Kerry to bring issue of Downing Street Minutes/Memo to Senate

Forum posts

• 2 June 2005, 18:02

  Your Editorial Statements are completly unnecessary and take away from the import of the issue.

  By attacking Kerry you say absolutly nothing about the importance of the memo itself and you actually hurt clarity of a good article.

  My only complaint about the article is that they refer to a 2003 cabininet meeting when it occured in 2002.

  • 2 June 2005, 18:25

    I Absolutely and emphatically disagree with the writer who said that the editorial comments ’are completely unnecessary and take away from the import of the issue’.
    IF Kerry was other than -at this point in his life- a politician looking for leverage to address his failings in the 2004 election, he would have been speaking up at the same time as Rep. Conyers and lending his voice to Rep. Conyer’s efforts.
    Kerry is the PERFECT example of everything that is ’wrong’ with the Democratic Party and why it keeps losing elections.

  • 2 June 2005, 20:05

    The added comment was right on the mark! Kerrys remark, ""When I go back (to Washington) on Monday, I am going to raise the issue", is typical head up his butt, Kerry!
    This is month old info!
    Conyers is and has been all over this from the moment the minutes were published!
    Unlike Kerry, he did not have to travel to England to have a "light" go on!

  • 2 June 2005, 20:10

    So where were our great senators like Boxer and Byrd on that one?

    Whatever motivations Kerry has, he is the first Senator to bring the matter in the open. This is good, and unfortunately, there are naysayers everywhere.

    I agree with the original writer that we do NOT need editorial comments. We are able to make our own conclusions.

  • 2 June 2005, 22:07

    Kerry who? Where has he been—I have hardly heard his name in weeks and weeks, despite so many issues that should have been publicized!!

    I personally think the man is so concerned about his public image that he does not do or say anything unless his (inept) advisors have told him it is politically OK. What does this man believe in? Does he have an opinion of his own?

    I agree Kerry represents what is wrong with the Democratic Party----silent unless it is 100% guaranteed that speaking up will gain votes. [thankfully there are some superbly honest and un-intimidated exceptions like B Boxer and J Conyers]

    And where is the articulate and inspiring Barack Obama? We desperately need someone who can rally the people.

    ALL OF THE DEMOCRATS should be SCREAMING about the Downing Street minutes! Loud and non-stop. So many lives lost on this personal vendetta. So much wasted money (into conspirators’ pockets). So much corruption and tragedy.

  • 3 June 2005, 09:47

    You are absolutely right! I think Kerry is more worried about being reelected as a senator the next time around and keeping his job, than his is about the real political issues. This is nothing more that a political lie, like all his others, to keep him in the public eye. He blew the election, and now he pretends to be the tough guy, but he’s a month too late.

    A disenchanted idealist.

  • 3 June 2005, 16:34

    It is better late than never for Kerry to bring up the DowningStreetMemo. Also Kerry has the clout that Conyers lacks. I have to agree that Kerry was playing it safe though.

  • 4 June 2005, 19:45

    I think you are onto something when you say Obama. I know he’s new to his job, but I believe there is no one in the Senate better positioned to be the Democratic nominee for President in 2008 than Obama if he would marry himself to an investigation of this memo.(NO WAY can Hillary be the lead on this. She’ll be shouted back before she leaves the gate.) As a grand jury sidenote, maybe he’ll force Novak to reveal his source. I fell out of my chair when he attacked Mr. Felt. We should be pressing Obama into service. The first Black President should be a Democrat. It would be an unbearable failure for progressive liberal’s if the republicans beat us to the punch. Who knows where the Downing Memo might take us if investigative reporters and Senators start following the evidence it reveals?

  • 6 June 2005, 14:50

    The Democrats should go for Bush like Starr and Republicans went for Bill Clinton. Deceiving the Congress and lying incessantly to the American public to sacrifice American lives on a cooked up war is far more serious than perjury in a sexual context. The Democrats neither bark loud nor bite. They have to win over the media. They need to call for a special prosecutor as aggressive as Starr.

