John Edwards CO-SPONSORED Lieberman's 2002 Iraq War Resolution!

[Bicoastal]

It's right HERE in pixilated black and white--Edwards's co-sponsorship under Lieberman's resolution, along with 15 other Senators, including Joe's fellow turncoat Zell Miller and noted GOP ghouls Pete Domenici, Jesse Helms, and Strom Thurmond. This resolution, authorizing the US to attack Iraq, was never voted for; it was amended and ultimately replaced with a very similar resolution that we know today as the legislation that officially brought us into the quagmire we're in today--which, I hardly need to remind you, Edwards voted for AS WELL.

I know Edwards has since apologized for his involvement. I know Obama wasn't in the Senate at the time, so how could we know who he would have sided with. But, as long as we're judging people by the company they keep....

Do people REALLY find this less disturbing than Obama (along with both Clintons, Durbin, Biden, Boxer, John Lewis, Max Cleland, and most of the rest of the party) endorsing Lieberman in the 2006 Connecticut primary?

[gaiilonfong]

1. Maybe Elizabeth wants to go on tweety

and talk about her husbands warmongering with LIEberman?
Or will that be off limits now?

[Larkspur]

2. Edwards has moved back towards the Left since 2002, Obama is leaning towards the Right

His backstabbing of Lamont and CT Dems who ousted Lieberman in the 2006 general election and his Liebermanesque rhetoric on bipartisanship show that Obama is leaning towards the Right. Obama was a keynote speaker at the launch of Robert Rubin's The Hamilton Project, which is basically DLC version 2.0. The Hamilton Project supports free trade and the outsourcing of American jobs.

I'm with Sen. Webb, who says that we have to fight the Rubin wing of the Dem Party to get economic justice for all Americans.

[Bicoastal]

3. This is really reaching...

...there's no way that Obama is leaning Right by embracing Independents and Former Republicans who've seen the light. That's called expanding the Democratic party--and it's also how you win elections.

And Lieberman was NOT about bipartisanship--he was about his way or the highway.

And I didn't hear Edwards sticking up for Lamont until AFTER the election.

Face it--Obama has been more liberal IN the Senate than Edwards was at his job while he still held it. How can you claim he moved to the left when all we've heard from him since 2004 is rhetoric but not legislation--and endorsements but not participation?

[Larkspur]

4. Edwards did appear with Lamont; Obama was a no show

Edwards came around the time of the primary, just before the primary results and he assured Lamont that he would win the primary over Lieberman. And Lamont did win the primary.

Obama had book tours in New York and Massachusetts during the general election but he never came to CT to stump with Lamont. I volunteered on Lamont's campaign and had friends who were paid staff on Lamont's campaign. My friends told me they tried very hard to book Obama, but he dismissed them. And when Obama sent out his email, he back stabbed Lamont after one of Lamont's aides told reporters that based on their stats Obama's email went out to about 5,000 people. Obama's camp said that only 250 people received his email.

Obama's bipartisan rhetoric mirrors Lieberman's. Lieberman basically supports caving into Repuke bullying. I've yet to see Obama stand up to the Repuke bullies and fight for what is right, like opposing torture, filibustering telecom immunity in the FISA bill. Obama is great on rhetoric but lack of leadership in the senate on important issues is noticeable.

[Bicoastal]

7. According to this account from the Edwards website, it was AFTER.

http://www.johnedwards.com/news/headlines/nhreg20060818/

I may look for Obama's doings with Lamont, but I could also say that Obama had less time on his hands and more collegial responsibilities to attend to in 2006 than Edwards did.

Still, all this bickering about 2006 still doesn't explain away the Edwards co-sponsorship of Lieberman's resolution in 2002. If actual leadership over rhetoric is so important to you, how can you expect me to dismiss Edwards' leadership in favor of getting into Iraq in 2002 against his rhetoric today?

[Larkspur]

37. Hillary made time to meet with Lamont personally

She didn't stump with him, but she graciously invited Lamont to her NY home to discuss how to help him.

Now, I don't trust the Clintons and felt that Hillary and Bill triangulated over the Lamont-Lieberman race with Bill siding with Lieberman so that Hillary can say that she supported the Dem primary winner from CT. But if Hillary found the time to personally meet with Lamont, Obama could have too, especially since he had book tours in NY and Massachusetts around the time of the 2006 general election. It wasn't like he had to fly from California to CT for a 2 hour stint. He was already in the New England neighborhood.

