I agree with ralphbon- Gore alienated a lot of moderate/left Dems with his VP choice- among the many factors that cost him the election.
Looks like Kerry thought a bit more clearly on that. I don’t think McCain was ever really in the cards, but it’s certainly a shame for his campaign that Dean wasn’t interested.

Posted by: æ | Jul 6 2004 14:59 utc | 4

So, Nader told Kerry a couple of weeks ago to pick Edwards for VP. What will Nader do now? And what will swinge voters (between Nader and Kerry) do now?
Bonus question: Edwards was a trial lawyer suing big business for the sake of the little guy, which wasn’t that far from what Nader did; Edwards is bashing Bush on the 2 Americas and the huge divide between the haves and have-nots, which could show to potential Naderites that there is some hope with the Dems. Discuss.
😉

Posted by: CluelessJoe | Jul 6 2004 15:17 utc | 6

Clearly Lurch’s better half had to be someone with spunk and zest. The breck girl has the needed sheen.
He is pretty and successful and can really stay on message. And that is what’s important here–Edwards’ message: The Two Americas
In the other thread there was some talk of a civil war. Well here we go: Civil war talk right out of the mouth of wealthy white southerner. How do you like them apples?
Edwards’ The Two Americas speech is about a real war going on right now in this country. The growing divide between the haves and the have nots. He is the prime purveyor of that message.
So the battle has been joined. And we have a one-two punch:
Kerry trying to represent the middle class, and Edwards the only mainstream politician on the planet who speaks of the poor.
Sound the trumpets…let the war begin…

Posted by: koreyel | Jul 6 2004 15:29 utc | 8

If it had been Gephart,
I might have had to resort to the Willie Loman or Sylvia Plath “Final Solution”.

Posted by: FLASHHARRY | Jul 6 2004 15:34 utc | 10

Besides,
My candidate, Wesley Clark, would be best running Defense or State anyway.
Folks, I think this was about the best we could have hoped for: I think it gives us a real chance of winning.

Posted by: FLASHHARRY | Jul 6 2004 15:39 utc | 12

My heart belongs to Dennis but I am content with this. There is so much work to do. Maybe Kerry – Edwards will be a jump start.

Posted by: Anonymous | Jul 6 2004 15:41 utc | 14

quoth CluelessJoe:
And what will swing voters (between Nader and Kerry) do now?
I can’t see Kerry’s VP pick having a significant effect on the Nader crowd. Sure, he’s got those trial lawyer and son-of-a-mill-worker creds, but Kerry’s still the target of their criticisms and bringing Edwards onboard isn’t going to change Kerry’s voting record, or desire to send more troops over to Iraq, or stance vis-a-vis Israel.

Posted by: Anonymous | Jul 6 2004 15:48 utc | 16

“Edwards was at his home in Georgetown when Kerry called, readying his two young children for summer camp. Kerry called from his Pittsburgh home.” ( wire)
uhh, I thought he was the Senator from Massachusettes? How many damn ‘homes’ does he have, anyway? I’d guess that particular home might be his wife’s, technically.

Posted by: æ | Jul 6 2004 16:33 utc | 18

Excerpts from Rep Jesse Jackson Jr’s Press Release:
“Of all the candidates, Senator Edwards was the best campaigner, had the strongest message, and finished a strong second to Senator Kerry during the Democratic primaries. Senator Edwards has character. Even under heavy pressure to go negative against Senator Kerry during the primaries, Senator Edwards resisted. …
“Senator Edwards had a strong populist message of “One America” during the campaign. He talked about ending America’s separate and unequal educational system, often saying it was a moral disgrace that we tolerated poverty in the richest nation on earth. In other words, Senator Edwards’ heart is in the right place. So once again, if the choice is between Sen. Edwards’ heart and Vice President Cheney’s heart, I trust the American people to choose Sen. Edwards’ heart.
“The Republicans are charging that Senator Edwards was Senator Kerry’s second choice. In 2000 Dick Cheney led Bush’s search team for a Vice President – and won a no-bid contest. He chose himself first. Vice President Cheney is number one in no-bid contests and no-bid contracts! Who could top the chutzpah of Dick Cheney?” Jackson concluded.

