to Reply #9
72. Why don't you just call him KKK Byrd then?
Edited on Wed Jul-11-07 12:53 PM by Matsubara
Isn't that what Hannity (race baiter extraordinaire) and O'Lielly call him?

His "long history of hatred toward racial minorities and homosexuals" consists of a brief stint in the KKK FIFTY YEARS AGO, which he has apologized for, and his support for the anti-gay-marriage amendment.

I don't like those aspects of Mr. Byrd's past, but why not give him credit for making a good point?

He will retire soon enough, one way or another.


By the way, he's right on a lot of things besides the war, more often than not, actually. He's often criticized for the amount of pork he brings home, but hell he's from one of the poorest states in the Union. If anyone needs more pork spending projectsto stimulate growth and bring jobs, it's West Virginia.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 12:57 PM
Response to Reply #72
74. He receives poor marks for civil rights voting record...
He throws around racial slurs. I don't need to mention his KKK past. He's done things much more recently.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Matsubara Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #74
76. And what better time to bring it up than after an important and effective speech on the war?
Edited on Wed Jul-11-07 01:01 PM by Matsubara
I call BS on your motivations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 08:40 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. silly n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 08:51 AM
Response to Reply #6
10. The admiration for Senator Byrd? Yes. nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 09:54 AM
Response to Reply #10
21. comic genius n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 09:56 AM
Response to Reply #21
23. Cool as the other side of the pillow. nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cassiepriam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 08:41 AM
Response to Reply #3
8. Of course, the notion that Americans should be told the truth is ridiculous.
Imagine a US senator even suggesting such a thing.
He better retire and they can bring in someone who
lies and BS's with the rest of them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 08:52 AM
Response to Reply #8
12. There are much better people in our party speaking truth...
Better by far than this man.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cassiepriam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 09:03 AM
Response to Reply #12
15. The truth is the truth no matter who speaks it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 09:04 AM
Response to Reply #15
16. And the support by progressives for a known racist and homophobe remains puzzling. nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MyNameGoesHere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #16
31. Well i cannot understand
why in every post about Senator Byrd there seems to be one of you that tries to hijack the message. I see this behavior a lot on other sites. If Senator Byrd is mentioned say at freeprepuke it contains mostly kkk byrd or similar references. So what is puzzling is why you would want to hijack this thread instead of making a new one about Senator Byrd. Are you trying to divert the message like some other groups seem to do?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 10:25 AM
Response to Reply #31
35. It's almost
like there's an agenda.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 10:35 AM
Response to Reply #31
40. I see differing opinions on individuals in countless threads...
Does it pain so much to see dissent from those that don't share your view of someone? Read the Clinton, Obama, Edwards, Sheehan, etc. threads. They contain much more vitriol. I have not mislead or lied regarding Senator Byrd. I am puzzled by the adoration some in our party have for him. I feel it is not unacceptable for me to post my opinions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MyNameGoesHere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #40
57. It's your dime
but when you hide in a thread and take it off message your intentions are not necessarily acceptable. Like i said, you got a beef with Senator Byrd start a thread about it and maybe people, myself included will take you seriously.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 11:15 AM
Response to Reply #57
60. I will take your advice under consideration. nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harlinchi Donating Member (954 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 10:25 AM
Response to Reply #16
34. Is Sen Byrd currently a known racist and homophobe? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 10:37 AM
Response to Reply #34
41. In my own estimation, yes. nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #34
47. "Currently" as in 43-65 years ago. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 11:09 AM
Response to Reply #47
56. was that vote to ban gay marriage that long ago? wow...
and 2001 as well. I'm getting old.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 11:19 AM
Response to Reply #56
61. Edit -- I'm wrong on the constitutional amendment...
Edited on Wed Jul-11-07 11:22 AM by Sparkly
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #61
63. Please explain...your link shows...
Voted YES on constitutional ban of same-sex marriage.

AND

Rated 20% by the ACLU, indicating an anti-civil rights voting record.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #63
65. See my edit. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #65
67. Noted. Does his vote for a Constitutional Amendment banning equal rights...
not make him a homophobe in your mind?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 11:31 AM
Response to Reply #67
68. I think "homophobe" takes it too far.
Not a champion of civil rights and equal protection, but not necessarily a "homophobe," either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #68
70. So when he favored denial of civil rights to blacks, do you not feel that was racist? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dhalgren Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 08:38 AM
Response to Original message
4. Man! The old "Lion of the Constitution" nailed it, didn't he?
This was back in Feb. '03! And he foresaw the whole debacle; the lies, the costs, the deaths and the maimings, the secrecy and the loss of trust. It is like he had a crystal ball, isn't it? No, he was simply using his experience and common sense to evaluate the situation in a clear and rational manner - something that every senator should have done, every congressperson should have done, every general should have done, every citizen should have done.

Senator Byrd probably won't say, "I told you so!"

