Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by zimv20, Apr 30, 2007.
direct video link
This from Dick Turbin? I mean Durbin? Color me shocked!
are you saying you don't believe him?
No, I think he's saying that he'll call him a juvenile name instead of responding to the substance.
is that the *next* to last refuge of a scoundrel?
Or the first refuge of a playground bully.
Remind me, 'cause I really don't know, which way did Durbin vote on the war?
And besides that, if the White House is lying to the country to start a war and you know it, aren't you obligated to say something, secrecy be-damned?
Shall we make a list of US politicians who knew better than to believe the swill that George Bush, Dick Cheney, and the neocons were peddling in the run up to the Iraq invasion? It's a long list. If you remove the very few (Al Gore, Barack Obama, etc.) who had the courage to stand up and say this is wrong, what you are left with is a list of political cowards who put their careers before the interest of country and humanity. While it is informative that Durbin now tells us he knew Bush was lying, it also places him, along with the rest of the Senate Intelligence Committee, just behind Colin Powell, George Tenent, and many others who through their cowardice enabled Bush and Cheney to get away with their crimes. It's a little late, Senator Durbin.
He voted no. I'm with you one of them should have risked jail and said it was a pack of lies.
edit: in 2002 the Democrats controlled the Senate and had a majority of 9 to 8 on the Intelligence Committee. The Democrats on the committee were: Graham of Florida (the Chairman,) Levin, Rockefeller, Feinstein, Wyden, Durbin, Bayh, Edwards, and Mikulski. The Republicans were: Shelby, Kyl, Inhofe, Hatch, Roberts, DeWine, Thompson, and Lugar. Only Durbin, Graham, Levin, Wyden, and Mikulski voted against. None spoke up to say the intelligence didn't support the war.
agreed. i wonder how much he lobbied his fellow dems: "i have information you don't, and i'm voting against."
Actually, Durbin himself says the voted against the war, together with half of the committee that heard that "evidence".
And I agree, he could've done more to speak out agains the war. Without revealing secrets, he could have said truthfully: "that's not what we heard in secret briefings - I can't tell you what we heard - but I can tell you this is not what we heard". Now, maybe legally he couldn't - I have not looked at the law as it pertains to this. Anyhow, even so, there were other ways to speak out.
Yet, while we happily beat up the guy who wasn't quite as fast running to put out the flames as we wish he were, why are some of these critics not similarly outraged by the guys who actually started the fire and are still stoking it as we speak?
While I don't think we have to beat up on people who lacked the courage at the time we all needed it, but I sure don't want to make heroes out of them for staying quiet. One can say that and still know who is really responsible for this war. The blood is clearly on the hands of President, the Vice-President, and the ideologues who pushed for it from 1991 on.
Oh, it wasn't half the committee who voted against the war resolution, it was half the Democrats (5 out of 9.)
Correct on all points.
Indeed, Democrats (I guess it would've been too much to expect Republicans to actually do the right thing for a change, my bad).
If Durbin is telling the truth, which I don't doubt he is, then the real question becomes how on earth could the following Senators have voted for the resolution?
Democrats: Rockefeller, Feinstein, Bayh, and Edwards.
Republicans: Shelby, Kyl, Inhofe, Hatch, Roberts, DeWine, Thompson, and Lugar.
while i find it horrible that he didn't do more to stop the war from stopping, i do think him coming forth now is a good thing, and almost applaudable. he could've let it be swept under the carpet, but at least he's not letting that happen. i just want to know why its taken this long for him to say something, or if something else is at play.
I'm with most of you: angry and disappointed at the Dems on the intelligence committee. They didn't have to give out any details; but for Durbin to stand there and tell you his hands were tied -- bull****! He could have said, "I can't tell you why, but as a member of the intelligence committee I am strongly recommending you vote against invading Iraq."
This is absolutely nuts. A stupid, venal or crazy president (or some combination of all three) pushing hard for a pointless, hopeless war, with his political enemies acting as enablers.
Of course I don't.
Even though everything he's saying turned out to be true? Have you watched the video? Are you even going to tell us why you don't trust Durbin, or is this another baseless hit and run where you don't actually say anything?
And no, if the info was marked as classified, he couldn't have said anything.