Posted by: ck | Jul 6 2004 16:53 utc | 20

@remembereringgiap
Who do you want?
PS: Still mad at me?

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Jul 6 2004 17:42 utc | 22

“Edwards the only mainstream politician on the planet who speaks of the poor”
There are others in America. Well, Latin America, that is. Chavez for instance. There also was Aristide some time ago.
Gini: Yep, had enough statistics to know it – and definitely not only used for income distribution.

Posted by: Clueless Joe | Jul 6 2004 17:49 utc | 24

let me put it even more plainly
if by the end of next month there are substantive indictement being enforced by the slave judiciary against prominent members of this administration including bush – then i would feel less melancholic
at this moment edwards is a sideshow
still steel

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jul 6 2004 18:23 utc | 26

@ RG – many in the US also fear that Bush/Cheney will do ANYTHING to stay in power, so – one idea I have heard is to examine all possible dirty tricks they could pull, and have a strategy in place to counter/deal with them, including the so-called tinfoil hat ideas. I was tired during the Clinton years of hearing US progressives say “Clinton will take care of it” meaning they did not have to do any hard work to defend their agenda or protect those most at risk. Also glad to see Edwards, because whether sideshow or not, this whole Southern thing is a big deal in the US. The War Party won’t be able to claim an exclusive on the South as they’ve done recently.

Posted by: francoise | Jul 6 2004 18:32 utc | 28

Bernhard, the Syrians and Iranians were called part of the Axis of Evil a long time ago. A long time ago, being the operative phrase. Don’t you think these guys have some contingencies? They have and the rational people (there are some) in the US Gov’t know that their hands are tied.

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Jul 6 2004 19:02 utc | 30

Continuing with the civil war theme:
Juan Cole points out “Edwards’ antipathy to Halliburton and his critique of unbid contracts.” Oh my, this is going to be a delicious juxtaposition of the Two Americas right on stage. The Populist Edwards and Lord Cheney in a debate? She-la-la that’s a hot ticket.
I guarantee this: Edwards will stay so relentlessly on message that the audience is going to need scolding to hold their applause. Pure charm and hope versus gravitas and death.
For the first time since Clinton totally swallowed and shit out his republican opponents in debate fomat… the democrat party has possibilities to drool over.

Posted by: koreyel | Jul 6 2004 19:09 utc | 32

@remembereringgiap
You think the CIA and the Pentagon are buying the Bush Bullshit? Hell, these guys are career pensionables. Don’t worry. I worry about two tethugs as numbers one and two on a US submarine.

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Jul 6 2004 19:31 utc | 34

@cp r´giap
I was not joking. I understand there is a strategy. I understand that they are quite succesfully pursuing this strategie. And I´m afraid that they probably can´t be stopped. If Kerry and Edwards get elected it won´t stop the strategy either, it could probably delay it.

Posted by: Bernhard | Jul 6 2004 21:16 utc | 36

So, are you all convinced that Kerry and Edwards are going to stop the Middle East policies of Bush? I’m not, not by a long shot. These policies are still supported by Aipac in the first place; it’s Sharon who was so gung ho for them. All this emphasis on the oil lobby at the root of these policies is IMO nonsense. As far as I can see, Kerry has more reasons than Lyndon Johnson did to turn this into another Vietnam, and he’s not making big noises about anything that looks like stopping it. So far.
It’s all very well to talk about the “two Americas” and of course that’s important. But if we’re talking about the haves and the have nots then I’m afraid the global picture is not irrelevent here.

Posted by: x | Jul 6 2004 21:25 utc | 38

For those of you familiar with the NY Post (and it’s policies) here’s a laugh:
A NY Post Scoop: Kerry Picks Gephardt!

