Brian Baird may have thought the big dog & pony show he was treated to in Iraq was impressive, but I’m guessing he was somewhat moved by this as well:
Recently returned from Iraq, U.S. Rep. Brian Baird got an earful Monday night from angry war foes who jammed a town hall meeting.
The Washington Democrat, who voted against the Iraq war resolution in 2002, now opposes a timeline for withdrawal of U.S. troops from that country.
Anti-war constituents repeatedly questioned Baird’s reasons for supporting the Bush administration’s decision to continued the “surge” of 20,000 additional troops at least until next spring.
“There is only one way to end an illegal and immoral war, and that’s to end it,” said Zamme Joi, an anti-war activist from Vancouver. Joi was among several activists who noted that they helped elect Baird to office in 1998 and continued to re-elect him in a congressional district that twice voted for President Bush. They called his position to support the war now a betrayal.
In May, Baird supported a bill that would have required troop levels to start falling by Oct. 1. But his perspective changed after a visit to Iraq in early August.
He now opposes a withdrawal timeline – and said he thinks that most of the country agrees with him.
“I have to believe that there is a quiet majority of people out there who think the war has been a terrible mistake, but they sure don’t want to see us lose,” he told The Columbian editorial board earlier Monday.
In fact the most recent Zogby poll, 54% of Americans U.S. should set a timeline for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. That would be a majority. Is this the kind of great “information” Baird got on his elaborately choreographed trip to Iraq?
It’s becoming apparent that these people are being bombarded with such bad information, so many “experts” whose only expertise seems to be at abject failure, that they can’t see the patently obvious any more. Watch the YouTube above. Baird’s constituents are sputtering with rage as he sits there and rubs snake oil all over his head and says “see, really, it makes the hair grow, just like the guy said. You just watch.”
Being the Michael O’Hanlon of the House may make him the darling of CNN and MSNBC, but the voters in his district who elected him as an anti-war candidate seem somewhat less than thrilled.
More from: The Stranger, Northwest Progressive Institute
(h/t swag & scarce)
Related posts:
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
Jane!
2
BADA BING!
Congrats, Biodun!
Cheers, Jane!
attaaaaack!! attaaaaaaaack! get ‘em with INFO!
Jane… Thom Hartman had Margorie Cohn on his show who said that she is hearing rumors that Lieberman will be the pick to replace Gonzo…. and since he is “one of their own” he will be confirmed…
Then discussed the downstream effects, Repug replacing Lieberman and moves the Senate majority to the Repugs. OMG…
I hope he learned a lesson from that meeting. I think he was just naive in the first place, and unfortunately uninformed. Should have talked first to his neighbor Norm Dicks, whose in a strongly Dem military district (Bremerton/Bangor), and has been voting on our side. Norm’s been in DC since 1976 and presumably knows how to sift the info.
I’m telling you…there’s koolaid in the capitol hill. koolaid, I say!
(and yes that’s me above, forgot to log in *rolls eyes*)
So, if Lieberman becomes AG, then does Jodi Rell (R-Gov. of Ct) pick a replacement for Joey bag o’ donuts?
Where in the hell is the phone call from Pelosi to STFU in all of this kabuki?
I want leadership, not leaderSHEEP.
This is simply delusional. We’ll see what the country really thinks about that in election races ‘08.
Why don’t these “winning in Iraq” people get the fact that you can’t “win” an occupation.
Lieberman AG?
I don’t THINK so.. Even Joe’s not THAT dumb.
Tradin a fat job for six years for a 15 month gig ta no where? Why?
We can only hope Baird faces a serious contender in the primaries. It sounds like he could be smacked down.
katymine @ 6
Would LOVE it if Lieberman did that, but don’t think he will. I’m not that lucky.
Committee chairs and majority leader stay the same, and Lieberman votes with the GOP anyway. At least he’d be out of the Senate in 18 months and out of his committee chair.
Heh, reality check dude,people are pissed off and you just made yourself a target.
Wait till he goes to Longview tonight.