I'm luke warm to Edwards. I prefer his current economic populist rhetoric over Obama's at this time and that's why I'm leaning Edwards in the CT primary on Feb. 5. While Edwards did co-sponsor IWR and the Patriot Act, he, unlike Hillary, has apologized for that IWR vote and I sense from him that he has learned from his past mistakes. I wouldn't be surprised if Edwards, a freshman senator at the time, was taking advice from Clinton advisors on IWR and the Patriot Act and he now realized that that advice was bad. If Edwards drops out of the Prez race, I don't see him endorsing Hillary.

I'm basically an "Anybody but Hillary" supporter, so I could see myself voting for Obama if the battle is between him and Hillary, but I won't be an enthusiastic supporter of his, at least at this time.

[bobbolink]

13. What you didn't hear, was what happened.

EDWARDS was the ONLY Dem to go to Connecticut and campaign for Lamont!

He also clearly PUSHEd Lamont on poverty, because when Lamont came out onto the stage to introduce Edwards, Lamont apologized for not making poverty a priority in his campaign.

So, YES, Edwards was campaigning for him, and was the only Dem to do so.

Whether you heard it or not, that was what happened.

[TahitiNut]

5. NAYs ---23 in Senate, 133 in House

NAYs ---23
Akaka (D-HI)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Byrd (D-WV)
Chafee (R-RI)
Conrad (D-ND)
Corzine (D-NJ)
Dayton (D-MN)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Graham (D-FL)
Inouye (D-HI)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Reed (D-RI)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Wellstone (D-MN)
Wyden (D-OR)

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=2&vote=00237


---- NAYS 133 ---
Abercrombie
Allen
Baca
Baird
Baldacci
Baldwin
Barrett
Becerra
Blumenauer
Bonior
Brady (PA)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Capps
Capuano
Cardin
Carson (IN)
Clay
Clayton
Clyburn
Condit
Conyers
Costello
Coyne
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Duncan
Eshoo
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Frank
Gonzalez
Gutierrez
Hastings (FL)
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hostettler
Houghton
Inslee
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (OH)
Kaptur
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kleczka
Kucinich
LaFalce
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Leach
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Lofgren
Maloney (CT)
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McKinney
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Millender-McDonald
Miller, George
Mollohan
Moran (VA)
Morella
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pastor
Paul
Payne
Pelosi
Price (NC)
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Rivers
Rodriguez
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Sabo
Sanchez
Sanders
Sawyer
Schakowsky
Scott
Serrano
Slaughter
Snyder
Solis
Stark
Strickland
Stupak
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Velazquez
Visclosky
Waters
Watson (CA)
Watt (NC)
Woolsey
Wu

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2002/roll455.xml

[burythehatchet]

17. Everytime I see Paul's name, I grow sad.

:(

[TahitiNut]

19. Yup. It was a terrible loss for this country.

.... not that we've done anything that would deserve him.

[Milo_Bloom]

6. Edwards war vote, and other duplicity, is the reason he hasn't caught on.

The majority of people don't TRUST him, no matter how good his message sounds.

People want to come up with all types of tin foil hat theories about how the MSM is keeping him down and how he isn't raising money from lobbyists (which isn't true, he has 18,000+ in his coffers from lobbyists), but the reality is that Edwards is the "Listen to what I say, not what I do" candidate and because of that people don't trust him.

He is campaigning AGAINST his own record, which includes a vote for war and baffling senate floor speech where he labeled two bit dictator Hussein a threat to America. Votes on the bankruptcy bill, free trade for China, limiting liability for nuclear plants, etc..etc.. not to mention his after senate activities working for company that was knee deep in predatory lending.

The fact that Edwards' campaign is dead in the water gives me real hope for the future... it tells me that people aren't going to fall for frilly words alone anymore, they are going to want SUBSTANCE, which is something 2008 Edwards seriously lacks.

[Snotcicles]

9. Who's your candidate?

[Milo_Bloom]

11. Don't have one right now.

I am very reluctantly planning to vote for Obama in the primary, but only as an Anti-Clinton/Edwards vote.

I am VERY concerned with Obama's religious overtones and fear that he may turn out to be no better than Clinton/Edwards when it comes to duplicity; however, I don't have any solid evidence of that right now, as I do with Clinton/Edwards who have both proven themselves unprincipled.

If Bloomberg runs, I may vote for him in the general election, but at this point the best I can say is that I am undecided on that.

[Blue_In_AK]

8. And Al Gore chose Lieberman for his running mate in 2000

Are we going to castigate Al, too?

[Bicoastal]

10. This isn't about castigation....

...it's about acknowledging that examining any one Presidential candidate's level of partnership with Joe Lieberman is no way to judge them to be fit for the job, since they ALL had close dealings with the guy at one time or another.