Posted by: x | Jul 6 2004 21:32 utc | 40

Ooops… let me do that again:
A NY Post Scoop: Kerry Picks Gephardt!

Posted by: x | Jul 6 2004 21:33 utc | 42

A most felicitous selection. Edward’s legal training and experience will be of great value to the Kerry WH. And it seems likely the Dems will need a bold and tenacious legal team to enforce a victory at the ballot box.

Posted by: serial catowner | Jul 6 2004 21:36 utc | 44

I like r’giap’s idea of communities of resistance . We all know that not much of what is really needed to turn this species crisis around will happen just because Kerry & Edwards get elected. However there are still pockets of progressive thought in America. I happen to live in one; Vermont (Leahy, Jeffords, and Bernie Sanders in DC from this state).
Those of you who know me a little from the Bar and the Moon may not be able to fathom this but I’ve just been asked (accosted) by a state democratic representative to run for the state representative seat from my district (two seats, presently both republicans, but in a progressive county.) If I did and took it seriously I feel I could have a decent chance of getting one of the two seats.
I’ve been saying I want something I can do to help make a difference. I’m not a politician but I can stand up and talk a good progressive/humanistic line with credibility. Still, I’ve got to keep on making a living and here in VT a legislature’s pay won’t do it. Which means IF I go for it, it’s just going to complicate my life even more and how effective could I be wearing too hats simultaneously. Think this place might be a place to come to bounce legislative ideas around if I run and then get elected?
We talk and think a lot of global stuff here but what about the acting locally? Or helping those who so choose?
Hope I’m not f**king up again by throwing this into the thread but I try to think of what I can actively do to help the cause of moving our societies in a more rational/humane direction. And y’all are about the only place I can get the intellectual help I need.

Posted by: Anonymous | Jul 6 2004 21:54 utc | 46

So, are you all convinced that Kerry and Edwards are going to stop the Middle East policies of Bush?
nope, I’m certainly not either. But on the domestic front, I can see a meaningful difference between Bush and Kerry. And I suspect it’ll take getting our house in order to address our foreign policy. I think we all have to admit that we’re talking about a very long-term goal when we talk about fixing the systemic problems, as opposed to the short term goal of getting Bush out.
I’m the first to admit that Kerry is really just another turd-in-a-suit, but seriously, who are we going to elect that’s not? Hello- politics, anyone? It’s a shitty profession for people of intergity, because it necessitates compromise.
So… right: Kerry isn’t exactly the cure for this wound, but a second Bush admin will be more like pouring salt on it.
Just to play Devil’s Advocate.

Posted by: æ | Jul 6 2004 21:56 utc | 48

Juannie, regarding my last post:
In the famous words of Emily Litela:
“Never mind.”

Posted by: x | Jul 6 2004 21:58 utc | 50

Can’t wait for the VP debate! John Edwards will win hands down! Just what we need.

Posted by: Lu | Jul 6 2004 22:01 utc | 52

Searching for the link, just found this great blog with information on corporations.
Burma (.pdf)
In Burma, Halliburton joined oil companies in working on two notorious gas pipelines, the Yadana and Yetagun. According to an Earth Rights report, “From 1992 until the present, thousands of villagers in Burma were forced to work in support of these pipelines and related infrastructure, lost their homes due to forced relocation, and were raped, tortured and killed by soldiers hired by the companies as security guards for the pipelines. One of Halliburton’s projects was undertaken during Dick Cheney’s tenure as CEO.”

