Jane!!!

Alright Dems. Time to step up to the plate.

I’m not surprised by Schuler’s vote. I am surprised by McNerney’s vote. I thought he was better than that.

P J Evans @ 3

I’m not surprised by Schuler’s vote. I am surprised by McNerney’s vote. I thought he was better than that.

Word! To say the least. WTF are these people thinking?

I don’t care about submitting anymore stuff to Bush that he will veto. I care about cutting off the funds. Democrats. What part of this do you not understand?

I thought 171 was a healthy number, considering. At least it showed the WH what they’re up against.

The next vote (tonight, I hope?) will be the real test for the dems.

What the f*** heck was McNearny thinking?

I’ll be calling Ciro’s office tomorrow to find out what the hell he thinks he’s doing. I expect more from him.

Funds will not be cut off at this point- Clusterfuck bought time with the “surge” next date with destiny will be early september when the generals will show up and say that the surge is working and that we are making progress- then there will be a giant pissing contest.

I know what Mahoney was thinking. Just like a republican because he is one. Fake Republican & Fake Rancher.

If this is posturing for ‘08, I do not like it, Demos. Why? Because I have not lost sight of the fact people are dying.

Gotta run–sorry for the drive-by.

They already notified 35,000 folks to get ready to ship out for Iraq. Where in the hell are these folks going to come from, the NG?
Just in time for hurricane AND tornado season.
My kingdom for a set of stones for every Democrat so they can stand unified and tell Bush to take a long walk off a short pier.

That’s why I love me my rep Doggett.

I am so disappointed is this all the Dems or are there more? Jane, now what????

rwcole @ 9

Funds will not be cut off at this point- Clusterfuck bought time with the “surge” next date with destiny will be early september when the generals will show up and say that the surge is working and that we are making progress- then there will be a giant pissing contest.

For the all the rationale that Bush uses against setting a timeline related to withdrawal and not telegraphing intent to the opposition in Iraq, the September date has very much become a deadline in its own right that could be capitalized on by insurgents to affect policy.

Lloyd!

Delay tried to redistrict him out of a job, but the few & proud Texas dems held a little tough to keep him there.

Thanks for highlighting it, Jane.

And, fyi, Brian Williams / NBC reported Shrub’s speech today as “concessions.” Maybe, just maybe, we’re seeing the beginning of some progress.

Bustednuckles @ 13

They already notified 35,000 folks to get ready to ship out for Iraq. Where in the hell are these folks going to come from, the NG?
Just in time for hurricane AND tornado season.
My kingdom for a set of stones for every Democrat so they can stand unified and tell Bush to take a long walk off a short pier.

My kingdom for a democracy…

Lovely. Just lovely.

We have two groups to work on. These freshmen who need to grasp the concept of unity, and the eleven moderate Republicans who need strokes to continue to move away from Bush.

Nola Sue @ 17

Lloyd!

Delay tried to redistrict him out of a job, but the few & proud Texas dems held a little tough to keep him there.

Thanks for highlighting it, Jane.

And, fyi, Brian Williams / NBC reported Shrub’s speech today as “concessions.” Maybe, just maybe, we’re seeing the beginning of some progress.

Delay did redistrict him out of his district. Later, the part of redistricting that included Lloyd did get reversed and he got his old district back.

All the dems knew that this thing wasn’t gonna fly- it was a chance for reps to get on the record in favor or opposed. There will be another vote on the funding bill that Clusterfuck has already said he would veto. No progress so far- although Clusterfuck has “empowered” his chief of staff to make a deal.

Ellen Tauscher voted yes! And I haven’t seen her playing the Blue Dog centrist-power-broker card lately. What’s up with her? Change of heart? Fear of a primary challenge with armies of Bay Area activists serving as troops?

this is the vote i wanted – not because i thought it would pass the first time, but because i wanted to know which Ds were in favor of bush’s endless war and which Rs were willing to say “no” to bush.

good first start (and i especially like that this would have required the withdrawal of contractors – i think, i haven’t read the bill yet).

now we know who to thank, and who needs to rethink their vote.

And Jerry McNerney voted no. Sigh …

Jane – thanks.

You know … we knew McGovern would not pass but it is still so shameful to see if fail …
at the same time our troops are bombing schools and killing 7 children and bombing neighborhoods and killing and wounding civilians – esp children.

I am beyond sick, beyond rage, and beyond hope.

We are determined to follow this evil path. From all I read in the press that actually reports accurately from Iraq, the Iraqis are organizing to make sure we begin to really understand the price we have made them pay … I guess W *and* Congress will not be satisfied until we’ve slaughtered many more Iraqi children … and our troops are cut off from supplies, exit routes and dying in ever greater numbers.

Carney lost me when he trashed our gay friends, McNerney lost me today and I hope we find a way to make that very very clear.

F*cking Sellouts!

Kucinich Reveals Dem Funding Bill Includes Privatization of Iraq Oil & Carte Blanche to Invade Iran

In a meeting with the West Los Angeles Democratic Club on Saturday, May 5, Presidential candidate and Ohio Congress Representative Dennis Kucinich revealed that the Democrats in Congress had made some secret concessions to the Republicans in the initial Bill to continue funding the Iraq War that was vetoed, and in a subsequent version that is currently being negotiated. They include:

Privatization of Iraq’s Oil – in the original Bill, but not shared with the public. A rule was created that said this clause could not be removed during debate on House floor.

Bush could invade Iran without approval of Congress. A clause that would require him to get approval from Congress first was removed.

Timetable for troop withdrawal from Iraq to be removed from Bill (in post-veto version).

Joe Buck @ 22

Ellen Tauscher voted yes! And I haven’t seen her playing the Blue Dog centrist-power-broker card lately. What’s up with her? Change of heart? Fear of a primary challenge with armies of Bay Area activists serving as troops?

No point in painting a bullseye on yourself for a bill that’s not going to pass.

I am very surprised by McNerney’s vote.

From the latest Iraq polling:

.

“One proposal would not provide additional funds for U.S. troops in Iraq and would require the U.S. to withdraw all its troops by March 2008. Would you favor or oppose that bill?”

.

Favor Oppose Unsure
% % %
5/4-6/07
39 60 2

Only 39% favor getting out by March 08.

We will not see a funds cut off bill or a withdrawal bill until those numbers reverse.

John in Sacramento … in fact, a condition laid out by the *democrats* as a benchmark of “progress” is passage of the hydrocarbon bill …

sell-outs? sounds about right to me

John in Sacramento –

That makes me sick!

rwcole – that polling question combines “funds for our troops in Iraq” with a withdrawal date so it sounds as if the troops would be left wandering naked in the desert … not a fair measure of support for withdrawal.

john in sacramento @ 26

F*cking Sellouts!

Kucinich Reveals Dem Funding Bill Includes Privatization of Iraq Oil & Carte Blanche to Invade Iran

In a meeting with the West Los Angeles Democratic Club on Saturday, May 5, Presidential candidate and Ohio Congress Representative Dennis Kucinich revealed that the Democrats in Congress had made some secret concessions to the Republicans in the initial Bill to continue funding the Iraq War that was vetoed, and in a subsequent version that is currently being negotiated. They include:

Privatization of Iraq’s Oil – in the original Bill, but not shared with the public. A rule was created that said this clause could not be removed during debate on House floor.

Bush could invade Iran without approval of Congress. A clause that would require him to get approval from Congress first was removed.

Timetable for troop withdrawal from Iraq to be removed from Bill (in post-veto version).

Jesus H Christ

Siun @ 30

John in Sacramento … in fact, a condition laid out by the *democrats* as a benchmark of “progress” is passage of the hydrocarbon bill …

sell-outs? sounds about right to me

suin – do you think most of them even know what they are doing? i’m coming to the conclusion that many of them are pretty stupid, and even the smart ones have to spend so much time raising money, for example, that they don’t have much time to keep themselves well informed or to do much independent thinking.

i’m trying to find reasons for hope… is it obvious?

McNerney has a lot of explaining to do.

I so regret supporting him.

Not a penny more.

And he can stop quasi-spamming me with his poorly formatted “personal notes” in freaking 6 point type.

They look like kidnapper’s letters.

Considering his vote, body snatchers may be the only possible explanation.

(Or a total betrayal).

Thank you, john in sacramento @ 26 (and Dennis Kucinich). As I said to greenwarrior in the last thread:

Ugly is the word. Unbelievably ugly. It’s quite a kick being considered successfully-conned dupes by our Members of Congress, huh?

I think that HR 2237 should be looked on as a test vote. It shows that the Republicans are still locked in a death embrace of support for this miserable failure of a war. It shows that about a third of Democrats are still wishy-washy and lets us know who they are. This is an incremental process. It would be nice if it weren’t, but this vote could be used by Pelosi to build public pressure and push through her 2 month funding proposal and a suitable alernative.

The main thing now is trying to sort through the heavy pro-Bush spin that is going on in the media. I admit I don’t know how much of it is real. I know that all the talk of Bush compromising is horse manure. Bush doesn’t do “compromise”. I think that there continues to be an attempt to portray 70% of the American people as “fringe” and so politicians need to be reminded that the other 30% is not enough to win elections. Finally, we need to ask them what happens when the surge fails because unless they’re blind or stupid it was obvious from the get go it wasn’t going work.

John in Sacto;

Bush could invade Iran without approval of Congress. A clause that would require him to get approval from Congress first was removed.

That is unbelievable.
If this is true then The Democratic party is dead to me. Done.
I will not be associated with a party that allows this to happen.

It’s essential that we look at the actual bills this Congress is considering and understand what is actually there rather than the rhetoric used to describe them. Supporting or opposing legislation based on talking points and hype leaves us open to a lot of problems …

examples – residual troops left in Iraq even after “withdrawal” (which I heard HRC numbers at 70,000)

or the hydrocarbon bill

or endorsement of the very “security forces” of the puppet government who form the backbone of the death squads

or leaving 100,000 contractors in place

or permission to invade Iran

the list keeps going …

we need to be very vigilant if we really want to know what is going on

selise @ 34

suin – do you think most of them even know what they are doing? i’m coming to the conclusion that many of them are pretty stupid, and even the smart ones have to spend so much time raising money, for example, that they don’t have much time to keep themselves well informed or to do much independent thinking.

That’s where we should come in.

“Let us do your thinking for you. Wouldn’t want you to sprain that pretty little head of yours.”

OT – sorry, but important in re: USA scandal. drational and his crew of DKos volunteers have analyzed all the emails in the doc dumps; there’s clearly documents missing, suggesting obstruction and coverup.

Miers and Kelley are now in our sights, too.

never mind

(best Emily voice….)

ooh goody!

is there a linky?

Rayne @ 41

OT – sorry, but important in re: USA scandal. drational and his crew of DKos volunteers have analyzed all the emails in the doc dumps; there’s clearly documents missing, suggesting obstruction and coverup.

Miers and Kelley are now in our sights, too.

So, Iran here we come. With the backing of the Democrats in Congress. I give this country five years tops then we will be in a civil war ourselves.

partially on-topic, here. . .

this came well into the
afternoon gonzales-hearing session. . .

it could be because i had written
on this topic in the last week,
but alberto gonzales’ completely
feeble-defense-of-public-corruption-
investigation-disparities-by-party
was. . . sad.

in the-above 1 min. 30 sec. video,
rep. artur davis, elected out of
alabama’s 7th district, simply
tears mr. gonzales apart — piece by piece. . .

well, it could be comical. . .
if it was not, actually, also a
national tragedy, of course. . .

Obey’s bill gives Bush the blank check the Republicans want– but only til the end of July, at which point it requires an up-or-down vote on whether to continue funding military operations or to begin the phased redeployment. Bush vowed to veto everything until he gets his way. . .

mr. gonzales was, today, as divorced
from reality, as mr. bush is, tonight. . .

Siun @ 39

we need to be very vigilant if we really want to know what is going on

Are FDL, TPM and/or Daily Kos the best places to get this information unfiltered?

Siun @ 39

It’s essential that we look at the actual bills this Congress is considering and understand what is actually there rather than the rhetoric used to describe them.

in support of suin’s warning… here’s the webpage with a link to the pdf for mcgovern’s HR 2237.

Mike Arcuri (upstate NY) also voted ‘yes’. This had been a republican district for as long as I can remember. He had a tough battle. Lots of lies were told and his opponent had a fund raiser featuring Cheney (which may have helped Arcuri). He already gets my money but hope everyone remembers him in’08.

Suin:

yes- it’s poorly worded- but I suspect that it the results would hold with a better worded version.

Most people hate this war- but they aren’t yet ready to get the hell out now.

Selise … I have thought a bunch about that but I think the real problem is that the democrats accept the same world view as the neocons and republicans. They see Iraqis as the enemy rather than a people whose country we illegally invaded. They see our effort as honorable if incompetent. They do not understand the fundamental priciple of self-determination and the right of sovereign peoples to their own nation.

So long as they do not understand the fundamental horror of what we have done and are doing … they will continue to support these such garbage.

The NewsHour doing its typical he said she said coverage of the Gonzales hearings. Wouldn’t it be nice if they turned this program into a news show?

xoites defends Constitution @ 43

So, Iran here we come. With the backing of the Democrats in Congress. I give this country five years tops then we will be in a civil war ourselves.

Is Iran in a civil war? or just Iraq?

1,511 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND..

Citizen Hamsher and the Firepup Patriots:

The Vietnam War didn’t end until hundreds of thousands, indeed millions, of people hit the streets and that was at a time when less than 50% of the votin’ public wanted us out. We have a moment here to call up the “adults” among us to get out in front for our kids and the kids in the desert. Public opinion is solidly behind gettin’ us outta Iraq. So far only one declared candidate (Edwards) has called for forced withdrawal and called upon citizens to mobilize. If the progressive blogosphere and networks like Pach’s Roots Project could coordinate with Move On, I think we could force the Democrats into action.

I remember bein’ a veteran behind the barricades after the Cambodian invasion and I remember how it felt to know that a majority of the “adults” who got me into that fuckin’ mess didn’t have the balls ta get us outta there. Now we have 70% of the “adult” population and most folks know that if we don’t get out now, they ain’t gunna have jobs in a couple a years.

A well organized mass march on Washington with simultaneous demonstrations in all the state capitols with “adults” out in front…would force the issue and if the elected Democrats bailed out, it would be the end of the Party. It’s time to force the Democratic party to get out in front of the people here or suffer the wrath of God at the polls.

My generation owes it to our children to get it right this time.

KEEP THE FAITH, IT’S TIME TO PUT IT ON THE LINE..GOD IS NOT PATIENT!

Siun @ 49

Selise … I have thought a bunch about that but I think the real problem is that the democrats accept the same world view as the neocons and republicans. They see Iraqis as the enemy rather than a people whose country we illegally invaded. They see our effort as honorable if incompetent. They do not understand the fundamental priciple of self-determination and the right of sovereign peoples to their own nation.

So long as they do not understand the fundamental horror of what we have done and are doing … they will continue to support these such garbage.

That is the real point, isn’t it? The democratic leadership and those democrats running for the Presidency are willing to invade Iran or any other country if they determine we “have” to.

This counrty is so far away from where it began. I wonder if it is possible for us to avoid the fate of Rome or are we condemned to repeat their history?

Hugh @ 50

The NewsHour doing its typical he said she said coverage of the Gonzales hearings. Wouldn’t it be nice if they turned this program into a news show?

And lose their social access to the folks with places on the Vineyard?

How else will PBS’ Beltway team get their perks for not straying from the herd?

Siun @ 49

Selise … I have thought a bunch about that but I think the real problem is that the democrats accept the same world view as the neocons and republicans. They see Iraqis as the enemy rather than a people whose country we illegally invaded. They see our effort as honorable if incompetent. They do not understand the fundamental priciple of self-determination and the right of sovereign peoples to their own nation.

So long as they do not understand the fundamental horror of what we have done and are doing … they will continue to support these such garbage.

You give them too much credit.

They see the oil, they wonder what happens to that oil if we leave. They want to keep those four massive bases that we built in Iraq so that we can maintain our presence there.

The Dems do not fundamentally disagree with the real reasons that we invaded Iraq. everything else is bullshit.

Jack Cafferty just called Alberto Gonzales a loser, after they showed Wexler yelling at Gonzales.

TexBetsy @ 51

xoites defends Constitution @ 43

So, Iran here we come. With the backing of the Democrats in Congress. I give this country five years tops then we will be in a civil war ourselves.

Is Iran in a civil war? or just Iraq?

I meant us, not Iran.

more bill links:

this, i think, is the new iraq appropriations bill, H.R.2206 (please correct me if i’m wrong on this) being considered now.

and finally, here is a page to bookmark – house bills (the actual text) before they get posted to thomas. this is the best place (i’ve found) to find text for bills currently under consideration.

War with Iran is unlikely but these people in the Bush Administration are very stupid. It bears remembering that most of our elected representatives are not the brightest of lights and they get most of their news from the same poisoned Washington well that most of the rest of us do. So add mediocre intelligence and often outright stupidity with bad information and it becomes pretty clear for them to do the right thing or even understand what it is.

Hugh @ 59

War with Iran is unlikely but these people in the Bush Administration are very stupid. It bears remembering that most of our elected representatives are not the brightest of lights and they get most of their news from the same poisoned Washington well that most of the rest of us do. So add mediocre intelligence and often outright stupidity with bad information and it becomes pretty clear for them to do the right thing or even understand what it is.

War with Iran is extreemly likely and has been planned for months.

OT-Murtha is about two minutes into the last 9 minutes left. He’s ON IT! C-Span.

xoites defends Constitution @ 53

This counrty is so far away from where it began. I wonder if it is possible for us to avoid the fate of Rome or are we condemned to repeat their history?

Nawwww… America is the only country to go from barbarism to decadence without the usual intervention of culture.

selise @ 34

Siun @ 30

John in Sacramento … in fact, a condition laid out by the *democrats* as a benchmark of “progress” is passage of the hydrocarbon bill …

sell-outs? sounds about right to me

suin – do you think most of them even know what they are doing? i’m coming to the conclusion that many of them are pretty stupid, and even the smart ones have to spend so much time raising money, for example, that they don’t have much time to keep themselves well informed or to do much independent thinking.

i’m trying to find reasons for hope… is it obvious?

This may explain McNerney. He’d certainly know what itmeant. Can someone ask him? I have been ooking at his blog, not finding anything. I’ll go check his Congressional site.

Nothing there either. Anyone know?

Apparently Howie needs a signed contract with Blue America recipients about the big issues.

noen …

Today’s bill was not released until late yesterday … which makes it very hard (hmmm) for responses from voters.

To track Iraq issues, along with FDL and Juan Cole, I suggest:

Reidar Visser (http://historiae.org) (expert on oil issues)
Missing Links – translations of reliable arabic sources, pretty good over all -http://arablinks.blogspot.com/

Moon of Alabama for a more international perspective -

Jane, Thank you so much for this thread and that thanks goes to all who are here.

fyi, Murtha is doing his best on cspan…evidently the votes will continue this evening. (on what…I don’t know)

My last line should read:

So add mediocre intelligence and often outright stupidity with bad information and it becomes pretty clear why it is so difficult for them to do the right thing or even understand what it is.

noen @ 62

xoites defends Constitution @ 53

This counrty is so far away from where it began. I wonder if it is possible for us to avoid the fate of Rome or are we condemned to repeat their history?

Nawwww… America is the only country to go from barbarism to decadence without the usual intervention of culture.

You must have missed the Beatles…

But all kidding aside, we are indeed on the brink if this congress or we as a people do not stop what seems to be coming next.

Siun @ 49

Selise … I have thought a bunch about that but I think the real problem is that the democrats accept the same world view as the neocons and republicans. They see Iraqis as the enemy rather than a people whose country we illegally invaded. They see our effort as honorable if incompetent. They do not understand the fundamental priciple of self-determination and the right of sovereign peoples to their own nation.

So long as they do not understand the fundamental horror of what we have done and are doing … they will continue to support these such garbage.

i fear you are correct (at least for many)… a moral failure based on a failure in empathy – at least that is where i suspect supremist thinking comes from.

kirk murphy, if you are still here, what do you prescribe for empathy deficiency?

Siun @ 65

noen …

Today’s bill was not released until late yesterday … which makes it very hard (hmmm) for responses from voters.

To track Iraq issues, along with FDL and Juan Cole, I suggest:

Reidar Visser (http://historiae.org) (expert on oil issues)
Missing Links – translations of reliable arabic sources, pretty good over all -http://arablinks.blogspot.com/

Moon of Alabama for a more international perspective -

Bookmarked

What percentage of the Blue America candidates who won, turned their coats?

xoites defends Constitution @ 60

War with Iran is extremely likely and has been planned for months.

We disagree.

oops – hit wrong button …

Moon of Alabama: http://www.moonofalabama.org/
(Bernhard tends to know what he’s talking about on military issues)

and Hands Off Iraqi Oil

plus Gorillas Guides where a newly enlarged team of Iraqi bloggers provide a genuine, ground level view – the bloggers are Sunni, Shia, former Bathists

1,511 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND..

Citizen Hugh:

“…this vote could be used by Pelosi to build public pressure and push through her 2 month funding proposal.”

Yes, but only if there is visible, nationwide pressure from the grass roots like the “Rubber Stamp” action but on a national scale with hundreds and thousands every day marchin’ into the offices of the weak-kneed Democrats and the vulnerable Republifascists.

