The honesty of Democrats

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(imntacrook @ Apr 9 2007, 09:48 AM) [snapback]420213[/snapback]</div>

having trouble loading link - a short synopsis please.
thanks.

 

When I saw the tread topic, I thought this was one of those oxymoron threads where everyone comes in to put the next greater post.

I say we stop talking with facts and get back to the rest of the discussion.



It's about 2 minutes of video where you see all the top Demo's giving their reasons and support for the war from about 1998 through 2004, ending with a Bush segment at the end from sometime in about 2005 stating that this war started with bi-partisian support.

 

Be honest, Daron...

Feb 18, 1998 - Nuclear weapons are a threat
Feb 17, 1998 - "or we take some ambiguous third route..." - what were the first two he talked about, and which "route" did we take?
Jan 31, 1998 - Iran and Iraq are "international outlaws" - Thus UN sanctions?
Feb 18, 1998 - He will rebuild "someday" - Clearly it hasn't happened yet, as we didn't find anything!

Nov 17, 2002 - chemical and biological weapons (no mention of nuclear)
Oct 10, 2002 - Evidence that Saddam is trying to develop nuclear weapons - Coming from the same intelligence reports Bush pressured the CIA into creating?
Aug 4, 2002 - He's trying to gain additional capability... along with the quote of "there's much we don't know"
Sept 18, 2002 - The president is approaching this in the right fashion - Hey, the first "pro-war" quote - but he wasn't even the Senate minority leader at the time...
Sept 15, 2002 - Support an action - doesn't say she supports war or an invasion
Jan 7, 2003 - He can't be allowed to have nuclear weapons - i don't think you'll find anyone who would have said otherwise, but that doesn't mean war.
Mar 17 2003 - support the president - said by a Junior senator, hardly a "top Dem". He goes on to say "if Saddam has not done the right thing"


None of the quotes that were cherry picked for this mash-up actually said anything directly about supporting a war in Iraq. A vast majority of them were well before any action was being considered by the administration, and while the UN was toughening it's stance on Iraq. Heck, most of them were even before weapons inspectors were allowed back in. All of them were advocating a strong stance. If we had the full text instead of the cherry picked sentence for each quote, I wonder if we would see anyone advocating an invasion or war?

 

Sure, lots of people were onboard for stopping the supposed threat from Saddam Insane.

... remember that little bottle of anthrax Colin Powell was holding? Remember those pictures of Saddams "WMD Facilities"?

I'd all be for taking the day off and going to the go-kart track.. but I'd be a little disappointed that when I got there, the go-kart track didn't exist.. You showed me pictures of the go-kart track, why wouldn't I believe it exists?

 

The problem with any quote in a political context is that you have to know the original context; in this case, a couple of the quotes are said to be from early 1998. Any of the quotes prior to late 1998 could be in the original context of the bi-partisan Iraq Liberation Act (link is to President Clinton's "signing statement" about the law).

IIRC, the Congress also granted President Clinton the authority to use force if necessary, but I can't find that now, so I may not be correct on that point. To be fair to Democrats, they may vote that way for a President they feel would show more restraint, yet oppose it for a President they don't feel shows that same restraint.