Posted by: fauxreal | Jul 6 2004 22:05 utc | 54

fauxreal:
which tie in to the abuses in Iraq, if you ask me…shows a pattern of disregard for humans, as opposed to corporate fucks.
Just to pick a little at this here — while I’m sure you’re right about the hand-in-glove behavior of corporations (esp. big oil) and control of local governments, I’m not so sure that it’s the sole or even major source of inspiration for Iraq.
Oil companies — and all corporations — need stability to do what they want to do. They do not need the kind of upheaval and uncertainty the Iraq war has created. They need regimes they can rely on for things like contracts, to know their pipelines aren’t going to blown up every other week, or the government’s not likely to change every few days. Instability is not their thing. The neocon instability plan for Iraq is a whole other ballgame than international corporate politics as usual.

Posted by: x | Jul 6 2004 22:09 utc | 56

remembereringgiap @5:26, “you are in the belly of the beast – so your instinct know better than mine but today on french radio i hear the continual nightmare of iraq & the ongoing lies getting more perverse by the hour & i have guardian in front of me with an old afghani with a sack over his head being guarded by some marine tough & it is difficult for me not to cry”
“Belly of the beast”. You hit it. And I live in the gut of the beast that was the cradle of the American civil war (a very red place to be) but I feel a sea change here. I stand up and applaud Michael Moore. He has tapped something here and I think you might begin to hear the birth of a roar from within the belly. And if they attempt to steal another election, the whole world will roar with us. I hope and believe because I really don’t see how it can get any worse.

Posted by: beq | Jul 6 2004 22:24 utc | 58

I’m prepared to entertain affirmative thoughts about Kerry and Edwards. I can be convinced–not, I hope, very easily, but it has indeed happened now and then.
So I’ll just put it to my friends here in the bar: what does Kerry read, and to whom does he listen in hours of urgent need? To whom does he look for consolation, and from whom or from what does he draw encouragement?
remembereringgiap: I haven’t been to France in over a year, and I miss the corrective stimulus that I find there. What I’m hearing from you is this: that the military power of the United States is far too big and too powerful to meet with meaningful resistance. If I’ve heard you wrong, please let me know. If indeed you think this, then I’ll suppose that others in France think the same.
What I think I hear people saying on this side of the Atlantic is that America has overrated its military strength, and it’s learning some hard lessons about self-restraint. But this could be a fantasy on my part, or a line of some kind being peddled by a pedlar of lines.
I want to repeat something else that I know to be true: the so-called believers in Bush to be found in states like Alabama are not at all happy with Bush (I refer here to the rank-and-file, not to the leadership or the colorful enthusiasts that keep turning up in newspapers). I feel a touch of “European” pessimism down here, perhaps because everyone feels so removed from Washington–and so powerless.

Posted by: alabama | Jul 6 2004 22:29 utc | 60

@Juannie
Go for it, Man! Make a difference!

Posted by: Anonymous | Jul 6 2004 22:34 utc | 62

Bernhard-
thanks for providing a forum here!
I think emulating the old one was a good ploy, too. It’s maybe not the best possible format, but it’s familiarity goes a long way for me.

Posted by: æ | Jul 6 2004 22:36 utc | 64

“it takes time to get people to pay attention to other options or arguments, esp. when the mighty wurlitzer is playing some Sousa war march.”
Which is exactly why I think we need some serious efforts to get our educational system- mainly primary/secondary- in order. Pity that’s not too high on the Kerry/Edwards agenda.
Beyond that, I’d add that a vote for Kerry is a vote for those “powers that be” you mentioned- let’s call ’em the DNC, shall we? Might still be the right thing to do, that’s up to you. But you do risk legitimizing their strategy when you accept it like that. There is, sadly, at least one good arguement to be made that the Dems need to loose this election, which is that if their center-(barely)left strategy wins them an election, they may never move an inch left again.

