View Story | 281 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
If this suvey has been diaried to death, I apologize and am happy to delete.
by LithiumCola on Tue Dec 25, 2007 at 07:45:46 PM PDT
In fact, I've actually been waiting for a diary on it, having read the questionnaire with great interest and being too ___ to write one myself. So thanks, LC, for this. It's like a kinda Xmas present!
It made me worry a bit about Edwards, toward whom I've lately been leaning...
Seul l'incrédule a droit au miracle. - Elias Canetti Road2DC
by srkp23 on Tue Dec 25, 2007 at 07:57:56 PM PDT
[ Parent ]
defend Edwards here, there are ways to do it. I would rather have had more straightforward answers from him though!
by LithiumCola on Tue Dec 25, 2007 at 08:02:25 PM PDT
In #2 he says he opposes preventitive war, which is exactly what the question is about, and says that the 02 AUMF does not cover Iran. I think its clear that means no. It does to me anyhow.
In #7 He says we should NEVER torture, and that he would oppose a veto of the bill. Read together it seems unambiguous to me. If he thinks the statute doesn't legally prevent it who cares whether its vetoed or not.
Really, I don't see any question as to whether he believes that the law permits an attack on Iran, he says no preventitive war and that is exactly what your scenario describes. If we were attacked by Iran, then it would not be preventitive.
"Time to focus on McCain and kicking his McAss." Angry Mouse
by NearlyNormal on Tue Dec 25, 2007 at 09:17:53 PM PDT
I don't know which was more disturbing, Romney's responses or Giuliani's and Huckabee's refusal to answer the questions.
Clearly, the constitution is not of any concern to these men.
All in all, good answers from the Dems. Edwards seemed to try and put campaign soundbites into his answers (like on number 2). I didn't find anything overly disconcerting in his responses though. I have no reason to doubt his commitment to the constitution.
Obama's answers were well reasoned, refreshingly answering each question with clear explanations. Being a con law professor, I expected good answers from him and got them. Clinton's were also very good, although not as elaborative as Obama's.
On the whole, I didn't find anything worrying in the Democrats' responses. I was pretty encouraged with our big 3. The Republicans, no surprise, are a disaster on these issues. I need to register a Boston.com account so I can read the rest.
by dmfox on Tue Dec 25, 2007 at 10:21:19 PM PDT
..I don't blame Edwards for trying to inject soundbites into his answers here.
It's shameful that the media doesn't give a third of the coverage to someone who is generally getting the same percentage of a following as Hillary and Obama. They don't want it to be a three-way race when a two-way Obama-Hillary is so much more 'newsy' for them.
I'm still an Edwards supporter, and a Patriots fan. Not having the best year here...
by Stymnus on Wed Dec 26, 2007 at 04:52:09 AM PDT
"We need a post-Bush, post-9/11, post-Iraq American military that is mission-focused on protecting Americans from 21st century threats, not misused for discredited ideological pursuits. We need to recognize that we have far more powerful weapons available to us than just bombs, and we need to bring them to bear. We need to reengage the world with the full weight of our moral leadership." Edwards’ plan for rebuilding America’s military is based on principles that look beyond Iraq, toward determining and providing the necessary resources; modernizing forces to meet the national security missions of the new century; and clarifying the role of our military, as America restores its moral leadership in the world. Take on Broader Challenges: Ensuring national security requires more than the exercise of raw power. Fighting global warming will also protect our security interests -- a recent report authored by a group of top military leaders said that, if unchecked, global warming could lead to civil strife, genocide, and increased terrorism. Solving global poverty is a moral imperative, but it is also a security issue -- global poverty increases the risk to America by providing a safe harbor for instability, extremism, and terrorism. Living up to our American ideals by protecting basic freedoms will help us avoid actions that give terrorists or even other nations an excuse to abandon international law.
"We need a post-Bush, post-9/11, post-Iraq American military that is mission-focused on protecting Americans from 21st century threats, not misused for discredited ideological pursuits. We need to recognize that we have far more powerful weapons available to us than just bombs, and we need to bring them to bear. We need to reengage the world with the full weight of our moral leadership."
