Biden-Lugar

Here's a poll:

•  Re: Biden/Lugar History

  I can't see polls in my OS X Safari browser, so let me comment instead.

  While the details of this are slightly intricate, they're pretty damn straightforward too:

  Both Biden/Lugar and the eventual resolution both did not require Bush to go back to Congress for further authorization.

  The only difference between Biden/Lugar and the eventual resolution is that Biden/Lugar required Bush to submit a piece of paper to Congress saying that Iraq had WMD's or that Iraq posed a grave threat.

  Howard Dean supported Biden/Lugar at the time.  He did not comment on the eventual resolution at the time.

  ---

  It is true that Howard Dean spoke out earlier and louder than the other candidates.  But any rational reading of events would indicate that had he been in Congress, he would have voted in favor of the war resolution.

  by Petey on Sun Jan 25, 2004 at 03:15:42 PM PDT

  •  OSX/ Safari, and more

    I see the polls just fine, and I'm using Safary and OSX 10.2.8 (haven't made the leap to Panther yet).  Do they show up with IE?  That's just kind of wierd.

    You cite the key:

    The only difference between Biden/Lugar and the eventual resolution is that Biden/Lugar required Bush to submit a piece of paper to Congress saying that Iraq had WMD's or that Iraq posed a grave threat.

    If Bush does this, and it turns out to be false (which we know it has), then Bush has lied to Congress, an impeachable offense.  Without it--in other words, under the IWR that passed--there is no recourse or consequence for the Bush's misleading of the Congress and the people.

    by folkbum on Sun Jan 25, 2004 at 03:38:30 PM PDT

    •  And

      
      And as it was clear at the time for all interested observers and all presidential candidates deserving the job, the evidence was more than a little flimsy.
      

      by Felix Deutsch on Sun Jan 25, 2004 at 03:46:43 PM PDT

    •  Yup.

      You're right, and that's why Bush, at the time, claimed that Biden/Lugar put too many restrictions on the administration, and had it squashed. Claiming that there's really no difference between B/L and what actually got passed is deceptive.

      Bush would have been forced to certify the very things he is now claiming he never actually claimed (i.e. I never said Iraq was an imminent threat, etc). Biden/Lugar would have put Bush at risk of either being impeached or showing proof of the need for war, a burden he clearly did not want.

      by justinb on Sun Jan 25, 2004 at 03:48:07 PM PDT

      •  Re: Yup

        "Claiming that there's really no difference between B/L and what actually got passed is deceptive."

        not really.

        Bush would have had to certify that he had a UN resolution OR that Iraq had WMD's OR that Iraq was a 'grave threat'.

        since he claimed 2 of those things in a speech before congress, do you think a piece of paper would make any difference?

        the White House opposed Biden/Lugar for the same reason that Edwards, Kerry, and Dean supported it.  it would have given a very small political card to the Dems if Bush waged the war as psychotically as they all feared, and as he eventually did.

        by Petey on Sun Jan 25, 2004 at 04:25:17 PM PDT

    •  Question

      Did any member of the admnistation go before Conrgress to testify "that Iraq had WMD's or that Iraq posed a grave threat" at any time in the run-up to the vote or the war?

      I have a hard time believing they didn't. If so they should be in jeopardy now if your logic is to be followed. I have not heard peep one on this score.
      

      by JPP on Sun Jan 25, 2004 at 03:49:57 PM PDT

    •  Re: more

      "If Bush does this, and it turns out to be false (which we know it has), then Bush has lied to Congress, an impeachable offense.  Without it--in other words, under the IWR that passed--there is no recourse or consequence for the Bush's misleading of the Congress and the people."

      This is why Edwards, Kerry, and Dean all preferred Biden/Lugar.

      But do you really think this would be impeachable?  There's no "lie".  The administration just produces the estimate they bullied the CIA into making that says Iraq has WMD's.  Case closed.

      No matter how you slice it, the Biden/Lugar certification was mere window-dressing.  And my larger point is that if Kerry and Edwards were wrong in their war resolution vote, then Dean was just as wrong to express support for Biden/Lugar and silence for the IWR.

      And as I said in my first post, Dean did speak out earlier and louder against the war than the other major candidates.  But it still seems odd to me under the circumstances for Dean supporters to be so appalled at Kerry and Edwards voting for the IWR.

      by Petey on Sun Jan 25, 2004 at 04:32:36 PM PDT

    •  Re: OS X & Safari

      "I see the polls just fine, and I'm using Safary and OSX 10.2.8 (haven't made the leap to Panther yet).  Do they show up with IE?  That's just kind of wierd."

      Yup.  I'm on Panther.  And I'm not willing to use IE just for dKos polls.

      BTW, you should make the leap when you can.  Everything is snappier under Panther.

      by Petey on Sun Jan 25, 2004 at 04:35:11 PM PDT

      •  um

        I have Panther and I use Safari - everything comes up perfectly.  Don't know what's up w/yours though.

        by alli at notre dame on Sun Jan 25, 2004 at 04:37:44 PM PDT

  •  get a better browser

    Camino or Mozilla (download for OSX here)

    by Felix Deutsch on Sun Jan 25, 2004 at 03:50:22 PM PDT

    •  Re: get a better browser

      "Get a better browser Camino or Mozilla "

      nah.  i love Safari.  (although, i am kinda jazzed about the upcoming OmniWeb 5).

      by Petey on Sun Jan 25, 2004 at 04:20:50 PM PDT