Posted by: æ | Jul 6 2004 22:48 utc | 66

Edwards made in Stresa?
U.S. Sen. John Edwards at Bilderberg
Milan, Italy, Jun. 6 (UPI) — Among the 100 or so invitees to the annual Bilderberg conference under way Sunday in a northern Italy resort is potential U.S. vice president John Edwards.
The article conveniently forgets to mention several attendees…
* Boot, Max — Neoconservative, Council on foreign Relations, Features Editor, Wall Street Journal
* Collins, Timothy C — MD and CEO, Ripplewood Holdings LLC, Yale School of Management, Trilateral Commission
* Corzine, Jon S. — Senator (D, New Jersey), Chairman and CEO, Goldman Sachs
* Donilon, Thomas L — Vice-President, Fannie Mae, Council on Foreign Relations
* Edwards, John — Senator (D. North Carolina), Democratic Presidential Candidate
* Feith, Douglas J. — Undersecretary for Policy, Department of Defense
* Gates, Melinda F. — Co-Founder, Gates Foundation, wife of Bill Gates
* Geithner, Timothy F. — President, Federal Reserve Bank of New York
* Graham, Donald E. — Chairman and CEO, Washington Post Company
* Haas, Richard N. — President, Council on Foreign Relations, former Director of Policy and Planning staff, State Department
* Holbrooke, Richard C — Vice Chairman, Perseus, former Director, Council on Foreign Relations, former Assistant Secretary of State
* Hubbard, Allen B — President E&A Industries
* Issacson, Walter — President and CEO, Aspen Institute
* Janow, Merit L. — Professor, International Economic Law and International Affairs, Columbia University
* Jordan, Vernon E. — Senior Managing Director, Lazard Freres & Co LLC
* Kagan, Robert — Senior Associate, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
* Kissinger Henry A. — Chairman, Kissinger Associates Inc.
* Kovner, Bruce — Chairman Caxton Associates LLC, Chairman, American Enterprise Institute
* Kravis, Henry R. — Founding Partner, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co., acquisitions financier
* Kravis, Marie Josee — Senoir Fellow, Hudson Institute Inc.
* Luti, William J. — Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs
* Mathews, Jessica T. — President, Carnegie Endowment for International War Peace
* McDonough, William J. — Cahirman and CEO, Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, former president, Federal Reserve Bank of New York
* Mundie, Craig J. — Chief Technical Officer, Advanced Strategies and Policies, Microsoft Corporation
* Nooyi, Indra K. — President and CEO, PepsiCo Inc.
* Perle, Richard N. — Resident Fellow, American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, former Likud policy adviser, former chair Defence Policy Board, former co-chairman, Hollinger Digital
* Reed, Ralph E. — President, Century Strategies
* Rockefeller, David — Member JP Morgan International Council, Chairman, Council of the Americas
* Ross, Dennis B — Director, The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
* Schnabel, Rockwell A. — Ambassador to the EU
* Strmecki, Marin J. — Smith Richardson Foundation
* Thornton, John L. — Chairman, Brookings Institution, Professor, Tsinghua University
* Yergin, Daniel — Chairman, Cambridge Energy Research Associates
List source here
/tinfoil

Posted by: regardless who | Jul 6 2004 22:54 utc | 68

beq
i really hope so
alabama,
yes that’s partly correct but i would go futher – i think states have been balanced by equilibriums of necessity – that is they do not push very far beyond their own self interest – & that was how it was throughout the cold war
but those equilibriums have been disturbed so totally now – mostly through lack of vision but also the transparence of force which can be equated with any 19th century imperial power – that at the end of the day – it is a force constructed in brutality
with bush & co there are qualitative differences – they have gone about their business with such crudity & crudity it is – they have smashed the illusions even of their enemies & today i think the enemies of america are in a much better position tthrough this barbarity. because this imperial power for all its force cannot control
& that is the lesson – the enmies of america will draw – but they will also involve the innocents just as america has done
they have comprimised without exception all of the comprador bourgoisie of the middle east – the only place resistance can go now is to the margins – to fanaticism
a fanaticism they have in common with the decision makers in america
one of the predicates i think for a fanatic is to not envisage really, a future, but to keep on fuelling an ongoing war – the war of the flea – but in permanance
i imagine the equilibriums have been so powerfully destabilised that it will take decades to repair even if bush lost & i do not think he will – i cannot understate how much i think they cannot afford to lose the reins of power
it is power but alos the malady of that power – i remember in the first gulf war – before it started king hussein gave a press conference – he was completely white – blank – he spoke very slowly as if it had just dawned on him that you could create a furnace through stupidity, through a lack of thinking out – it was what he said & he bgan to cry a little – it was not a performance – it was a man in front of the idiocy of history
& now that idiocy has led us to the abyss – & i just don’t see how anyone even fdr could draw back – create something solid – it is a nightmare beyond anybody’s expectations except some think tank in washington
so alabam it is that i fear – their inabilty to recreate an equilibrium – no matter how taut
i hope i’ve been clear, a little
still steel

