Daniel Kirkdorffer over at On the Road to 2008 has picked this up from David Postman at the Seattle Times:""If I knew then everything that I know today and the Republican leadership still brought it up for a vote, I would have voted no," Cantwell said in a statement Monday.
"If the Bush administration had done the hard work of building an international coalition to really contain Saddam, there would have been no vote," she said"
I checked with Postman just a few minutes ago and he verified that he received this specific wording from the Cantwell campaign. This is a significant shift from any previous statement from the senator in regards to her vote to invade Iraq. In Yakima and previously she was quoted as saying that if the Democrats had been in charge or if they knew then what they know now, there have been no vote. This is the first time that she has specifically said that she would personally have voted “no”. In light of what I just posted here I would say that this marks a dynamic “change of course” for Senator Cantwell and I welcome it whole heartedly.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Tuesday, August 15, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
DOES SHE MEAN IT OR JUST TRYING TO A MAKE AMENDS AT THE LAST MINUTE?
old moonbeam: So now she has to saying it "with feeling"?
Next we'll be asking our politicians to read us bedtime stories.
Wake up! While we've been getting all touchy feely about politics, the Republicans have been rubbing our collective nose in it.
People have been asking her to admit she wouldn't have voted differently if she knew what we know now. She's now saying that she would have.
Next question.
Moonbeam and Daniel,
While I embrace the statement, I am still a bit skeptical myself. She has had quite a few opportunities to make this statement and not take us through this level of divisiveness. The circumstances haven't changed so what has changed within the candidate? Has she really been this out of touch or is this just the correct political move at the right time?
Considering she has said that didn't vote based on any imminent threat but because she believed regime change was the right thing to do this statement seems a bit odd.
Chad - The divisiveness has not been her doing. Yes, she has been slow compared to others to make such a statement, but perhaps she was basing her final opinion on a different criteria. We didn't arrive at this conclusion at the same time.
What matters is the goals we now seem to have in common, and that she does voice and has voiced for a number of months now: we need to begin to bring troops home this year.
cry me a river...if she can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen!I question her motives...
Oh she can take the heat - you just don't like the answers.
According to the Seattle Times, Maria actually only said "I certainly wouldn't have voted that way if we knew you could contain Saddam Hussein and we didn't have to worry about what he was going to do."
Nowhere is to be found the quote "If I knew then everything that I know today and the Republican leadership still brought it up for a vote, I would have voted no,"
Re-read her real quote again. Not much of an anti-war statement after all!
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003204613_iraqpoll17m.html
So, outside of words, where are the DEEDS?
J,
As I stated in the post, I confirmed the statement with David Postman whose article is quoted. The folks at the "All Cantwell all the Time" Northwest Progressive Institute gave a more detailed statement here: http://www.nwprogressive.org/weblog/2006/08/sen-cantwell-clarifies-her-position-on.html
Now, as for the deeds and not the words, if you notice in the article that you cite, with the (HUGE) exception of the initial IWR vote, you don't see much daylight between Cantwell and Murray on the situation. I still embrace the fact that Cantwell has made some new statements regarding her position but, as many others have stated, I am not sold on the conversion just yet.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Chad,
I was correct when I wrote that only David Postman had the news. I appreciate that you reconfirmed with him and do not doubt that is what he said. I was only asking for someone else to confirm.That was yesterday.
Today, Thursday, August 17, the Seattle Times finnaly published all her remarks. Indeed, she would have voted differently if she knew then what she knows today. Good.
Unfortunately, this article concluded with "Stuart Elway, director of The Elway Poll, said Cantwell's and McGavick's positions are "almost identical," but the poll shows warning signs for both candidates."
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003204613_iraqpoll17m.html
The charts show 71% of democrats are in favor of a withdrawal in 18 months. She is still way out of contact with the voters.
She only has "regrets" but still no plan for any withdrawal. And if the Iraqis don't stand up this year, then what is her plan B?
Sorry I still don't see much to get excited about.
Post a Comment