But I will: "Senator Byrd told you so, you dumb fucking criminal sons of bitches!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bitwit1234 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 08:40 AM
Response to Original message
7. But, but , but.......
bush is traveling around the country telling people that he wants to reign in the tax and spend democrats. And that HE is the one trying to balance the budget. Real Americans know he is embarking on another round of lies. But he will repeat it over and over trying to build up the republicans for the next election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ljm2002 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 08:52 AM
Response to Original message
11. Wow, prescient hardly covers it...
...he hit that nail on the proverbial head, didn't he.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 10:14 AM
Response to Original message
28. Yeah, well, I would have been willing to hear lots of Aesop stories
during the Alito hearings in the form of a filibuster.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 10:28 AM
Response to Original message
37. history has shown, america is happy to believe in fairey tales.
and continues to manufacture new ones...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lovuian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 11:03 AM
Response to Original message
48. I'll never forget the little lamb story that Byrd talked about
the rich want the poors little lambs

He was against the Iraq War from the start

Byrd was brilliant in his opposition to the administration
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bonito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 11:05 AM
Response to Original message
50. Whats scary is this

Rick Santorum
"Iran in the Middle East as an absolute lynchpin for our success in that region, and I think they are committed to that. And while it may not be a popular thing to talk about right now, and I know public sentiment is against it, they understand the importance of the national security of this country, and they also understand that between now and November, a lot of things are going to happen, and I believe that by this time next year, the American public’s going to have a very different view of this war, and it will be because, I think, of some unfortunate events, that like we’re seeing unfold in the UK." more http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/Transcript_Page.aspx?ContentGuid=bd02aa0e-7953-414b-89ff-64db473685bc
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Terri S Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 11:08 AM
Response to Original message
54. He had a great many words of wisdom prior to the invasion...all ignored by too many
US Senator Robert Byrd
Wednesday ~ March 19, 2003
Speech delivered on the floor of the US Senate

Today, I Weep for my Country...

I believe in this beautiful country. I have studied its roots and gloried in the wisdom of its magnificent Constitution. I have marveled at the wisdom of its founders and framers. Generation after generation of Americans has understood the lofty ideals that underlie our great Republic. I have been inspired by the story of their sacrifice and their strength.

But, today I weep for my country. I have watched the events of recent months with a heavy, heavy heart. No more is the image of America one of strong, yet benevolent peacekeeper. The image of America has changed. Around the globe, our friends mistrust us, our word is disputed, our intentions are questioned.

Instead of reasoning with those with whom we disagree, we demand obedience or threaten recrimination. Instead of isolating Saddam Hussein, we seem to have isolated ourselves. We proclaim a new doctrine of preemption which is understood by few and feared by many. We say that the United States has the right to turn its firepower on any corner of the globe which might be suspect in the war on terrorism. We assert that right without the sanction of any international body. As a result, the world has become a much more dangerous place.

We flaunt our superpower status with arrogance. We treat UN Security Council members like ingrates who offend our princely dignity by lifting their heads from the carpet. Valuable alliances are split.

After war has ended, the United States will have to rebuild much more than the country of Iraq. We will have to rebuild America's image around the globe.

The case this Administration tries to make to justify its fixation with war is tainted by charges of falsified documents and circumstantial evidence. We cannot convince the world of the necessity of this war for one simple reason. This is a war of choice.

There is no credible information to connect Saddam Hussein to 9/11. The twin towers fell because a world-wide terrorist group, Al Qaeda, with cells in over 60 nations, struck at our wealth and our influence by turning our own planes into missiles, one of which would likely have slammed into the dome of this beautiful Capitol except for the brave sacrifice of the passengers on board.

The brutality seen on September 11th and in other terrorist attacks we have witnessed around the globe are the violent and desperate efforts by extremists to stop the daily encroachment of western values upon their cultures. That is what we fight. It is a force not confined to borders. It is a shadowy entity with many faces, many names, and many addresses.

But, this Administration has directed all of the anger, fear, and grief which emerged from the ashes of the twin towers and the twisted metal of the Pentagon towards a tangible villain, one we can see and hate and attack. And villain he is. But, he is the wrong villain. And this is the wrong war. If we attack Saddam Hussein, we will probably drive him from power. But, the zeal of our friends to assist our global war on terrorism may have already taken flight.

The general unease surrounding this war is not just due to "orange alert." There is a pervasive sense of rush and risk and too many questions unanswered. How long will we be in Iraq? What will be the cost? What is the ultimate mission? How great is the danger at home?

A pall has fallen over the Senate Chamber. We avoid our solemn duty to debate the one topic on the minds of all Americans, even while scores of thousands of our sons and daughters faithfully do their duty in Iraq.

What is happening to this country? When did we become a nation which ignores and berates our friends? When did we decide to risk undermining international order by adopting a radical and doctrinaire approach to using our awesome military might? How can we abandon diplomatic efforts when the turmoil in the world cries out for diplomacy?

Why can this President not seem to see that America's true power lies not in its will to intimidate, but in its ability to inspire?

War appears inevitable. But, I continue to hope that the cloud will lift. Perhaps Saddam will yet turn tail and run. Perhaps reason will somehow still prevail. I along with millions of Americans will pray for the safety of our troops, for the innocent civilians in Iraq, and for the security of our homeland. May God continue to bless the United States of America in the troubled days ahead, and may we somehow recapture the vision which for the present eludes us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Richard Steele Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 11:21 AM
Response to Original message
62. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 11:35 AM
Response to Original message
69. Stock idiot response to all criticism from Robert Byrd: "But but but, he usta be a Klansman!"
"The fact that he's overcome a racist cultural background deprives Byrd of any right to express opinions on the law."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beelzebud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #69
73. He also fillibustered the civil rights act, and was the leader of the Gang of 14 that installed
the Bush supreme court.

But I must be an idiot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaJones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 12:58 PM
Response to Reply #73
75. No idiot are you. He voted to ban gay marriage and amend the Constitution to do so..
yet he is the "Lion of the Constitution".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 04:10 PM
Response to Original message
89. Why not? They act like it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 18th 2024, 07:57 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC