If they didn’t want to send US troops into battle, they should’ve voted ‘No’…as did Ted Kennedy.
I think Rufus is correct. The authorization they voted for clearly gives Bush a mandate for sending troops in to battle at his discretion.
If I tell you “If you feel it is necessary you may go to the store and buy bleach,” this is a different thing from my telling you to go to the store and buy bleach.
They gave Bush permission and authority to do something. They didn’t do it. Bush did.
Well…this is a very fine line, I think you’ll agree. OK, fine. It was a ‘smear’ to say that Kerry and Hillary voted to send troops to Iraq. I guess.
But, using your ‘bleach’ example…if you tell me, “Don’t buy any bleach,” then no bleach will be purchased.
Only if you had intent to denigrate, and don’t worry, it’s third degree mansmear at best since you thought it was true. Cop a plea and you’ll be out in 6 months.
Sorry, Mrs Sheehan has entered the political arena and people do and say nasty things there. Even worse, they often say things that are nasty, rude and true. If she did not want that kind of attention, she ought not have put herself in that line of fire.
I have checked the rulebook and I do not see that one person’s death (her son) gives someone else (her) a morally superior position. Further, the rules do not have an exception to attack for bereaved family.
She asked for it. She got. There is no reason to complain about it.
So, the leftists are planning to kill Kevin Bacon! We must stop Moore and his dasterdly schemes once and for all!
Kevin Bacon, We shall avenge thee!
If you’ve been spending the last three or four years mouthing how you “support the troops,” though, attacking bereaved family members of fallen servicemen does seem rather hypocritical, IMO.
There’s a rather big difference between an opinionated “Cindy Sheehan is wrong” and an unsubstantiated “Cindy Sheehan is secretly funded by Michael Moore and is only in this for the money.”
I have done neither. But so what if I did? This person has made herself fair game for all the traditional political gotcha. Remarkably (and I have not followed this non-story too closely) I do not think she herself is complaining.
Good for her.
Which TV news anchor were you speaking of here?
Thanks for fielding this one for me, CosmoDan.
NP, It’s a sincere question. I thought, Duh,…I must have missed some other news anchor thing.
BTW, there’s an S, it’s CosmosDan. For some reason it’s a very common mistake here on the SDMB. You did better than Scylla. He called me Cosmodon twice, although it may not have been an accident.
Really? I’ve been looking all over for a copy. Do you have a link?
So tell, me, Cosmoodan, er, Comosodan, er, Comasoodan, er, Cosmosday, er… Aw, fuck it.
Now there’s an idea, I could change my user name to AwFuckIt and everybody would get it right. Thanks for the inspiration This Year’s Noodle
Sorry, we all have copies, but you can’t have or ever see it. It is right here in the rule book itself.
I’ve always read it as cosmodan. Then again, if you change I just might have to read the new one as AwFuckWit. 
-Joe, on hold for 32 minutes and counting
Since I’m noting an absence, a sample of none, clearly I am discussing none.
Sorry about the mispelling of your name though. I’m dyslexic.
Scylla, you and I are far apart on most issues, and there are times when you royally piss me off. But (whether you value it or not) you’ve earned my respect with this statement.
You made the statement I quoted when defending your position that there is much more Liberal/ Democratic media smearing on a national level than there is Republican / Conservative. It would only make sense or have any meaning if you were referencing some specific action that supported your position. In the same way you referenced Howard Dean in the sentance prior to it. Were you not referencing any action of Dean either?
If not a reference to some specific act then what was it? How did it support your position?
Cosmological:
I am happy with the words as I wrote them. They convey the exact meaning and sentiments I wished to convey, and I don’t wish to alter them so that they convey a different meaning. I am unwilling to alter them so that they convey a falsehood simply so that you can have the satisfaction of pouncing on a falsehood.