If we can’t organize a mass demonstration, maybe we ken work to mobilize an on-goin’ “rubber stamp” movement with the Edwards campaign out in front…maybe to culminate in a mass demonstration on the 4th of July.

KEEP THE FAITH, THE CLOCK IS TICKIN’ AND PEOPLE ARE DYIN’ BECUASE WE ARE TOO TIMID TO DO WHAT’S NECESSARY!!

xoites defends Constitution @ 68

You must have missed the Beatles…

Sorry, they don’t count. They were Brits.

;)

Hugh @ 72

xoites defends Constitution @ 60

War with Iran is extremely likely and has been planned for months.

We disagree.

Who is we?

noen @ 75

xoites defends Constitution @ 68

You must have missed the Beatles…

Sorry, they don’t count. They were Brits.

;)

Read the rest of my post. :)

selise @ 69

Siun @ 49

Selise … I have thought a bunch about that but I think the real problem is that the democrats accept the same world view as the neocons and republicans. They see Iraqis as the enemy rather than a people whose country we illegally invaded. They see our effort as honorable if incompetent. They do not understand the fundamental priciple of self-determination and the right of sovereign peoples to their own nation.

So long as they do not understand the fundamental horror of what we have done and are doing … they will continue to support these such garbage.

i fear you are correct (at least for many)… a moral failure based on a failure in empathy – at least that is where i suspect supremist thinking comes from.

kirk murphy, if you are still here, what do you prescribe for empathy deficiency?

I so wish I had an idea. Total blank.

Eureka Springs @ 66

Jane, Thank you so much for this thread and that thanks goes to all who are here.

fyi, Murtha is doing his best on cspan…evidently the votes will continue this evening. (on what…I don’t know)

Which channel? Is it on the tooobs?

Thanks

Hugh @ 72

xoites defends Constitution @ 60

War with Iran is extremely likely and has been planned for months.

We disagree.

Since you do you may want to check these out:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories…..3568.shtml

http://www.truthout.org/docs_05/011805A.shtml

NorskeFlamethrower @ 74

Yes, but only if there is visible, nationwide pressure from the grass roots like the “Rubber Stamp” action but on a national scale with hundreds and thousands every day marchin’ into the offices of the weak-kneed Democrats and the vulnerable Republifascists.

We definitely need to keep the pressure on. We need to keep pointing out that the Democrats are doing the two things Americans want: fund the troops and get out of Iraq and that the Republicans oppose both of these, that they would rather see American soldiers and Iraqi civilians die rather than admit they were wrong.

As I was saying above the media is currently spinning the Bush line like crazy. We need to push back against this.

john in sacramento @ 26

F*cking Sellouts!

Kucinich Reveals Dem Funding Bill Includes Privatization of Iraq Oil & Carte Blanche to Invade Iran

…
Bush could invade Iran without approval of Congress. A clause that would require him to get approval from Congress first was removed.
…

This is a big deal. Getting out of Iraq really matters. Keeping from getting into Iran really really matters. time for more calls…

xoites defends Constitution @ 76

Hugh @ 72

xoites defends Constitution @ 60

War with Iran is extremely likely and has been planned for months.

We disagree.

Who is we?

You and Hugh…

two fine defenders of our Constitution… :)

john in sacramento – On dial up here but check cspan.org and work from there, imo.

selise snarked

kirk murphy, if you are still here, what do you prescribe for empathy deficiency?

orange sunshine? *s* (no, not kos)

kirk murphy @ 78

selise @ 69

Siun @ 49

Selise … I have thought a bunch about that but I think the real problem is that the democrats accept the same world view as the neocons and republicans. They see Iraqis as the enemy rather than a people whose country we illegally invaded. They see our effort as honorable if incompetent. They do not understand the fundamental priciple of self-determination and the right of sovereign peoples to their own nation.

So long as they do not understand the fundamental horror of what we have done and are doing … they will continue to support these such garbage.

i fear you are correct (at least for many)… a moral failure based on a failure in empathy – at least that is where i suspect supremist thinking comes from.

kirk murphy, if you are still here, what do you prescribe for empathy deficiency?

I so wish I had an idea. Total blank.

The only thing i can recomend is being raised with pets, having a loving family and not being influenced by the concept that wealth is all that matters in life.

“Fate of Rome”

To be transformed into a christian nation?

Siun @ 73

Moon of Alabama: http://www.moonofalabama.org/
(Bernhard tends to know what he’s talking about on military issues)

Is that… Billmon’s blog? It sure looks like it and it has many of the same themes. And it’s too early for me to have been drinkin’… weird.

kirk murphy,
thanks

Siun @ 49

Selise … I have thought a bunch about that but I think the real problem is that the democrats accept the same world view as the neocons and republicans. They see Iraqis as the enemy rather than a people whose country we illegally invaded. They see our effort as honorable if incompetent. They do not understand the fundamental priciple of self-determination and the right of sovereign peoples to their own nation.

So long as they do not understand the fundamental horror of what we have done and are doing … they will continue to support these such garbage.

And apart from worldviews, the demos get too much funding from the same sources and spend too much time w/ the same kind of political advisors …

rwcole @ 86

“Fate of Rome”

To be transformed into a christian nation?

There was that, for a while. Then came Fascism and a Nazi occupation but not before the burning of Rome. Being there after the fact was definitly a huge plus.

Eureka Springs @ 84

john in sacramento – On dial up here but check cspan.org and work from there, imo.

selise snarked

kirk murphy, if you are still here, what do you prescribe for empathy deficiency?

orange sunshine? *s*

sad to say, i was being serious – no snark. :(

Eureka Springs @ 84

john in sacramento – On dial up here but check cspan.org and work from there, imo.

selise snarked

kirk murphy, if you are still here, what do you prescribe for empathy deficiency?

orange sunshine? *s*

The DEA won’t let me prescibe that one….

locked away in Schedule I

And selise, I’m not suggesting your question was snarky.

The only folks I’ve come across with empathy deficiencies have been people with antisocial personality disorder (jargon for “sociopath”).

The poor ones wear prison jumpsuits; advantaged sociopaths wear CEO’s tailored suits.

Antisocial personality disorder appears to reflect fundamental disruption in basic emotional responses: folks with ASD seem to have reduced capacity for anxiety and other emotional states important in empathy.

Sadly, I’m unaware of any treatments proven to remedy this basic biological deficit.

Sad for our planet and the living beings upon it, too.

Every day the megacorps choose to poison us all – and every day some of us die. And more of the planet’s biosphere and creatures within it die.

Slain by the deliberate choices of the well-dressed sociopaths who become the megacorps’ CEO’s.

Sadly, I know of no treatment for these people.

Physical separation appears to be the only known intervention successful in protecting the rest of us from the sociopaths.

et tu, McNerney?

Rep Lewis (R-Sh*tbag) just introduced a motion that would totally trash the Iraq bill. Voting now on his motion

selise @ 91

Eureka Springs @ 84

john in sacramento – On dial up here but check cspan.org and work from there, imo.

selise snarked

kirk murphy, if you are still here, what do you prescribe for empathy deficiency?

orange sunshine? *s*

sad to say, i was being serious – no snark. :(

Actually much could be said for giving Bush a tab and dropping him in DarFur for a day or so.

Amazingly, Jane presses on with a new thread

what do you prescribe for empathy deficiency?

I prefer jail time. It doesn’t really change their attitude but it does remove them from circulation.

Disappearing Thread returns.

New Thread

Just say’in

Anyone have a quick summary of the “benchmarks” in the spending bill?

“Burning of Rome”

The one that Nero fiddled through- or another one? Rome was burnt more or less weekly.

rwcole @ 100

“Burning of Rome”

The one that Nero fiddled through- or another one? Rome was burnt more or less weekly.

Maybe there is something to be learned from that. :)

I am all by myself upstairs. Come visit.

And the real kicker is -

All the crocodile tears being spilled along with excuses for staying in Iraq to “save” the Iraqi people from themselves, are being shed for an allegedly-future reality that is in fact transpiring right now thanks to regular incitements from the occupiers, and many of those crying for public effect know it.

If we left, and left the Iraqi oil behind for the Iraqis to control and sell, I believe the Iraqis could and would successfully rebuild their country by letting the Iraqi Parliament nationalists hold their country together – Sunni, Shiite and Kurd alike. [Opinion polls in Iraq have consistently shown wide support from average Iraqis - Sunni, Shiite and Kurd - for a united country in control of its own resources.] Thus, with the end of our occupation, provided the “hydrocarbon law” fails to pass (I wish I shared Hugh’s confidence on that score), an Iraqi-oil-funded and Iraqi-directed first-class reconstruction of their country could, and I believe would, begin.

In short, Iraqis would soon show us up, and how. But American taxpayers would no longer be taking on debt for mercenaries to roam Iraq or for American-directed “reconstruction,” and American volunteers in our Armed Forces would no longer be dying and incurring lifelong disabilities just to transfer the Iraqi oil riches to global oil corporations. Oh yeah – and Dick Cheney would be ever so mad . . .

Pow Wow @ 103

Nails run from your hammer!

Scarecrow @ 99

Anyone have a quick summary of the “benchmarks” in the spending bill?

i’m skimming the bill now (see my links above, i think i’m reading the correct version)… and will post what i find here, unless someone else beats me to it.

xoites defends Constitution @ 104

Pow Wow @ 103

Nails run from your hammer!

(Because you hit them on the head.) :)

Benchmarks – from Pelosi’s site:

REPORT
The bill includes benchmarks similar to those proposed by the President and included in the vetoed bill, and requires the President to report to Congress by July 13 on progress in meeting those benchmarks.

The President must report progress by the Government of Iraq in:

Giving United States Armed Forces and Iraqi Security Forces the authority to pursue all extremists, including Sunni insurgents and Shiite militias
Delivering necessary Iraqi Security Forces for Baghdad and protecting such Forces from political interference
Intensifying efforts to build balanced security forces throughout Iraq that provide even-handed security for all Iraqis
Ensuring that Iraq’s political authorities are not undermining or making false accusations against members of the Iraqi Security Forces
Eliminating militia control of local security
Establishing a strong militia disarmament program
Ensuring fair and just enforcement of laws
Establishing political, media, economic, and service committees in support of the Baghdad Security Plan
Eradicating safe havens
Reducing the level of sectarian violence in Iraq
Ensuring the rights of minority political parties in the Iraqi Parliament are protected.
The President must also report on whether specified goals actually have been accomplished by the Government of Iraq, including:

Enacting a broadly accepted hydro-carbon law that equitably shares oil revenues among all Iraqis
Adopting legislation necessary for the conduct of provincial and local elections, taking steps to implement such legislation, and setting a schedule to conduct provincial and local elections
Reforming current laws governing the de-Baathification process to allow for more equitable treatment of individuals affected by such laws
Amending the Constitution of Iraq consistent with the principles contained in Article 137 of such constitution
Allocating and beginning expenditure of $10 billion in Iraqi revenues for reconstruction projects, including delivery of essential services, on an equitable basis

I am very disappointed with Jerry McNerney. I sent him some bucks in the Blue America. Dammit, we need wind engineers in government! I am hoping he voted no b/c of the hydrocarbon bill and other trojans that Dennis Kuchinich found. But his e-mail is one of those form thingies, it won’t take me from here in Canada, wrong zip. I’ll see if I can find him some other way. I want to ask him and Ciro Rodruiguez, too.

I’m trying, x d C. . . Thanks. [Readers on the internets, at least, seem to be picking up these hydrocarbon law facts very quickly, it’s encouraging to see; now that Matt Taibbi of Rolling Stone has tackled the subject, for one, I hope we’ll see some more non-internets coverage of what’s really at stake in Iraq.]

http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/51657/

Bush’s so-called concessions are nothing more than accepting “benchmarks” for the Iraq government. No mention of what they would be, and no mention of what penalties would be attached, should they not be met. Veto promised for proposed funding through July only.

So basically, they’re hyping his concessions, when in reality he’s making none.

But this Kucinich thing? Is that confirmed? Is it in the links up there around 46 & 58?

HotFlash @ 108

I am very disappointed with Jerry McNerney. I sent him some bucks in the Blue America. Dammit, we need wind engineers in government! I am hoping he voted no b/c of the hydrocarbon bill and other trojans that Dennis Kuchinich found. But his e-mail is one of those form thingies, it won’t take me from here in Canada, wrong zip. I’ll see if I can find him some other way. I want to ask him and Ciro Rodruiguez, too.

What is the correct ZIP? Perhaps someone who has that zip can send it for you?

Gunga Djinn …
didn’t hear Kucinich but the leadership chose to remove the provision requiring congressional approval of any war against Iraq before the last round

and the benchmarks are above which include the requirement on the hydrocarbon bill

Siun, Good golly…. a radical lefty might just accuse the Dems of owning the war/ occupation after reading that little bit of madness.

HotFlash @ 108

I am very disappointed with Jerry McNerney. I sent him some bucks in the Blue America. Dammit, we need wind engineers in government! I am hoping he voted no b/c of the hydrocarbon bill and other trojans that Dennis Kuchinich found. But his e-mail is one of those form thingies, it won’t take me from here in Canada, wrong zip. I’ll see if I can find him some other way. I want to ask him and Ciro Rodruiguez, too.

the mcgovern bill (hr2206, i think) that was voted on, and was defeated this afternoon, was just for the withdrawal (including contractors) – the bill under consideration now (hr2237, i think). you can find links to both bills here.

Jane Hamsher @ 27

Joe Buck @ 22

Ellen Tauscher voted yes! And I haven’t seen her playing the Blue Dog centrist-power-broker card lately. What’s up with her? Change of heart? Fear of a primary challenge with armies of Bay Area activists serving as troops?

No point in painting a bullseye on yourself for a bill that’s not going to pass.

Good One! It’s all about the numbers…

The “Iraqi Security Forces” are closely aligned with the Badr Brigade and Al Hakim (think death squads … thank you Negroponte, Cofer Black, Petraeus and friends).

The “militias” we’ve been so keen on disbanding have not been these forces but ones like Sadr’s who – though not clean – at least provide the only security many neighborhoods have.

When we removed the Sadr forces from protecting the markets, that was when the gigantic bombings of those markets happened – and continue to happen. The US and government forces are unable or unwilling to block the car bombers but refuse to allow forces who have had success on that score from protecting the people. Of course, the Sadrists also want the US out and are uncompromising on that so guess they are clearly the bad guys, eh?

Eureka … I’ve always been proud to be a “radical” … in the real sense that “radical” means returning to the core beliefs like the constitution and just treatment and such …

go to his web site…look on the side banner of sponsors! And get really pissed@!

http://www.carneyforcongress.com/contact/

Siun @ 39

It’s essential that we look at the actual bills this Congress is considering…

examples – residual troops left in Iraq even after “withdrawal” (which I heard HRC numbers at 70,000)

If this is true, then apparently the word “withdrawal” is just a string of letters.

or the hydrocarbon bill

What does that have to do with Iraq?

…or permission to invade Iran

WTF

Since when do Dems campaign to get us out of Iraq and then secretly say let’s go somewhere else stupid?

the list keeps going …

we need to be very vigilant if we really want to know what is going on

True true true.

xoites defends Constitution @ 60

Hugh @ 59

War with Iran is extreemly likely and has been planned for months.

Something I’ve wondered for some time is whether a President has to execute a war policy, even if he/she had no part in passing it. In other words, could Bush & the current Congress pass a law requiring the next Dem president to execute a war?

How far does the Executive branch power to define and execute our foreign policy go?

Siun @ 112: Thank you, and did you mean removed clause on war with IraN? (Trying in vain to sort through their deliberate smokescreen.)

Selise @ 114:

the mcgovern bill (hr2206, i think) that was voted on, and was defeated this afternoon, was just for the withdrawal (including contractors) – the bill under consideration now (hr2237, i think)

I just downloaded the PDF’s from links above;

I think you reversed them:
HR 2237=McGovern=voted on yesterday=about 5 pdf pages.

HP 2207=200 pdf pages, haven’t even begun to skim it; Iraq, Katrina, etc. etc..

(in post 120, the quoted statement

War with Iran is extreemly likely and has been planned for months.

appears to be associated with the wrong commenter…)

Gunga Djinn @ 121

Siun @ 112: Thank you, and did you mean removed clause on war with IraN? (Trying in vain to sort through their deliberate smokescreen.)

Selise @ 114:

the mcgovern bill (hr2206, i think) that was voted on, and was defeated this afternoon, was just for the withdrawal (including contractors) – the bill under consideration now (hr2237, i think)

I just downloaded the PDF’s from links above;

I think you reversed them:
HR 2237=McGovern=voted on yesterday=about 5 pdf pages.

HP 2207=200 pdf pages, haven’t even begun to skim it; Iraq, Katrina, etc. etc..

thank you. yep, i did reverse them – but i think you want to be reading hr2206 (hr2207 is the agricultural portion of hr1591 that was separated from the war portions).

‘course i could have gotten in wrong again – apparently, i’m almost stupid enough to be a member of congress (although that would be my only qualification).

oops…correction to 121:

should read:

HP 2206=200 pdf pages, haven’t even begun to skim it; Iraq, Katrina, etc. etc..

[confirmed: Obey, Emergency Appropriations for Fiscal Year 2007, Including Iraq, Katrina, Vet Care and Other Items, 202 pdf pages]

Selise @ 123

You watch me, I’ll watch you, and together we’ll SMASH those devilish little typo’s!

:)

xoites defends Constitution @ 111

HotFlash @ 108

I am very disappointed with Jerry McNerney. I sent him some bucks in the Blue America. Dammit, we need wind engineers in government! I am hoping he voted no b/c of the hydrocarbon bill and other trojans that Dennis Kuchinich found. But his e-mail is one of those form thingies, it won’t take me from here in Canada, wrong zip. I’ll see if I can find him some other way. I want to ask him and Ciro Rodruiguez, too.

What is the correct ZIP? Perhaps someone who has that zip can send it for you?

Try 95376 Tracy, Ca

or 95209, Stockton Ca

Sorry, too lazy to find any more

OT but on T: Where’s a thread anywhere on the fact that the 26,000 member oil workers union of Basra struck today against the privatization law? I would think this would be big news to the blogs: that they are putting it in Cheney’s face and in the face of all who would make privatization of Iraqi oil a benchmark for progress or withdrawal. Sorry, I don’t have the links, but they are out there, technos. I got an email from the US Labor Against the War coordinator on this. see www uslaboragainst war dot org for links and contacts.

Hassan Juma’a Awad, the leader of the Basra oil workers spoke to unions around the US on the 2005 USLAW tour and now his name is on the strike call. He seemed to be confident that Iraqis can handle Iraq. Now that the oil workers are taking this timely and cutting-edge action, I feel we should pay attention.

Gunga Djinn @ 125

Selise @ 123

You watch me, I’ll watch you, and together we’ll SMASH those devilish little typo’s!

:)

excellent! i’m counting on you!

jc @ 127 – Here’s one link about the strike that’s been posted by commenters in the threads here at FDL today and yesterday:

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/51632/

I’m willing on those oil workers, and very much hoping that they will prevail in this struggle. If the Cheney hydrocarbon-stealing bill fails to become law, those Iraqis will have been a huge part of the reason why.

My message to Carney:

I would have thought that a former officer would have enough concern for the troops to get them out of a bad situation. I guess not. What a disappointment. Funny how your website seems full of concern about bringing the troops home. When you get a chance to vote on it, you vote against it.

Does this show how low the integrity and honor of the officer corps has fallen to?

So, what WAS the outcome of the C-Span coverage of House Activity today with regards to the Iraq Funding Bill led by Obey, that Murtha went off on SO well . . . they broke twice for electroid votes about changes proposed by the ReThugs (stalling) and the next thing I saw was the Ag Portion being deliberated . .. ????

And, what the hell good does ANY Dem proposed funding come to if BoyKing has free rein to do Iran, if funding is conditional on PSA’s being in place, and NO timetables are attached to the funding?

What manner of fuckery IS this???

ok, here’s what i see from a preliminary skim of h.r.2206 (not including the parts on hiv/minimum wage/small buisness tax cuts/… (there’s 202 pages).

chapter 1 is “immediate funding needs”
chapter 2 is “additional funding”
chapter 3 contains most of the requirements and constraints

there are requirements for many, many reports to be made by the POTUS, the SecDef, OMB and even an external assessment. it is required that some of these reports be submitted before all the money appropriated will be made available.

the big report appears to be:
SEC. 1330 – on the progress the Government of Iraq (long list of items to be included siun above has listed)

because:
SEC. 1331. (a) LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS.—None of the funds provided by chapter 2 shall be available for obligation or expenditure unless—
(1) the President submits to the Congress, on or before July 13, 2007, the report required by section 1330; and
(2) a joint resolution of approval is enacted into law.

this sounds to me as though there aren’t really any benchmarks, just items to be reported on (maybe a good thing when it comes to the “hydrocarbon law” – i hate the idea of privatizing the iraqi’s oil against their wishes). then congress can fund or not fund the remainder of the $$.

other limitations:
SEC. 1312. None of the funds made available in this Act may be used in contravention of the following laws enacted or regulations promulgated to implement the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
SEC. 1327 – units may not be deployed unless they are “mission ready”
SEC. 1328 – limits the permissible length of combat deployment

here’s one i’m not sure about (page 64 line 3, in chapter 5), why is only part, and not all, of the money not to be used for permanent bases? – “Provided further, That of the funds provided under this heading, $274,800,000 shall not be obligated or expended until the Secretary of Defense certifies that none of the funds are to be used for the purpose of providing facilities for the permanent basing of United States military personnel in Iraq.