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jul 6 2004 23:06 utc | 70

PS fauxreal:
what I was referring to was the abuse of other humans. by any means necessary to get what you want. contractors doing the dirty work.
–and as far as your comments, upthread, about Edwards’ position on Israel, I can tell you without a doubt that a politician from the south has to take a pro-Israeli line to get elected by the Bible belt.
but there is no doubt in my mind that the entire world would be 1000% better off without Bush and the neocons making policy about the Middle East.
I agree with what you are saying here. All of it. However, I’m not convinced that “by any means necessary” or the abuse of other humans is going to be a whole lot different. The unconditional support for Israel is a great crux of the problem here. It is a great part of the cause of the neocon domination of foreign policy.

Posted by: x | Jul 6 2004 23:28 utc | 72

fuaxreal-
I’d say my political views are far left, so I’m definitely not voting for Bush, no question. That said, my politics are also left enough to be pretty critical of the DNC and Kerry.
As for the Dems. loosing, I’m not necessarially advocating that logic- though I do see it’s point. The Democrats are sidling rightwards, have been for years. I’m not sure it can be stopped, I only know it means those of us who are further left than the DNC are stuck. We can vote with them and vindicate their shift, or we can vote for someone else. It’s a fair point that now’s not a good time, but it is also a fair point to say in not now, when?

Posted by: æ | Jul 7 2004 0:52 utc | 74

fauxreal…
I’ve only one qualm with what you wrote above.
This should be in bold:
“Get your ass out of the White House, you fascist fuck.”
if you are not willing to do that, I think you’re a part of the problem.
In other words…I couldn’t agree more.

Posted by: koreyel | Jul 7 2004 1:12 utc | 76

“You vindicate the Democrats slide to the right by not voting for them, but voting for someone else.”
how so? I mean, if you vote for them, you are implicitly agreeing with their position, right? If their rightward strategy wins them elections, what is the impetus to move leftward? Wasn’t that what that Dean fellow was supposed to be about? He got squashed by his own party.
As for bringing more lefty voters to the polls- it’s up to them to endorse platforms that appeal to lefites, isn’t it?
I donno… I’m genuinely shocked at this attitidue that Kerry’s going to win and everything will be fine. It will somewhat be less bad, but it will not be fine- not until we do things Kerry has no intention of doing.
What would the political landscape look like if the Dems loose the WH but get the Senate, and/or possibly the House? I know the Senate is a real possibility (Go Obama!- now there’s a Democrat I can like!)…

Posted by: æ | Jul 7 2004 2:50 utc | 78

Obama, yes that will work.
I think that this is a point that is being missed. A very crucial point. It is NOT these people that we vote for that are running the party.It is US,and we don’t even realize that we are the ones with the power! It is we who vote them in! Yes,US!It is we who empower them in the first place! Would there be a politician without a parade to jump in front of? We are the populace that enables the politicians in the first place! Yes, we elect them to represent us, but without us, they would have no-one to represent!
I can’t stress this enough.
As others have said,”hold their feet to the fire” and by God and King Hell Harry, that is what I will do!

