As an Ohioan, I also am sensitive to those swing/Republican districts we took last fall. AND WANT TO HOLD ON TO.

Carney’s is such a district.

So is Zack Space’s here in Ohio.

And Charlie Wilson’s as well.

I’m sure Rahm has told them that Job 1 is reelection.

And that means keeping the big red circle off your back.

By whatever means necessary.

Adam (Art Director at DownWithTyranny) @ 139

Yes, Howie took me to a restaurant in LA where they served chocolate icecream without sugar or fat. It was amazing!

Jane loved it too. It’s called CRU.

I see it’s on Griffith Park BLvd. Okay after the fire?

Just so you know.

Ciro? Not in the last election if I’m not mistaken. In fact I think his Blue America “donate” thing was disabled, no?

I respect Jerry M very much and think he’ll make a great Congressman, but his explanation since the vote and his aides’ @ Calitics the other day re: the Iraq supplemental – against McGovern and for Obey is … as Colonel Potter used to say “Horsepucky.”

Jerry M told Howie @ 52 above

I just got off the phone with him. He said he struggled with the vote but is convinced that the supplemental strategy is the right way to go and that it will force more and more Republicans to buckle and do the right thing. He felt the other bill was counterproductive and would have played into Bush’s hands. I don’t agree with him personally but I feel certain of his sincerity. I know ending the war is a huge priority for him.

My reading of his explanation is that it was purely political

He said he struggled with the vote but is convinced that the supplemental strategy is the right way to go and that it will force more and more Republicans to buckle and do the right thing.

A strategy?

He felt the other bill was counterproductive

Counterproductive to what?

His aide – sorry can’t remember her name – said something to the effect that he’s a scientist and as such he methodically looks at the bills on which he votes, and that the Obey bill contained benchmarks to hold the Iraqi’s accountable (I could be mistaken about the last part, and if I am, I apologize), well, sorry to drive a truck thru that statement, but, let’s look at the bill for which he did vote …

Re: the “benchmarks”

[…] So, what’s left in the bill that Bush doesn’t like? Benchmarks!

But there are two problems with this. Bush DOES like them. And they’re NOT benchmarks. A benchmark is a standard of excellence against which other items are measured. Or it’s a measure of progress toward a goal. The so-called benchmarks in the House bill are nothing of the sort.

Here’s the relevant section:

“SEC. 1710. (a) BENCHMARKS- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, fifty percent of the funds appropriated by this Act for assistance for Iraq under the headings `Economic Support Fund’ and `International Narcotics and Law Enforcement’ shall be withheld from obligation until the President certifies to the Committees on Appropriations and Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committees on Appropriations and Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives that the Government of Iraq has—”

Then the bill lists five (count em!) so-called “benchmarks,” starting with:

“(1) enacted a broadly accepted hydro-carbon law that equitably shares oil revenues among all Iraqis;”

[…] Far from equitably sharing oil revenues, it hands the bulk of them over to foreign (probably largely US and British) corporations. This is the number one “benchmark”, the theft of the oil of a nation we aggressively attacked and occupied. […]

“(2) adopted legislation necessary for the conduct of provincial and local elections, taken steps to implement such legislation, and set a schedule to conduct provincial and local elections;”

This is ludicrous. The majority of Iraqis have already backed ending the occupation. A majority of the members of their current parliament have signed a bill to end the occupation. And we’re going to threaten to end the occupation unless they hold elections and act like a democracy? […]

“(3) reformed current laws governing the de-Baathification process to allow for more equitable treatment of individuals affected by such laws;”

Oh, great, we’re also going to threaten to leave unless they undo destructive laws that we imposed on them. Of course, we’ll tell them what the new laws should be. […]

“(4) amended the Constitution of Iraq consistent with the principles contained in Article 137 of such constitution; and”

This involves a process of amending “their” Constitution. We are demanding that they complete it or else… we’ll end our occupation of their country.

“(5) allocated and begun expenditure of $10,000,000,000 in Iraqi revenues for reconstruction projects, including delivery of essential services, on an equitable basis.”

Hmmm. So, after destroying their country, occupying it for years, slaughtering perhaps a million citizens, driving millions more to flee the country, and generally ruining their society, while dumping hundreds of billions of US dollars into war profiteering corporations pretending to reconstruct Iraq, we’re going to demand that the Iraqis shell out $10 billion to pay for the reconstruction themselves. […]

Click the link above to read the entire breakdown by David Swanson

You think he’s mistaken about the Iraqi oil law? Click here

Jerry should run from this vote as fast as he can, because it’s not a vote against the occupation – it’s a vote to try to hang on the Republicans. And if he keeps reminding people of his poor explanation, he’ll find that he’s turning the people who believed in him away, and that in 2008 when he needs help, he won’t find it

Oklahoma kiddo @ 159

I strongly believe in the rule of law. By definition I cannot subscribe to the notion that two wrongs, or for that matter, a thousand-million wrongs make a right.

Do you, for instance, believe in the rule of law in the “Patriot” Act that abolishes habeas corpus? Or the one that condones torture?

I do not. Your move.

fahrender @ 192

greenwarrior (#117)

Lieberwurst is not an Independent. He is a Dependent. He is dependent on AIP*C and the GOP …..

Agreed! I cede to the gentleman at the fahr end.

The fahr left end I assume.

greenwarrior (#117)

Lieberwurst is not an Independent. He is a Dependent. He is dependent on AIP*C and the GOP …..

Agreed! I cede to the gentleman at the fahr end.