Quote:
Originally Posted by dculkin
I don't buy that, although I have no way of knowing what was in the minds of the Democrats who voted in 2002 to authorize the use of military force in Iraq. There is no doubt in my mind that the Administration lied, repeatedly, about the supposed threat posed by Saddam, but I doubt that people like Hillary Clinton and John Edwards were fooled by those lies. The lies, combined with many honest errors, mislead the public and therefore provided political cover for Clinton and Edwards to vote in favor of the 2002 resolution, but I doubt that those votes were cast in good faith. Of course, I don't know everything they knew, so I could be wrong. I just think that if there was a good reason for authorizing force, we would have heard it by now.
|
Yes, that is an assumption that I made.
That some of the participants may have been swayed by the bull.
I cannot truly know why they voted the way they did.
But the broad statement by Bot that the Democrats voted for the war
before they voted against it needed some prefacing.
Even I was swayed further to the side of war than what I thought I
would be. But I never crossed the line.
And in light of these later events, I am glad that I was not put into a
position of having to vote one way or the other.
My main argument was that the democrats may have been swayed by the
bull, and that they are not wishy washy as was suggested by Bot.
I get tired of Right wing Republicans blaming everyone else for the
problems in the world.
And I have a big mouth, and balls enough to say what I think.
Thanks
RichC
.