• 2 June 2005, 18:34

  How come WE knew that they "fixed information" long before the invasion. How come WE knew that Bush & Co LIED to start this war long before the invasion. How come WE know that the 911 is nothing but a cover up for Bush & Co. (could this have been one of those fixes?) How come WE knew that Hussien and Iraq were way too broke to even contemplate a military build up due to our 10 years of sanctions that killed and starved a million Iraqis? How come WE are all signing impeachment petitions and no one in Congress is?

  This list goes on and on, but CONGRESS DOES NOTHING....HEARS NOTHING.....SEES NOTHING! They are all supposed to be highly educated, intelligent people who are supposed to THINK, COMPREHEND and FIGHT for the laws of this country but they don’t. They don’t do anything.

  If Kerry doesn’t realize that American’s are very tired and angry at all of this bull, maybe he should also turn off the boob tube and get on the internet and actually INVESTIGATE real people, not just what his lackeys tell him.

  Heck, I will even buy him a cup of coffee!

  Thanks,

  R. Ballard

  • 2 June 2005, 19:08

    Kerry is part of the Illuminati faction. Yes, he opposes Bush but nothing would have changed if he was President. Kerry was promoted by the elite media just like Bush. They both work for the corporations that line their pockets with money.

  • 2 June 2005, 21:04

    Please clarify: is there any indication that the Downing memo was out before November 2004? If so, that Kerry was aware of it?

    I was one of many arguing that there was no case for war, that intelligence was being manipulated, that Bush had Iraq as a target before 9-11 - but no one in power (Republican or Democrat) seemed to be able or willing to hear our argument.

    It is, indeed, very OLD NEWS - the fact that it’s "old" is what makes it so relevant today.

    Rees Chapman

  • 3 June 2005, 09:16

    For the TRUTH, I’d Make the Coffee for anyone interested

  • 3 June 2005, 10:20

    I watch C-span, rarely see him and have never seen him stand up for THE PEOPLE. He is a bones man and a part of the deceptions, if he wasn’t as pointed out above he would have stood with those demanding the truth and those demanding good things for THE PEOPLE on many outragous bills.

    Believe no man’s/woman’s words, only their actions. And his actions speak volumes to me on his intentions. Decieve and divert by words

  • 4 June 2005, 19:54

    It is disheartening and tragic that many on the left who read, listened, absorbed, weighed and evaluated the actual evidence about WMDs and the phantom Iraqi threat to our nation were so emphatically ignored and discounted by Bush and his warmongering administration in the unstoppable leadup to conquest and invasion. Make no excuses, hold no illusions— these were men who wanted war, lived war, breathed war, shat war, wanked desperately to the drumbeat of Saddam’s defeat and woke up to the satisfying scent of billions of dollars absconded from the stupid American people to fund their hellish Shell-oil game in the sand. Osama bin Laden will die an old man in the mountains of Afghanistan long before Bush and his egregious machinations are revealed, because we have in this post-millennial version of America no Deep Throats, no ’real’ American idols, just puny punk warrior presidents who choke on pretzels, mouth a Potomac of lies and drink genocide and Florida orange juice for breakfast. No, ’American Idle’ is the longest-running reality show, starring the very dead and putrid Press, papier-mache punditto-heads for a murderous regime unparalleled since the gory glory days of Joe Stalin and Mao Zhedong. Is this the America of our dreams, or our nightmares?

  • 6 June 2005, 14:58

    Cos American media is gutless. That’s why.

    A. D. Wilson

• 2 June 2005, 18:58

  Bush is also a ventriliquist?

  "One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
  President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.

  "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program."
  President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

  "Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
  Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.

  "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
  Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

  "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
  Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.

  "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
  Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.

  "Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
  Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.

  "There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
  Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001.

  "We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
  Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.

  "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
  Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

  "Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
  Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

  "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seing and developing weapons of mass destruction."
  Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

  "The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
  Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.

  "I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
  Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.

  "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have alway s underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
  Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002,

  "He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do."
  Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.

  "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
  Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

  "We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction. "[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...
  Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.

  • 4 June 2005, 00:03

    Wow, after all those quotes, there’s something missing. The difference is, not one of them said "I’m going to put thousands of our best men and women in harms way and kill hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civillians to bring them freedom, without verifying infomation provided by one souce that is not very credible."