And I think Gore fits into that equation nicely...

[Blue_In_AK]

25. I'll accept that.

I'll admit to feeling a bit snarky when I made my reply. Shame on me. (Is there a smilie for spanking oneself?)

[benny05]

12. Yes I do

Because Obama kept voting supplements for the war, along with Clinton.

[emulatorloo]

14. John Edwards RENOUNCED his IWR vote several years ago!

And has moved considerably to the left since then.

Just like many real people I know -- they RENOUNCED Bush's war and have moved to the left since 2002.

[burythehatchet]

18. It is encouraging that nothing more substantial than this can be

used against John. The whole "trial lawyer" tag won't work because it fits with his rhetoric.

[robbedvoter]

27. he NEVER renounced his sponsorship of IWR - a far more serious crime than a vote

Still waiting on that. Once again - this thread ain't about his vote. Nice try getting them mixed up though.

[mzmolly]

15. If you read the resolution IT was not the problem. The problem was

how Bush used his 'authority.' Believe me, Edwards position on the war made me nauseas, but he was lied to and he regrets his vote.

I honestly feel you have a point, and I can totally understand people being disturbed by this. But, I am looking foward - not back.

[TahitiNut]

21. Handing a loaded .45 to a 12-year-old isn't the problem. It's who he shoots that's the problem.

:eyes:

[mzmolly]

24. If the twelve year old said he was 30 and promised only to use the gun in self defense,

that is indeed part of the problem.

[bpeale]

16. i find that less disturbing

he apologized for his vote. takes a big man to admit they are wrong.

obama & clinton both vote to fund, and refund, and refund this war. to me that is WORSE. and they plan to keep our troops HOSTAGE in iraq until they get a second term.

that is just plain reprehensible in my book. therefore neither one of them deserves my support under ANY circumstances. support them? not now, NOT EVER.

[krabigirl]

20. Yes, don't like it, but he retracted his Iraq War vote.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

22. And, Hillary voted for Kyl/Lieberman.

[robbedvoter]

28. Most candidates did. Sponsorship is far worse than voting - as it implies promoting

advocating, selling, getting others to vote for it.

[judaspriestess]

23. John Edwards made many mistakes this being the worst one

BUT, he has apologized for his mistakes and now he is on a mission to make it right. I accepted his apology, it takes a strong person to apologize to America and I truly and deeply appreciate his conviction to stand up for what he believes in. He was not the only one to make the same mistake and its done now we cannot change the past. But his vote alone did not make us go to war. As others have said and I have to agree, the other candidates keep voting to fund the war in Iraq how is that any better? Its not!!

[robbedvoter]

26. And this year wanted to attack Iran, and keeps mum on the 2004 theft.

Edwards: 'Iran must know world won't back down'

Ron Brynaert
Published: Tuesday January 23, 2007

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2007/Edwards_Iran_must_know_world_wont_0123.html
Other than that, he's dreamy! :shrug:

[LSK]

30. Then why was EDWARDS scolding Hillary on the Iran vote???

[robbedvoter]

31. because he is a hypocrite, obviously. He would have voted the same - based on this speech

Edwards: 'Iran must know world won't back down'

Ron Brynaert
Published: Tuesday January 23, 2007
Print This Email This
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2007/Edwards_Iran_must_know_world_wont_0123.html
Mind you the NIE report was known unoffocially at the time - Sy Hersch wrote about it.

[LSK]

35. yes and he talked about carrots and sticks

He NEVER said we should invade them.

And the NIE was NOT KNOWN PUBLICLY.

[robbedvoter]

36. he KNEW of the NIE - so the sticks were not necessary at all.

If I knew of NIE, he did too. If he didn't and threatened war with no information whatsoever, it's even more pathetic.

[LSK]

29. VALERY PLAME THOUGHT SADDAM HAD WMD IN 2003

So if even she can be fooled, you don't think Edwards could be fooled?

People keep forgetting what it was like in 2002.

[robbedvoter]

32. Edwards was in the Intelligence Committee - knew more than Plame - just wasn't

much of a fighter. he was the one advising kerry to not apologize for the war vote - remember?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADwjvAs9J-0

[Zorra]

33. Kucinich supporters don't have these type of conflicts.

Our candidate always does the right thing regarding Iraq and most other issues.

[Skittles]

34. correct

I cannot in good conscience vote for someone who voted for that piece of SHIT IWR - although I have resigned myself to supporting whoever makes the cut. :(