Yeah this guy really needs a primary opponent- and usually I don’t like to see that happen.
ccmask @ 9
Yep. Which is fine: at least we’ll know that person is a real Repug, not Joe-Repug-lite. But I agree with Jane. It won’t come to that. Joe-Lie will not be nominated for AG. His name is not on the list that’s floating around
ccmask @ 9
My understanding is yes. And with Craig’s imminent departure, what would that mean for the Idaho seat?
rwcole @ 13
Thom Hartman and Marjorie Cohen are talking about it and what a political coup this would be.Hartmann is very concerned
katymine @ 6
I have long predicted that.
katymine @ 6
I’ve seen rumors anout Lieberman replacing every BushCo resigner since the 2006 election. It never happens. It won’t happen. And if Lieberman himself thinks that Bush is going to offer him any payback for his betrayals, he’s kidding himself.
ccmask @ 9
I’m having trouble seeing this one, too. It’s hard to think of a pick that would more enrage the Democratic wing of the Democratic party.
Jane Hamsher @ 15
And he would not be able to return to his Senate seat at the end of the 18 months, correct?
Jane you have such a way with words. I love the way you hand pick words, arrange them in sentences, creating paragraphs that are so great.
katymine @ 6
Wouldn’t have any effect. The committee chairs are “fixed” until the next Congress. Getting rid of Lieberman would be great..special election or another Senate election in ‘08 for Lieberman’s seat. Lamont would be a shoe in.
puma
That’s a hell of a “payback” 16 months in a serpent’s nest- with nothin ta gain an plenty ta lose…
Pretty Pictures:
http://freewayblogger.blogspot…..-soon.html
Coming Attractions!
Ah, the old “silent majority” claim, last refuge of the deluded.
rwcole @ 27
Well, I didn’t say Lieberman was looking for the nod. But I can’t imagine anybody thinking this nomination would be a good deal.
This reminds me of the comments by the soldiers who wrote the op/ed about the war recently. As they said, the dog-n-pony show gives a completely different perspective – the Pentagon’s sales pitch – to visiting dignitaries. It is foolish for anyone who drops in for a quick visit to buy the sugarcoated version they are presented.
My goodness, isn’t this something we all should have learned in Critical Thinking 101?
mc @ 19:
Idaho is so deeply red I doubt a Dem could capture that seat.
here’s what’s totally bizzare about that youtube;
biard says “they are standing up against al qaeda”
what is wrong with this guy?, these are insurgents that want America out of their country…this guy is repeating the bush lines like he has been zombified and is now a mariontte
Redshift @ 29
When Baird says the public agrees with him, he’s rounding to the nearest majority.
IIRC, Lieberman meets with both the D’s and R’s in private senate strategy meetings.. Why on earth would the R’s want to change that?
Maybe Joe is ready to come out.
We need some libertarian dems for the mountain states.
ccmask @ 36
Uggggh.
Biodun @ 32
I’m assuming the Gov in Idaho is a Republic as well, meaning Craig’s replacement would be an appointed R.
“I have to believe that there is a quiet majority of people out there who think the war has been a terrible mistake, but they sure don’t want to see us lose,”
This reminds me. My beloved Democrats STILL keep getting beat on the head with the “losing” thing. You see, most Americans DO like a winner. We like to WIN. Maybe it doesn’t resonate as strongly here at fdl….but being a WINNER resonates very well throughout America.
As to winning/losing….long, long, ago both Ms. Taylor Marsh and our own Mr. TSF got it right: We WON the war. Now let’s end the Occupation.
The cold hard facts are that the US military kicked the holy snot out of the “vaunted” Iraqis. The Iraqis can barely fight their way out of a paper bag.
I just think that the sooner the D team restores the talk to how we already WON, how our military DID win the war….the more and more many Americans will move even stronger and faster towards withdrawal. I believe it’s time for the D team to start talking about our VICTORY, and then combine it with Bush’s LOSS of an occupation. But give Americans the room to say “we won”.
Ghostman
katymine @ 6
I was thinking last night about Hatch, to whom the same arguments have been applied. We know that what Hatch really wants is to be on the Supreme Court. What if he made a deal that he takes the AG’s job and in return, if there’s another Supreme Court opening, he gets it?