  • 4 June 2005, 14:44

    "We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction. "[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...
    Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

    I notice you are unable to quote Kerry’s words in the Context that they were spoken which when compared to what we know now with the revelations of the Downing Street Memo, is that Senator Kerry’s Speech on January 23, 2003 was profound and should be recognized as containing the correct policy to pursue on Iraq, IE, allowing the UN to peacefully disarm Iraq or verify Iraq’s compliance backed by the full threat of US military force and power....... Kerry was right and Bush was wrong to have decided to invade Iraq whether or not the UN could conduct inspections that worked.

    Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003: Second, without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses.

    He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. He miscalculated an eight-year war with Iran. He miscalculated the invasion of Kuwait. He miscalculated America’s response to that act of naked aggression. And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction.

    That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm.

    So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War. Regrettably the current Administration failed to take the opportunity to bring this issue to the United Nations two years ago or immediately after September 11th, when we had such unity of spirit with our allies. When it finally did speak, it was with hasty war talk instead of a coherent call for Iraqi disarmament. And that made it possible for other Arab regimes to shift their focus to the perils of war for themselves rather than keeping the focus on the perils posed by Saddam’s deadly arsenal. Indeed, for a time, the Administration’s unilateralism, in effect, elevated Saddam in the eyes of his neighbors to a level he never would have achieved on his own, undermining America’s standing with most of the coalition partners which had joined us in repelling the invasion of Kuwait a decade ago.

    In U.N. Security Council Resolution 1441, the United Nations has now affirmed that Saddam Hussein must disarm or face the most serious consequences. Let me make it clear that the burden is resoundingly on Saddam Hussein to live up to the ceasefire agreement he signed and make clear to the world how he disposed of weapons he previously admitted to possessing. But the burden is also clearly on the Bush Administration to do the hard work of building a broad coalition at the U.N. and the necessary work of educating America about the rationale for war.

    As I have said frequently and repeat here today, the United States should never go to war because it wants to, the United States should go to war because we have to. And we don’t have to until we have exhausted the remedies available, built legitimacy and earned the consent of the American people, absent, of course, an imminent threat requiring urgent action.

    The Administration must pass this test. I believe they must take the time to do the hard work of diplomacy. They must do a better job of making their case to the American people and to the world.

    I have no doubt of the outcome of war itself should it be necessary. We will win. But what matters is not just what we win but what we lose. We need to make certain that we have not unnecessarily twisted so many arms, created so many reluctant partners, abused the trust of Congress, or strained so many relations, that the longer term and more immediate vital war on terror is made more difficult. And we should be particularly concerned that we do not go alone or essentially alone if we can avoid it, because the complications and costs of post-war Iraq would be far better managed and shared with United Nation’s participation. And, while American security must never be ceded to any institution or to another institution’s decision, I say to the President, show respect for the process of international diplomacy because it is not only right, it can make America stronger - and show the world some appropriate patience in building a genuine coalition. Mr. President, do not rush to war.

  • 4 June 2005, 20:19

    Do not confuse the meaning of the memo......the war was preplanned that is against the Consitution of the United States. He put his hand on the Bible and swore to uphold the Constitution. Bush has violated that oath. The statements made by other Republicans and Democrats are immaterial to the info in the memo. This is not a we were all wrong issue.

    The other members of congress did not preplan this war...at least to our knowledge.

• 3 June 2005, 08:15

  Kerry (Skull & Bones member and cousin of GW Bush) is a completely discredited individual. He is an establishment player and only comes out of his hole to do damage limitation. This is a classic distraction tactic to take the heat off Bush. Watch how Kerry will waffle away about this document and then the whole issue will just disappear once the public outrage has been suitably diffused by him.

  • 7 June 2005, 05:03

    Yes. Ever since the 60’s, Kerry leaps to the head of the column and STOPS. IT. As he stopped Dr. Dean, then threw away the election and split the country until — ta-DA! — the press started paying attention to the voter protests, and there was teevee news time to be had. In addition to his horrible politics, his soldier-cult posing, and his press-hog propensities, he makes even the most interesting subject dead boring. He is SUCH a disaster that he MUST do it on purpose. The man posed in costume alongside a dead goose, for heaven’s sake. And couldn’t even carry his own goose . . .

    Boxer. We want Boxer.