……. so, based on the above, here’s my very preliminary conclusions:

no timeline for withdrawal. benchmarks on iraq government are for reporting purposes only (although congress can then decide to not release the remainder of the $$).

sections 1312, 1327 and 1328 look good, but i have no idea how loophole free they are. will need some study tomorrow on this.

will this help end the war? i don’t see it.

hoping other firepups will jump in with other views on this bill.

selise @ 132

ok, here’s what i see from a preliminary skim of h.r.2206 (not including the parts on hiv/minimum wage/small buisness tax cuts/… (there’s 202 pages).

chapter 1 is “immediate funding needs”
chapter 2 is “additional funding”
chapter 3 contains most of the requirements and constraints

there are requirements for many, many reports to be made by the POTUS, the SecDef, OMB and even an external assessment. it is required that some of these reports be submitted before all the money appropriated will be made available.

the big report appears to be:
SEC. 1330 – on the progress the Government of Iraq (long list of items to be included siun above has listed)

because:
SEC. 1331. (a) LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS.—None of the funds provided by chapter 2 shall be available for obligation or expenditure unless—
(1) the President submits to the Congress, on or before July 13, 2007, the report required by section 1330; and
(2) a joint resolution of approval is enacted into law.

this sounds to me as though there aren’t really any benchmarks, just items to be reported on (maybe a good thing when it comes to the “hydrocarbon law” – i hate the idea of privatizing the iraqi’s oil against their wishes). then congress can fund or not fund the remainder of the $$.

other limitations:
SEC. 1312. None of the funds made available in this Act may be used in contravention of the following laws enacted or regulations promulgated to implement the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
SEC. 1327 – units may not be deployed unless they are “mission ready”
SEC. 1328 – limits the permissible length of combat deployment

here’s one i’m not sure about (page 64 line 3, in chapter 5), why is only part, and not all, of the money not to be used for permanent bases? – “Provided further, That of the funds provided under this heading, $274,800,000 shall not be obligated or expended until the Secretary of Defense certifies that none of the funds are to be used for the purpose of providing facilities for the permanent basing of United States military personnel in Iraq.

……. so, based on the above, here’s my very preliminary conclusions:

no timeline for withdrawal. benchmarks on iraq government are for reporting purposes only (although congress can then decide to not release the remainder of the $$).

sections 1312, 1327 and 1328 look good, but i have no idea how loophole free they are. will need some study tomorrow on this.

will this help end the war? i don’t see it.

hoping other firepups will jump in with other views on this bill.

Thanks Selise, for breaking it down; I haven’t had time to read any of it yet

And thanks Suin for finding that link to Speaker Pelosi’s website

I am really proud that Lloyd is my rep. And that he withstood the machinations of Tom DeLay and a politicized Justice Department.

Howie went over the edge. You see his list? Everyone’s a reactionary, an electoral whore, or something along those lines. He’s done a world of good, but this is just crazy talk and I pray he regains his sanity.

Rick Boucher’s a reactionary? Sure – until we’re talking net neutrality. Then he’ll be wonderful again. Nancy Boyda’s an electoral whore? She’s representing freakin’ Kansas. Maybe Howie wants Weird Jim Ryun back.

This sort of ripping your friends a new one, the moment they aren’t willing to go quite as far as you are, is destructive to the movement. These people aren’t Liebermen, but they weren’t ready to go as far as McGovern was. We should be proud of having gotten 170 votes for that, not ripping everyone who didn’t.

RT – I have been wondering if Howie was as sick with a knot in his stomach as I am over this. I hear you I really do. But this Iraqi occupation is now and always has been bat shit insane in every possible way…nothing excuses it except perhaps ignorance and that is no excuse for members of congress who listened to progressives with facts on hand before they accepted campaign contributions under the auspice of ending this fiasco. jmho

Will head over to dwt and see what he wrote..

RT and ES -

probably three quarters of a million people dead and 4 million refugees… our troops bogged down in a situation that could turn far more deadly with no withdrawal plan – they could be cut off…. and we’re creating a generation of iraqis who hate us, maybe enough to join in al qaeda type attacks on american civilians.

the mood i’m in today, i’d use much, much stronger language than howie did. voting against mcgovern’s bill was a vote to kill more americans.

give howie a few days… and give me a few weeks… then maybe it will be possible to look at it more dispassionately. today i just can’t do it.

selise – I am with you and dont plan on calming down much til we (are out of Iraq) prevail with peace.

Eureka Springs @ 138

selise – I am with you and dont plan on calming down much til we (are out of Iraq) prevail with peace.

i know. thank you.

larue @ 131 – The “short-leash” Iraq funding bill [H.R. 2206 that selise has combed through above] passed this evening – by 221 to 205.

selise – Thank you for that analysis. That actually gives me a little hope back. It sounds as though the provision for the second vote in late July may have been written so as to give a vote to end the occupation clear passage even if no oil law has been passed in Iraq (despite the fact that Democrats may be secretly hoping one has passed by then).

It seems this House bill is unlikely to become law, what with veto threats and all, so I guess the next question is how much more is David Obey prepared to give Bush: is mandated passage of an Iraqi oil-forfeiting law going to be the next bargaining chip in play? [Bush’s new “benchmark talk” leads me to suspect that’s what he’s hoping for.]

It’s also not clear to me how much a problem no specified end-date in a bill would be should Congress vote (in July) to end the occupation and to fund a redeployment. The magnifying glasses need to be close at hand as this bill moves into the Senate…

Calling Members of Congress names for not voting the way you’d like is unproductive and shows surprising naivety. On votes like these, Members of Congress do have to take into account their constituency back home. This is especially true for new Members of Congress.

Nancy Boyda (KS) represents a very conservative Kansas district where military issues are very important. Even though her district tilts slightly in favor of getting out of Iraq, her constituency won’t support an immediate withdrawal. She is aware of this and has to vote accordingly. She is also facing a tough re-election fight.

You don’t build a movement by castigating Members of Congress for not voting the way you want them to vote. You educate them on your issues and help them to educate their constituency on your issues and why those issues should be the issues of their constituency. A new Member of Congress cannot do that overnight. It is a long-haul process that requires recognizing that Members of Congress do, in the end, have to represent their constituency. On some important votes they will stand with you and other important votes they may have to stand against you. That’s why building strong coalitions requires time, tremendous effort and infinite patience.

Lloyd Doggett is my congressman.
for which i thank all that is holy.

ceabaird @ 130

My message to Carney:

I would have thought that a former officer would have enough concern for the troops to get them out of a bad situation. I guess not. What a disappointment. Funny how your website seems full of concern about bringing the troops home. When you get a chance to vote on it, you vote against it.

Does this show how low the integrity and honor of the officer corps has fallen to?

You do know the guy worked for Feith and had a fundraiser headed by Richard Perle! nuff said/

Jon @ 141

Calling Members of Congress names for not voting the way you’d like is unproductive and shows surprising naivety. On votes like these, Members of Congress do have to take into account their constituency back home. This is especially true for new Members of Congress.

Nancy Boyda (KS) represents a very conservative Kansas district where military issues are very important. Even though her district tilts slightly in favor of getting out of Iraq, her constituency won’t support an immediate withdrawal. She is aware of this and has to vote accordingly. She is also facing a tough re-election fight.