It doesn’t seem like he has much to lose — if he doesn’t get appointed by Bush, the chance of there being another Republican president before he’s too old is slim. (This scenario is less plausible for Lieberman since he’s younger.)
What do you guys think?
OT,
Gee why does Lierman speculation highjack our thread everytime? He’s a frickin bogeyman and a symbol, but I thought we were riffin about the turncoat democrats Like Baird? Oops, same topic.
I am tired of Lieberman, I just wish He would LEAVE.
Redshift @ 29
I thought of that too, but the post was getting long.
I personally think Bush is just floating names to see what the reactions are. And the msm is more than happy to oblige, at this point in time. But whether he will pick someone who will piss the Dems off, well, that would be so Bushlike.
mc @ 39:
Gov. “Butch” Otter, Repug-ID
perris @ 33
Insurgents or resisters of occupation? And how do you tell the difference?
Biodun @ 45
“Butch Otter?!?!” Let the fun begin….
landofthefree @ 31
You’d think so. And be careful never to take any investment advice from anyone comparing casualties to last winter instead of last summer; they probably don’t understand “compared to the same quarter last year” in finance either.
OT..This story has “legs” and might be the straw that breaks Bush’s back. (But I also thought trashing the Constitution would have done it)
August 28, 2007
Iraq Weapons Are a Focus of Criminal Investigations
NYT link
The odds of a supreme court opening in the next year are pretty slim- and once we get past Christmas or so- dems aren’t gonna let Bush make a pick- it’s too late. Hatch is evil- but he ain’t stoopid.
The Bush administration is effectively over- bout the only think left to do is to preside over the defeat in Iraq.
ccmask @ 44
Word has it that Ted Olson might get it. (Word through the grapevine.)
Arizona polls at around 65% of All voters wanting to get out of Iraq.
How can a so called Red state turn against the war?
Pat Tillman…
Lori Piestewa – she was the first woman killed in Iraq and was with Jessica Lynch
Spc. Alyssa Peterson’s suicide after refusing to participating in “enhanced interrogation”
http://www.commondreams.org/he…..102-05.htm
OT — sorry, Jane, but I have to ask this after Scarecrow’s critique of NYT this morning.
Is Stolberg on the take? Or simply stupid?
She’s quoting Ari Fleischer about Gonzo — but Fleischer’s not a White House staffer, a PR flack paid by the White House to promote the failed Iraq War.
Was Fleischer paid to get Stolberg to post something positive about Gonzo in scope with his PR efforts?
I may need to re-SPOTLIGHT Scarecrow’s piece once again and ask those questions. Shills, the lot of them; the least they could do is tell us they’re shilling.
I love how citizens who came to hear and talk to their Congressman are characterized by the anchorman as “an angry mob” in the introduction to the segment. Then, he says in the wrapup that it “takes a lot of guts” to change positions. Both the reporter and the anchorwoman agree with him that the Congressman is doing the right thing.
The fix is in on Baird, folks.
ccmask @ 9
I hope Rell has some sense not to appoint a Republican. If she has to nominate anyone, Lamont would deserve it.
Jane Hamsher @ 43
Well, we appreciate your leaving some room for us to be clever, and not taking all the good snark yourself. *g*
Steve-AR @ 49
Excerpt:
An eye-opening assertion, considering that the Iraq occupation has been little more than an enormous ring of fraud and kickbacks.
Fern @ 46
well that’s my point, they are the resistance to our occupation, there are very few al qaeda
yet baird says “they are standing up against al qaeda”
he is zombified and a bushie, that is the only explanation
As I pointed out last night, Baird has no background in foreign affairs. He does have a PhD in clinical psychology so you would think he had some understanding of “denial”.
A “quiet majority” like the Silent Majority before it is a political ploy to validate the unconscionable by appealing to a non-existent majority. Baird has nothing and a majority of incorporeal invisible Americans support him on this.
Perhaps the Dog & Pony Show includes giving the Rep. a ‘brick’ of cash from the Billions we sent over there.
Steve-AR @ 49
“involves a senior American officer who worked closely with Gen. David H. Petraeus in setting up the logistics operation to supply the Iraqi forces when General Petraeus was in charge of training and equipping those forces in 2004 and 2005, American officials said Monday”
Pretty much says Petraeus was in charge and the officer followed his orders, doesn’t it?