• 3 June 2005, 13:55

  Rep. Conyers
  Rep. Kucinich
  Sen. Boxer

  The REAL champions of democracy.

  Kerry failed us. November 3, 2004, he took a dive.

  • 4 June 2005, 20:22

    Right On...let’s donate to their campaigns...maybe others will wake up

• 3 June 2005, 16:44

  Because Kerry wants to bring up the Downing Street Minutes, that proves he believes the 2008 election was rigged? The leap of logic is so great that I can’t begin to follow it.

• 3 June 2005, 16:53

  The actual exit polling indications were that the democrats were nervous and worried by 1:00 PM EST on election day. The info. came from a top democrat operative on election day. The top operatives were preparing for a challenge to the results even before the election results were known. They just don’t like to lose. Nothing like a little denial, oh how could we lose.

  X

• 3 June 2005, 17:10

  Poor little Steve - the election was stolen and everything is Bush’s fault.

  • 4 June 2005, 20:55

    For the record, that paranthetical comment at the bottom of the story was added by someone other than me, and I have no idea whom.
    Link to the original:
    http://www.southcoasttoday.com/daily/06-05/06-02-05/a01lo167.htm
    Steve Urbon

  • 6 June 2005, 04:37

    Steve -Thanks for clearing that up!!

    The way it is written it looks like your personal comment that you added here but kept out of the newspaper. I thought it puzzling that you did such a good job on this article, and also the one I just saw on Kids First, and yet expressed the attitude I see above.

    Mystery solved!! So I will thank you for doing a great job of reporting on Senator Kerry. Thanks!!

• 3 June 2005, 17:18

  Maybe somebody better go ask Rycroft about just exactly what he meant when he wrote what he thought Dearlove was telling them based on a few minutes of meetings with Colin Powell!

  Isn’t it more plausible that Rycroft was building a case of his own for defending Blairs position by intimating a third party knew what was going on in Bush’s head as a result of a meeting with Colin Powell?

  By the way, the dictionary definition of "fix" does not automatically mean "rigged" except to the 2 percenters here that HATE BUSH! It can mean adjust, amend, solidify, and a host of other terms.

  I guess SOMEBODY better ask Rycroft BEFORE they get embaressed on this. It seems strange that the BBC has not run anything on this since before the Blair election a month ago —doesn’t it?

• 3 June 2005, 19:12

  It was fixed long before 2002 or maybe Saddam did have WMD and that’s why we raped ppl at abu ghraib, so we could find out intelligence that we knew didn’t exist. Yup, that’s it. Rinse Wash Repeat.

  

• 3 June 2005, 22:47

  According to the Pentagon, in 2002 coalition forces bombed Iraq on 78 separate days in an attempt to provoke a belligerant response from Saddam in order to use it as a pretext for an invasion with ground forces. Saddam did not take the bait. The Downing Street memo is a non-issue and Kerry’s bleatings about it now only goes to show what a cypher he truly is.

  Someone mentioned it - he’s just puffing himself up to his constituents for his reelection bid in 06.

  Check the bombing record at ccmep.org/usbombingwatch/2005.htm

• 4 June 2005, 06:35

  IT TAKES A REAL PERSON TO STAND UP FOR WHAT IS RIGHT. IT TAKES A REAL PERSON TO DEMAND THE TRUTH. ONLY A COWARD WOULD NOT UNDERSTAND THESE COURAGE TO CHALLEGE AND DEMAND HONESTY WHEN CREDIBILITY IS IN QUESTION. ONLY A GENUINE LEADER CAN EXERCISE BLUNTNESS WITH EASE AND GRACE. A VERY BASIC HUMAN KNOWLEDGE IS ...IF YOU HAVE NOT DONE SOMETHING WRONG THEN YOU HAVE THE POWER OF THE TRUTH WITH YOU. IF YOU ARE HIDING SOMETHING WRONG THEN YOU WILL BE DESPARATELY DO ANYTHING TO HIDE THIS. MANY HONEST RECOGNIZE OTHER HONEST PEOPLE. ANY HINT OF IMPURITY OR BLEMISH WILL BE RECOGNIZE. MANY PEOPLE IN WHITE WHO IS KNOCK DOWN IN SOIL WILL NOT COME OUT CLEAN EVEN IF THEY TRY TO DUST THEMSELVES OFF. Simple advice...maintain your color...don’t expose it to bleach and don’t risk associating with any dirt. You can keep yourself clean by being careful and watching your speed.