You don’t build a movement by castigating Members of Congress for not voting the way you want them to vote. You educate them on your issues and help them to educate their constituency on your issues and why those issues should be the issues of their constituency. A new Member of Congress cannot do that overnight. It is a long-haul process that requires recognizing that Members of Congress do, in the end, have to represent their constituency. On some important votes they will stand with you and other important votes they may have to stand against you. That’s why building strong coalitions requires time, tremendous effort and infinite patience.

My understanding she ran a progressive
Jon @ 141

Calling Members of Congress names for not voting the way you’d like is unproductive and shows surprising naivety. On votes like these, Members of Congress do have to take into account their constituency back home. This is especially true for new Members of Congress.

Nancy Boyda (KS) represents a very conservative Kansas district where military issues are very important. Even though her district tilts slightly in favor of getting out of Iraq, her constituency won’t support an immediate withdrawal. She is aware of this and has to vote accordingly. She is also facing a tough re-election fight.

You don’t build a movement by castigating Members of Congress for not voting the way you want them to vote. You educate them on your issues and help them to educate their constituency on your issues and why those issues should be the issues of their constituency. A new Member of Congress cannot do that overnight. It is a long-haul process that requires recognizing that Members of Congress do, in the end, have to represent their constituency. On some important votes they will stand with you and other important votes they may have to stand against you. That’s why building strong coalitions requires time, tremendous effort and infinite patience.

Sounds a bit of BS’er to me… This is what she said when she wanted to be elected:

“Foreign Policy

Establish a Realistic Plan for Iraq

The three-year-long Iraq war has cost thousands of American lives and has left Iraq without a functioning government. This chaos is a direct result of the current administration’s poor planning for the occupation of Iraq. Due to their failures, Iraq has become a training ground for terrorists, who may pose a greater threat to our security than Saddam Hussein ever did.

Out of respect for the Iraqi people and in honor of the American patriots who have already died, we have stayed for over three years and helped Iraq restore at least minimal government functions. But our assistance cannot be a blank check extending indefinitely. “Stay the course” is a political slogan, not a military strategy.

The administration must establish a responsible, realistic plan for dealing with the insurgency and a timeline during which the Iraqi citizens must establish a viable government for themselves…

Was she a republican at one time? Figures…

Foreign Policy: http://www.nancyforcongress.com/issues.php

http://www.issues2000.org/House/Nancy_Boyda_War_ _Peace.htm

pow wow @129
RE: Here’s one link about the strike that’s been posted by commenters in the threads here at FDL today and yesterday:

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/51632/

Thanks. Really, really ON topic after all! Missed it earlier.

Jon @ 141: Calling Members of Congress names for not voting the way you’d like is unproductive and shows surprising naivety. On votes like these, Members of Congress do have to take into account their constituency back home. This is especially true for new Members of Congress.

Nancy Boyda (KS) represents a very conservative Kansas district where military issues are very important. Even though her district tilts slightly in favor of getting out of Iraq, her constituency won’t support an immediate withdrawal. She is aware of this and has to vote accordingly. She is also facing a tough re-election fight.

You don’t build a movement by castigating Members of Congress for not voting the way you want them to vote. You educate them on your issues and help them to educate their constituency on your issues and why those issues should be the issues of their constituency. A new Member of Congress cannot do that overnight. It is a long-haul process that requires recognizing that Members of Congress do, in the end, have to represent their constituency. On some important votes they will stand with you and other important votes they may have to stand against you. That’s why building strong coalitions requires time, tremendous effort and infinite patience.

My understanding was that she ran as an economic progressive?

However, sounds a bit of BS’er to me… This is what she said when she wanted to be elected:

“Foreign Policy

Establish a Realistic Plan for Iraq

The three-year-long Iraq war has cost thousands of American lives and has left Iraq without a functioning government. This chaos is a direct result of the current administration’s poor planning for the occupation of Iraq. Due to their failures, Iraq has become a training ground for terrorists, who may pose a greater threat to our security than Saddam Hussein ever did.

Out of respect for the Iraqi people and in honor of the American patriots who have already died, we have stayed for over three years and helped Iraq restore at least minimal government functions. But our assistance cannot be a blank check extending indefinitely. “Stay the course” is a political slogan, not a military strategy.

The administration must establish a responsible, realistic plan for dealing with the insurgency and a timeline during which the Iraqi citizens must establish a viable government for themselves…

Wasn’t she a republican at one time? Turned democrat in 2003 — convenient — Figures…

Foreign Policy: http://www.nancyforcongress.com/issues.php

http://www.issues2000.org/House/Nancy_Boyda_War_ _Peace.htm

selise @ 132

ok, here’s what i see from a preliminary skim of h.r.2206 (not including the parts on hiv/minimum wage/small buisness tax cuts/… (there’s 202 pages).

…

Thank for delving in :) … will have a read tomorrow… Also what did ever happen to the House : ‘Accountability in Contracting Act’?

http://blogs.usatoday.com/onde…..es_ac.html

…regarding our ‘paid’ army that we need to keep an eye on…

http://www.tomdispatch.com/index.mhtml?pid=190995

CheckingIn @ 146

Jon @ 141: Calling Members of Congress names for not voting the way you’d like is unproductive and shows surprising naivety. On votes like these, Members of Congress do have to take into account their constituency back home. This is especially true for new Members of Congress.

Nancy Boyda (KS) represents a very conservative Kansas district where military issues are very important. Even though her district tilts slightly in favor of getting out of Iraq, her constituency won’t support an immediate withdrawal. She is aware of this and has to vote accordingly. She is also facing a tough re-election fight.

You don’t build a movement by castigating Members of Congress for not voting the way you want them to vote. You educate them on your issues and help them to educate their constituency on your issues and why those issues should be the issues of their constituency. A new Member of Congress cannot do that overnight. It is a long-haul process that requires recognizing that Members of Congress do, in the end, have to represent their constituency. On some important votes they will stand with you and other important votes they may have to stand against you. That’s why building strong coalitions requires time, tremendous effort and infinite patience.

My understanding was that she ran as an economic progressive?

However, sounds a bit of BS’er to me… This is what she said when she wanted to be elected:

“Foreign Policy

Establish a Realistic Plan for Iraq

The three-year-long Iraq war has cost thousands of American lives and has left Iraq without a functioning government. This chaos is a direct result of the current administration’s poor planning for the occupation of Iraq. Due to their failures, Iraq has become a training ground for terrorists, who may pose a greater threat to our security than Saddam Hussein ever did.

Out of respect for the Iraqi people and in honor of the American patriots who have already died, we have stayed for over three years and helped Iraq restore at least minimal government functions. But our assistance cannot be a blank check extending indefinitely. “Stay the course” is a political slogan, not a military strategy.

The administration must establish a responsible, realistic plan for dealing with the insurgency and a timeline during which the Iraqi citizens must establish a viable government for themselves…

Wasn’t she a republican at one time? Turned democrat in 2003 — convenient — Figures…

Foreign Policy: http://www.nancyforcongress.com/issues.php

http://www.issues2000.org/House/Nancy_Boyda_War_ _Peace.htm

2003 was a convenient time for a Kansas Republican to turn Democrat??

In which alternate universe??