Edwards’ plan for rebuilding America’s military is based on principles that look beyond Iraq, toward determining and providing the necessary resources; modernizing forces to meet the national security missions of the new century; and clarifying the role of our military, as America restores its moral leadership in the world.
Take on Broader Challenges: Ensuring national security requires more than the exercise of raw power. Fighting global warming will also protect our security interests -- a recent report authored by a group of top military leaders said that, if unchecked, global warming could lead to civil strife, genocide, and increased terrorism.
Solving global poverty is a moral imperative, but it is also a security issue -- global poverty increases the risk to America by providing a safe harbor for instability, extremism, and terrorism. Living up to our American ideals by protecting basic freedoms will help us avoid actions that give terrorists or even other nations an excuse to abandon international law.
http://johnedwards.com/... ----
Edwards: "We HAVE to stand up to this President" by jamess - Sat Nov 03, 2007
http://www.dailykos.com/... ----
Bumper stickers, bin Laden, and more Bait and Switch by jamess - Fri Nov 02, 2007
Not hard power. Not soft power. Smart power. by jamess - Sat Sep 01, 2007
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act -- George Orwell
by jamess on Wed Dec 26, 2007 at 05:50:32 AM PDT
Docudharma
by LithiumCola on Tue Dec 25, 2007 at 08:09:35 PM PDT
...a few observations:
So, who do I predict will win the nominations:
Sick.
PATRIOT I+II, MCA, FISA CAPITULATION, NOW TORTURE. YOUR COUNTRY IS SLOWLY BEING DISMANTLED. WHAT R U GONNA DO ABOUT IT?
by maxschell on Tue Dec 25, 2007 at 10:03:40 PM PDT
is that Romney is probably the only candidate on the Republican side who will make Hillary appear warm, spontaneous and human. I think he will be a DISASTER for the Republicans if he takes it.
by Mother of Zeus on Wed Dec 26, 2007 at 06:38:15 AM PDT
question #4
Under what circumstances, if any, would you sign a bill into law but also issue a signing statement reserving a constitutional right to bypass the law? I strongly disagree with President Bush's use of signing statements as back-door vetoes and permission slips to disregard laws he finds inconvenient or objectionable. As president, I will return to the way that signing statements have been used historically. No one, including the president, is above the law.
I strongly disagree with President Bush's use of signing statements as back-door vetoes and permission slips to disregard laws he finds inconvenient or objectionable. As president, I will return to the way that signing statements have been used historically. No one, including the president, is above the law.
Sums it up I'd say.
"You are more than the sum of what you consume, desire is not an occupation" KMFDM - Dogma
by Chaoslillith on Tue Dec 25, 2007 at 09:48:35 PM PDT
Do you agree or disagree with the statement made by former Attorney General Gonzales in January 2007 that nothing in the Constitution confers an affirmative right to habeas corpus, separate from any statutory habeas rights Congress might grant or take away? I disagree.
I disagree.
by Chaoslillith on Tue Dec 25, 2007 at 09:49:56 PM PDT
Is there any executive power the Bush administration has claimed or exercised that you think is unconstitutional? Anything you think is simply a bad idea? Our Founding Fathers believed deeply in a system of checks and balances among the three branches of government. Whether on signing statements, disregard for the Geneva Conventions, or violation of the established FISA process to authorize warrantless and illegal spying on American citizens, the Bush administration has repeatedly attempted to increase the power of the executive branch relative to the judiciary and legislative branches, which does damage to the constitutional design of our government and violates our constitutional traditions. We do not have a royal presidency. We do not have a king of the United States of America. Whatever George Bush thinks, he is not king. And it's important for the American people to understand that their president respects them and understands that the Oval Office and the White House and the presidency doesn't belong to one person. It belongs to the American people.
Our Founding Fathers believed deeply in a system of checks and balances among the three branches of government. Whether on signing statements, disregard for the Geneva Conventions, or violation of the established FISA process to authorize warrantless and illegal spying on American citizens, the Bush administration has repeatedly attempted to increase the power of the executive branch relative to the judiciary and legislative branches, which does damage to the constitutional design of our government and violates our constitutional traditions. We do not have a royal presidency. We do not have a king of the United States of America. Whatever George Bush thinks, he is not king. And it's important for the American people to understand that their president respects them and understands that the Oval Office and the White House and the presidency doesn't belong to one person. It belongs to the American people.