From the vid: “He (Baird) said he doesn’t care about the political fallout…”
well, *that’s* convenient… so he won’t mind when he gets voted out, presumably.
TV guy wails:
Aaanngggrryy mob, in introducing the story.
I hope someday he sees an actual angry mob.
The “liberal” press, yeah right.
Joel
NPR trotted Baird out last week as “proof” that the surge was working-not in Iraq, but as a PR strategy to convince so-called moderates that we need more time.
Because I was driving at the time, in order to not smash my forehead repeatedly against the dashboard, I made a supreme effort to remain in my “happy place” until the story was over.
What is this a$$hole’s IQ? Did he graduate from high school? And, how in the he** did he get elected? By default?
TeddySanFran @ 54
KATU sucks, it is a horrible news station.
Their big thing is blowing coverage of storms so out of proportion it is infuriating.
Usually you can see why a congresscritter takes the position he does- in this case- it’s a fuckin mystery.
Maybe this guy got convinced that we’re gonna be clearly winning by november and wanted ta get on the bandwagon while there was still a seat?
Beats me!
LS @ 60
I bet that won’t be in the September report.
mc @ 24
How would he? I don’t know how CT deals with replacements. But once HoJo is out, he’d have to try and fight Dodd in ‘10, at the earliest.
rwcole @ 50:
I agree that the Bush administration is more or less over. But I’m afraid Cheney is still dangerous. He has nothing to lose, has no horizon, and is playing an end game. He’s gunning for Iran, and Chimpy might just let him do it. Going after Iran would be suicidal, IMO.
Redshift @ 29
That really surprised me too — this guy Baird is old enough to remember the first Silent Majority, and that it’s a Nixonism.
LS @ 61
or he was being set up as scapegoat from the get-go
Iran-Contra Redux anyone?
rwcole @ 67
You have to wonder what the Rethugs have on him, don’t you?
If Lieberman left, shouldn’t he be replaced with another Independant?
Bustednuckles @ 66
Most TV news is horrid. No matter where you are from.
Puma
Does he fly through Minnesota to get to Ideeho?
Ghostman – very well said. You can’t “win” or “lose” an occupation. You are either occupying a sovereign nation or you are not.
Heh, remember back a couple years ago when the Republicans would get their panties in a wad when people started to refer to the Iraq War as an occupation? At first, they bristled and said it was horrible to refer to us as an occupying force. “We’re liberators, not occupiers!” They sure dropped that dead-end argument quickly, didn’t they? (Of course, it helped that many of the military leaders “on the ground” agreed that we were occupying that nation).
Kathy/Fozzetti @ 74
I see your reasoning, but it just doesn’t happen that way in practice.
“I have to believe that there is a quiet majority of people out there who think the war has been a terrible mistake, but they sure don’t want to see us lose”
How does that work exactly. How can we “lose” a civil war?
“The Iraqi people are standing up to Al Qaeda…”
He sounds just like Scott McClellan.
What a himbo.
Interesting, the Baird thing sounds Rovian to me; threaten him to go along with the story, or else…perhaps exposure…causing it piss off the Dems, and let the Dems eat their own. Leaving no fingerprints.
rwcole @ 76
I wasn’t going to be the first to say it.
rayne @ 53:
Stolberg is mostly a stenographer, sometimes a reporter.
perris @ 58
I agree with you – it’s just that I’m getting uncomfortable with using the term “insurgency” to describe this.
From Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurgency
TRex @ 80
But if they’re standing up, shouldn’t we be standing down?
Bio
I really don’t think that even Cheney REALLY wants to invade Iran- I think it’s sabre rattling- but what the hell- these guys often surprise me.
rwcole @ 86
I don’t see Cheney leaving office with Iran as it is.
EvilDrPuma @ 57
LS @ 60
And combined with the law suit by the two Americans who were put in solitary for 97 days and tortured by the US Military.
Coz
yeah the whole “win/lose” dichotomy is a joke when applied to this thing- but he’s probably right in thinking that if and when our troops come out of there- there will be a very bad feeling among a majority of americans. You’d have to do it at night–
Re Petraeus, from my scandals list:
I shall have to add a line about criminal investigations into this.