  If Mr. Kerry does intend and do demand an explanation to this horrible allegation...I salute him. He is doing his job as expected by the people who elected him. He is merely exercising leadership and not abusing it. I applaud Senator Conyer and all the rest that are demanding an answer. The sooner we get an answer the sooner we can put this behing us.

  THANK FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP AND COURAGE.

• 4 June 2005, 07:33

  Just like the Clinton’s, Kerry is a neo-con.
  We have very few, in either party,with the balls to stand up to the neo-cons.To bad George Calloway is a brit,he had the balls,he neutered Sen. Levin and castrated Coleman.
  The memo will be disassembled by those that dissemble,for those that do the ’dis n’ dat’ for the shrub,it will be childs play (no-balls dems will studder,instead of act)
  Then there will be more progress in Iraq,the ’hard work’ shrub must endure to allow wall street too slice up what little will be left over after SS retirement,and pension cancelings, after Enron United etc.etc.
  Magically the deficit will de dissallowed disavowed disemboweled,and Laura Bush will win the teacher of the year award for discovering the true meaning of whatever the hell her husband thinks while Karl Rove’s not around.
  And does anyone know how many mexican marines it will take too secure the Iraqi oil fields? because thats something not even a republican would do.
  Paddle Foot

• 4 June 2005, 20:57

  That parenthetical editorial comment at the bottom of the story was added by someone other than Steve Urbon.
  Just check the original link.

• 5 June 2005, 14:19

  It’s important that we remain focused on the issue at hand. I assure you the Bush Administration will try to somehow to spin the issue. Keep in mind this Administration will say and do anything to win. This is the Party that took a war veteran and former POW, John McCain, and war veteran, John Kerry, and literally spun their service records to make a draft dodger seem more patriotic! This President is guilty of the most horrible of war crimes. This is not to be an issue of right and left...ALL Americans should unite and tell the World..."We’ll show you how a Democracy works"... Mr. Bush...YOU’RE FIRED!

• 6 June 2005, 11:48

  THIS MEMO HAD NOT BEEN RELEASED UNTIL LAST MONTH. THERE IS NO WAY SENATOR KERRY KNEW OF THIS UNTIL THEN.
  I THINK WE ALL KNOW THAT IT DIDNT MATTER WHO RAN AGAINST BUSH IN 2004, HE WOULD WON NO MATTER WHAT..ITS PART OF HIS GLOBAL POWER PLAN, AND THIS ADMIN WAS NOT GOING TO LET ANYONE STOP IT.
  INSTEAD OF ANGER, WE ALL NEED TO RALLY AROUND SENATOR KERRY AND SUPPORT HIS EFFORT IN EDUCATING THE PUBLIC ON THIS MATTER. THIS IS VERY SERIOUS, STOP PLAYING THE GRUDGE GAME AND LETS HIT HARD...WE THE PEOPLE CAN DO IT AS LONG AS WE ALL BECOME UNITED.
  IT’S NEVER TO LATE. BUSH MUST BE HELD RESPONSIBLE!

  • 6 June 2005, 19:36

    Kerry might be trying to save face, but that’s such a minute issue relative to this memo. This memo is a piece of evidence of war crimes commited by the Bush admin.

    What’s worth debating, war crimes, or run-of-the-mill political manuvering?

• 7 June 2005, 05:05

  Yes. Ever since the 60’s, Kerry leaps to the head of the column and STOPS. IT. As he stopped Dr. Dean, then threw away the election and split the country until — ta-DA! — the press started paying attention to the voter protests, and there was teevee news time to be had. In addition to his horrible politics, his soldier-cult posing, and his press-hog propensities, he makes even the most interesting subject dead boring. He is SUCH a disaster that he MUST do it on purpose. The man posed in costume alongside a dead goose, for heaven’s sake.
  Boxer. We want Boxer.

• 18 June 2005, 00:57

  What is the point of criticism of Kerry? The lies by Bush and Blair and their admin’s cannot and should not be overshadowed by extraneous bull---- by the stubborn remaining supporters of Bush.