Some of his answers are a bit vague...which is weird for Edwards however the bulk of them are to the point and appropriate.
by Chaoslillith on Tue Dec 25, 2007 at 09:55:34 PM PDT
Those are good answers.
by LithiumCola on Tue Dec 25, 2007 at 10:01:11 PM PDT
"...it's important for the American people to understand that their president respects them...."
Of course we DON'T have a president who respects us, and what JE means to say is that we want and should have a president who respects us.
I too have no concerns about Edwards weaseling on these questions. I think you're over-parsing, LC, a habit we all have needed to get into over the past seven years.
-7.88, -6.72. "Wherever law ends, tyranny begins."--John Locke IMPEACH THE BASTARDS!!!
by caseynm on Wed Dec 26, 2007 at 07:33:58 AM PDT
you've dared to enter the candidate fray. Be afraid.
John McCain, 100 years in Iraq "fine with me"
by taylormattd on Tue Dec 25, 2007 at 09:58:12 PM PDT
a candidate! Sheez!
But some folks are saying that in this diary I displayed some bias. I made note of it and I hope people take it into account.
by LithiumCola on Tue Dec 25, 2007 at 10:00:01 PM PDT
of the most fair minded people at this site LC (not to mention one of the best writers). I would hope any and all candidate partisans would recognize that.
But I guess I'm cracking up a bit because folks who don't participate in these diaries very regularly don't realize that even when they believe they have posted a fair, neutral comment or diary, they will be descended upon by battle-weary kossacks seeking to protect their candidate.
Welcome LithiumCola!
by taylormattd on Tue Dec 25, 2007 at 10:05:12 PM PDT
And I'm glad I could provide a laugh!
by LithiumCola on Tue Dec 25, 2007 at 10:07:04 PM PDT
I hope you will continue to write such informative and straightforward diaries. This is what candidate diaries should be.
by taylormattd on Tue Dec 25, 2007 at 10:34:52 PM PDT
...that facts have a liberal bias.
Proud Sponsor of Hope '08My Political (and moral) Compass: -9.00, -8.72
by bmozaffari on Tue Dec 25, 2007 at 10:36:13 PM PDT
towards the president's fully respecting and abiding by the constitution.
We need more such bias.
Sic transit gloria mundi - ancient Roman proverb
by kovie on Wed Dec 26, 2007 at 01:21:36 AM PDT
on your depiction of Edwards answer to be the same as Romneys. Total and complete bullshit.
That interpretation is absurd.
"There is one man who knows in his heart that we have to build one America - not two - and that man is Barack Obama." John Edwards 5/14/08
by TomP on Wed Dec 26, 2007 at 05:25:29 AM PDT
They just don't get it. We need a smart strategy
All American Patriots
John Edwards: Edwards Statement On Giuliani And Romney Comments
05/29/2007
Chapel Hill, North Carolina – Senator John Edwards released the following statement today following Republican presidential candidates Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney's comments on the Bush doctrine of a "Global War on Terror."
"George Bush has made America less safe and less respected in the world. The Republican candidates are now trying to double down on his failed foreign policy. They just don't get it. George Bush's strategy is a failure - the threat of terrorism has increased. We don't need more political huffing and puffing, we need a smart strategy that uses American power to stop terrorists from hurting us and to stop people from becoming terrorists in the first place. That's why I laid out a comprehensive plan to build a strong military focused on protecting Americans and to use all the tools available to us to defeat terror groups and restore our moral leadership."
"George Bush has made America less safe and less respected in the world. The Republican candidates are now trying to double down on his failed foreign policy.
They just don't get it. George Bush's strategy is a failure - the threat of terrorism has increased. We don't need more political huffing and puffing, we need a smart strategy that uses American power to stop terrorists from hurting us and to stop people from becoming terrorists in the first place.
That's why I laid out a comprehensive plan to build a strong military focused on protecting Americans and to use all the tools available to us to defeat terror groups and restore our moral leadership."
http://www.allamericanpatriots.com/...
by jamess on Wed Dec 26, 2007 at 05:44:02 AM PDT
by jamess on Wed Dec 26, 2007 at 05:53:40 AM PDT
wide narrow
View Story | 281 comments