| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front |
| Daschle : No need to find WMD to justify War |
| 2003-05-02 |
| Edited for pertinent material The search for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq should continue, but coalition forces don't need to find them to justify the war against Saddam Hussein, U.S. Sen. Tom Daschle said. Wow! What a remarkable admission. Do you think the left that controls the heart and soul of the Democratic Party is going to go nuts? The Democratic leader in the Senate, who had criticized President Bush's failure to find a diplomatic alternative to war, on Thursday applauded the president's leadership and the military's performance in toppling Saddam's regime. Again, this is remarkable and shows what a couple of bad polls will do to adjust Tommy Boy's attitude. "In 21 days, we eliminated somebody who, for 20 years, has repressed and tortured his own people and posed a serious risk not only to his country, but to countries all over the world, including the United States," Daschle said in a conference call with South Dakota reporters. Doesn't this sound as if it was written by Karl Rove? "Obviously, if these weapons exist, they still pose a threat, so I think the search must continue, but I don't think there's any more justification required than what we've already seen in terms of the purpose of the military operation. Regime change was a legitimate goal, it was accomplished, and I think that's laudable in and of its own right." What an unbelievable statment. This will provide cover for Edwards, Gephardt, Lieberman, and (to a lesser extent) Kerry for their "support" for the war. Tepid support by most standards, but rabid by leftist standards. |
| Posted by:ColoradoConservative |
| #14 LH - I don't think so - this is revisionist backpedal by the weakest former senate majority leader in modern times .... poll- governed ass-covering at its best - they should pay dearly at the polls and not be given a pass for their transgressions |
| Posted by: Frank G 2003-05-02 17:48:01 |
| #13 Liberalhawk et. al., This is the same Tom Daschle who said before the war that he was disgusted that CIC had been such a total diplomatic failure and had allowed the risk of one human life during a war. He said the same during the war. Today's statement is a reversal to say the least. I wish he and Pelosi would continue to "energize the base" and to let the American people "never go to the polls and not know where the democrat party stands." |
| Posted by: kkriel 2003-05-02 17:04:57 |
| #12 Liberal Iowa guy1: That Dean talks straight, hes a rural guy, and hes against this damned war, Im gonna vote for him. Not one of those hawkish pseudo-democrats. Liberal Iowa guy2: Daschle said the wars a success even if we dont find anything more dangerous than the fertilizer you and i use. Liberal iowa guy1: Damn, and Daschle works real close with Harkin on Ethanol, so he's a guy we can trust. Guess I'll be giving Gephardt and this Leiberman fellow a second look. Somehow this sounds like a stretch to me. I suspect Daschle is just trying to protect himself, thats all. |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2003-05-02 15:47:08 |
| #11 Liberalhawk: Regarding your comment: "Im surprised that you think Daschle has so much pull with voters in NH and Iowa - I dont think so." I would disagree as to Iowa. Daschle has represented South Dakota since 1978 and worked closely with Iowa Senators and Representatives on such hot-button issues as the ethanol subsidy (a pork-barrel boondoggle if there ever was one), downstream water issues and union issues. All of these issues greatly affect Iowans and Daschle and Sen. Tom Harkin are joined at the hip on these things. |
| Posted by: ColoradoConservative 2003-05-02 14:57:26 |
| #10 Daschel is running interference. I think this is a move to pull the Dems back towards the center. I move that was not possible during the war and one that is vital to keep the dems relevant. |
| Posted by: Yank 2003-05-02 12:47:26 |
