Kennedy called the war "fraud" last week. Why no follow-up attacks?

[RichM]

Why has this sensational & terribly frank assessment of the war not led to further developments? I loved Kennedy's statement -- it was a momentary example of exactly what ALL leading Democrats should be saying. However, it seems already to be an isolated one-time shot, followed up by nothing. How is this possible?

If a leading senator publicly says that the administration conducted a war on the basis of fraud for political gain, how is it possible that such a thing can be said, reported on -- & lead to nothing further? The logical thrust of Kennedy's statement is that an enormous crime has been perpetrated; it would seem to imply nothing less than recognition that impeachment proceedings & full investigation leading to prosecution are in order.

When Kennedy spoke, the media covered it. If he spoke AGAIN, they would cover it again. If other Democrats (besides Kucinich, who is ALWAYS on top of this issue -- in fact has never left it) spoke out in the same forceful way, the media would cover it. If the party as a whole was serious about either bringing Bush down, or establishing the truth about the war, wouldn't they be ALL lining up right now to issue more statements with the forcefulness of Kennedy's?

I don't mean just a few scattered shots. I mean a relentless campaign. Why are they allowing Kennedy's statement to fade into a one-time event, followed up by nothing?

[ixion]

1. because Kennedy was right

it was a fraud, and everyone knows it. :mad:

[bpilgrim]

2. things seem to be pilling up at the moment...

i certainly don't think kenedy has back off his remark or his speaking out about it either.

but it would be nice to hear more of our leadership giving him cover on this.

maybe they feel if they just sit back no one can call them partisians - lol

actually i think they are more worried about starting a constitutional crisis/revolution here at home and that is why they are mostly mum.

think about it... you work for the 'man' esentially, that would be very bad for business, eh?

:shrug:

peace

[KoKo]

7. That's why the Wilson/Plame Incident needs a Special Council, it will ALL

come out.....just like "Hutton Inquiry" has done in Britain. It aired the dirty laundry and Blairs having big problems with it. The only way to get focus without looking like Dems are "anti-war & troops" is to go at it "sideways."

Which is why this may be such a big story....the Wilson problem. It's a last ditch effort by all who want this to be investigated NOW......to get something started......but from a flank attack instead of a "head on battle." Just my 2 cents....but it's all we've got......since spineless Dashle is still head of the Dems....and Pelosi isn't much better.

[wtmusic]

3. Byrd has been attacking since October

And so has Kucinich. The message is sinking it but it will take a while.

[sangh0]

4. Faulty premise

The Democrats HAVE been regularly condemning Bush*'s fraudelent march to war. Maybe you havent noticed because you are not paying attention to the Dem Presidential candidates, and the other Dems in Congress.

Dean has said it, Kerry has said it, etc. And if Kennedy said it AGAIN, there is no garauntee that the media would cover it because the 2nd time around, it's not news.

[LoneStarLiberal]

5. Successful Co-opting By Administration

Like most of the Democratic attacks against the Bush administration's misadventure into Iraq, the administration was able to easily paint Kennedy's remarks into the corner of "not supporting our troops."

When are our representatives and candidates going to learn that you can't simply get up and criticize THE WAR? It's too damned easy to paint those criticisms into the corner I mentioned above, a corner by the way that resonates deeply (in a deeply negative way) with most American voters, a corner that is the Achilles Heel of the Democratic Party.

Note to all elected Democratic representatives and candidates for President: CRITICIZE THE ADMINISTRATION'S LACK OF DECISION-MAKING AND LACK OF PREPARATION, not just "the war." Their decision-making, premeditation, and lack of preparation are exactly what Senator Kennedy said: A fraud. Pure and simple, demonstrable fraud. Why try to overreach to anything else? Keep driving this argument home time and time again. It's demonstrable, it's got the force of truth behind it, and it is virtually unassailable.

Unfortunately our elected Democratic officials find themselves once more between a rock and the Bush administration's nefarious policy decisions. Voting against the $87 billion additional disbursement is a losing proposition both for the officials and for our party's hopes of regaining the usurped White House in 2004. What to do then? Simple: Gut the $87 billion of everything but the most basic infrastructure improvements and all the money necessary to support our forces in Iraq. A wireless network? Nice try but not necessary. Water works? Necessary.

[Solomon]

6. When you can only get this much support even from DU'ers,

what can you expect from congress?

http://democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=419876

It's a shame.

[hadrons]

8. there were follow-up attacks ....

they've just been surprisingly weak

[Terwilliger]

9. looks like no-one is hell bent on Kennedy's charge

but that's not horrendously surprising

Looks like circumstances may finally get the Dems REALLY on the attack, but only because of outside forces...not because they made it happen.

[Tatiana]

10. There's no way to spin that truth.

Kennedy hit too close to home. The best thing to do for the Repukes would be to let it fade away, rather than opening another can of worms.