Posted by: possum | Jul 7 2004 3:45 utc | 80

ae —
I don’t think everything will be fine if Kerry wins — but it will be infinitely better than another four years of BushCo.
Kerry has one of the most liberal voting records in the Senate, and frankly — I expect to be pleasantly surprised by his administration.
There’s an apocryphal story about FDR. Some lefties were in the Oval Office, pitching a lefty reform program to him. Midway through the presentation, FDR stopped them. He said, “Alright, you’ve convinced me — now, go out and put some pressure on me.”
That’s our job — to put pressure on the Kerry Administration, once he’s elected, to enact a progressive agenda we can all be proud of.
btw — in FDR’s day, he called himself a Liberal because the term Progressive had fallen into disrepute. Even Eisenhower called himself a Liberal. How times have changed.

Posted by: ck | Jul 7 2004 5:00 utc | 82

btw, for those interested, Dean is using his clout from his primary run to continue an organization that can be a voting bloc to take the Democratic Party leadership away from the DLC.
it’s important to remember that the theocrats who are now controlling the republican party started at the grassroots level 30 years ago via school boards and local party organization, and getting out the vote for republican candidates.
they have been at this for THIRTY YEARS.
With the last two elections (prez and midterm) they effectively took power from the country club republicans.
Juannie- I’ve also been reading Radical Simplicity off and on. Small is Beautiful is another interesting book, as far as how people look at the way they exist in the world.
Developers have also bought up lots of land here and the McMansions just keep on coming. Sprawl is moving toward a mall culture off the highway, as well.
Fortunately, there are quite a few people here who support local bizzes and farmers.
But the fights between citizens (and their reps) and developers have gotten into the realm of the bizarre lately, too, with vendettas carried out by “fixers” for developers and trials and other weirdness.
Just about all manufacturing jobs have been shipped to Mexico, and lots of people have suffered because of that. Those who have been able to scramble a living hang on, move to another county to afford rent, take on two jobs and odd jobs. Some have had to relocate.
I’ve had the opportunity to see the “two Americas” in action in my town. People who “have” have no idea what life is like for those who don’t.

Posted by: fauxreal | Jul 7 2004 6:14 utc | 84

Saddam Hussein’s regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal.
Iraq has continued to seek nuclear weapons and develop its arsenal in defiance of the collective will of the international community, as expressed through the United Nations Security Council. It is violating the terms of the 1991 cease-fire that ended the Gulf War and as many as 16 Security Council resolutions, including 11 resolutions concerning Iraq’s efforts to develop weapons of mass destruction.
By ignoring these resolutions, Saddam Hussein is undermining the credibility of the United Nations, openly violating international law, and making a mockery of the very idea of collective action that is so important to the United States and its allies.
Who said so? The answer is here
via Under the Same Sun

Posted by: Bernhard | Jul 7 2004 8:59 utc | 86

Cloned Poster
Sad (pathetic) indeed. It’s not just the fault of some stupid kid in Orange County, and it’s not his father’s fault. But what gives with a society – and a newspaper – that would print this crap.
In Australia I am pretty sure that article could result in a prosecution for racial vilification.
No such laws in the USA ?

Posted by: DM | Jul 7 2004 9:49 utc | 88

beq: Now you’re here, then you’re there. I can’t keep up. My head hurts. Really, having Edwards on the ticket has made me feel unusually good today. I don’t remember feeling good for awhile.
Truthfully, my hope springs eternal comment was semi-snarky. And it doesn’t “feel good” to feel this way. But you know, when I was a kid the parental types and authoritarians made it very clear that life was not about “feeling good”! 😉 To that end, I’m more Dantesque in my outlook:
“I am the way into the City of Woe.
I am the way to a forsaken people.
I am the way into eternal sorrow.
Sacred justice moved my architect.
I am raised here by divine omnipotence    Primordial love and ultimate intellect.
Only those elements time cannot wear.
Were made before me and beyond time
I stand.
Abandon all hope ye who enter here.”