| #9 From the New Republic - what happened at a panel at the Childrens Defense Fund (Marian Wright Edelman - definitely left side of Dem party) "On April 9, this is where the Democratic field found itself. The tone was set when the candidates were introduced one by one, and Sharpton's name generated the rowdiest applause. Lieberman used his opening statement to praise Saddam's ouster. "As I saw that statue of Saddam Hussein falling in Baghdad, I could feel the hopes of the children of Iraq for a better life rising," he said. On my recording of the event, one can just hear the faint sound of a lone pair of hands clapping slowly three times and then abruptly stopping, as if cowed into silence by the obvious lack of enthusiasm in the audience. Unlike Lieberman, Moseley Braun was unimpressed by the scene in Firdos Square earlier in the day. "If we spent eighty billion dollars to kill Saddam Hussein," the ex-ambassador to New Zealand explained, "that's seventy-nine billion dollars too much." She would rather have seen the money spent on health care and other domestic priorities. Howard Dean echoed Moseley Braun's lefty isolationist belief that rebuilding Iraq would simply cost too much. (Only Edwards made the obvious point that Democrats could actually be in favor of spending money abroad on Iraq and at home on health care.) Dean then added perhaps the most stunning line from a Democratic candidate during the war: "We should have contained Saddam. Well, we got rid of him. I suppose that's a good thing." " Lieberman's support was strongest, but Edward's point was salient as well. And he said it in a hotbed of leftism - he did NOT pander to the crowd. |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2003-05-02 12:44:30 |
| #8 Helen thomas and the others will go after Gephardt anyway - Daschle simply doesnt carry much weight outside the Senate itself. Gephardt has done more to protect himself by proposing a health care plan that outflanks Dean on the left - much more important than anything Daschle says. In any case I think the hawks Lieberman, Edwards,and Gephardt - would like to see Dean do well - they dont think he can win, and he hurts Kerry. As for speaking - Dean will get to speak at the convention if he wants to whatever Daschle says. And Kucinich and Sharpton wont, barring them doing much better than expected in the primaries. Im surprised that you think Daschle has so much pull with voters in NH and Iowa - I dont think so. |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2003-05-02 12:38:15 |
| #7 Everything this guy does is based on political calculation. Nothing he says on anything carries any substance. A slimeball of the first order. Buh-bye Tommie. |
| Posted by: Rex Mundi 2003-05-02 12:33:55 |
| #6 I'll bet this is the result of 67 different focus groups. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2003-05-02 12:03:45 |
| #5 I'm going to start calling him "BagDaschle Bob". |
| Posted by: FormerLiberal 2003-05-02 11:56:57 |
| #4 Whoa... Is this an Onion satire? Scrappleface? |
| Posted by: Dar 2003-05-02 11:37:23 |
| #3 Liberalhawk: You're missing my point. Daschle is providing "cover" for Gephardt, et al, from the leftist wing of the Democratic party. Daschle doesn't want to see a Dean or Kucinich or - God forbid - Al Sharpton to make inroads in the primaries and position themselves for a damaging speech during the convention (think: Pat Buchanan and the '92 Republican convention). The GOP wouldn't go after Lieberman. You are right - I was wrong to characterize Lieberman's support as tepid. Joe has been staunch on this. I disagree with you on Edwards' support. I would still characterize it is tepid. However, Daschle's comments will be used to deflect the invective spewing from Helen Thomas and the NY Times crowd. |
| Posted by: ColoradoConservative 2003-05-02 11:36:14 |
| #2 See Tom. See Tom run. See Tom run scared. See Tom dance and sing. See Tom sweat. |
| Posted by: tu3031 2003-05-02 11:09:19 |
| #1 Its good but not all that surprising - despite some out of context remarks, Daschle has NOT taken the leftist line on the war. As indeed, more than half of Dem senators did not. And Liebermans and Edwards support has NOT been tepid - its been as firm as the support from any GOP Senators - again Lieberman was clear on the problem in Iraq before the administration was. If the GOP wants to make hay of this from the point of view of Bush's competence thats fair - Bush won, why shouldnt he get a boost. If GOP wants to take digs at Dean or Pelosi for their opposition, or Kerry and Gore their waffling, thats also fair. But if the GOP goes after Edwards, Gephardt or Lieberman for alleged "tepid support" they will be engaged in slander and will forfeit whatever moral capital they have gained (IE they will be showing themselves to be slime) |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 5/2/2003 11:28:08 AM |