RW,
snip
http://rawstory.com//news/2007….._0828.html
kdh22 @ 65
He has a PhD in clinical psychology.
in reading about baird’s town-hall meeting (and good for him for doing it – too many of our reps hide from their constituents), i can’t find any report that he actually laid our his reasoning let alone any evidence to back it up. (can anyone confirm or deny that?)
if that’s true, then it sounds a bit like mcnerney’s visit – repeated talking points.
why not explain the rational? that doesn’t sound like someone who’s changed their mind.
Me at 88..oops.. can someone fix that mess?
We’ve been openly arming both sides in the war- so that should be no surprise.
Ghostman at 40
FWIW, I don’t like the idea of saying we won in Iraq.
Invading Iraq was a war crime, as I read Nuremberg. It was wrong legally, morally and every other way, in my view.
To say we won the war is to approve an illegal action, I believe.
I agree that Americans like to win.
In the case of Iraq, however, Americans need a cold, hard dose of reality — something our government has wrongfully withheld.
rwcole @ 76
Minneapolis-St Paul airport is a hub for several airlines.
rwcole @ 95
I guess if the purpose of war is to sell arms, they have won.
Baird reminds me of another officeholder who traveled to an American war zone, but who was much more honest about the dog-and-pony show he was subjected to, forty years ago this month:
Steve-AR @ 88
Isn’t this what Althespook was hinting at a few weeks ago?
Where’s Baird living in DC? Pricey area? Who is he rooming with, anyone? Who is paying the tab? Who takes him to lunch/dinner/etc.? What parties does he go to, if any? Who is being so nice and kind to him he’s feeling beholden to them instead of his OWN Damn Constituents fCHsakes?
I mean really, fuck collegiality. Politics is to be waged, not played at. Replace him.
demi @ 100
I don’t happen to recall the statement, but I wouldn’t be very surprised.
Cozumel @ 79:
Precisely. How can the US lose the Iraqi civil war? Defies logic, don’t it?
LS @ 60
Nice way to neutralize Petraeus’s report.
rwcole @ 95
Which goes right to the argument that very bad things will happen if we leave. By arming both sides to the teeth, Petraeus and the Bush Administration are increasing the chances of a bloodbath when we leave. Talk about self-fulfilling prophecies.
Hugh @ 90
Your list ia awesome. I check it regularly. Someday it may read like another document ratified and read first on July 4, 1776.
Fern @ 104:
Yep.
Joe Klein’s conscience @ 69
I was the first person to float joe as the replacement the administration would pick when we were first speculating
everyone said joe wouldn’t abandon his lifetime seat in the senate for a few months in the whitehouse
I said that he was their tool, he is beholden to cheney and bush, he is their judas sheep and he will do their bidding
in addition it will set him up for a spot on the gop ticket as vp
his replacement will be named by a republican as well
this is win win for everyone in the administration, loose loose for America
and joe becomes a pundit on corporate media if he does not win the vp spot or get elected
joe will definately sanction everything abu torutre sanctioned and say abu did nothing wrong, the democrats will be impotant against liarman
i believe this is a no brainer for bush
Jim Clausen #106,
Thank you.
“involves a senior American officer who worked closely with Gen. David H. Petraeus in setting up the logistics operation to supply the Iraqi forces when General Petraeus was in charge of training and equipping those forces in 2004 and 2005, American officials said Monday”
Pretty much says Petraeus was in charge and the officer followed his orders, doesn’t it?”
I’ve written before. Petraeus, Franks, Casey, Pace…they are all “brilliant.” “The best of our best.” Wrong.
They are overrated, possibly currupt, political players, and all with an eye to their lucrative post-military gigs within the defense industry. I wish Congress would place more confidence in the sergeants who wrote the op-ed piece in the NYT 2 weeks ago than any of the brassholes at the top of the chain of command.
One wonders whether “trip to Iraq” isn’t some codephrase for something along the lines of Senator Geary’s trip to the whorehouse.
A good question by Steve Soto:
But I’m sure Petraeus knew nothing about what was happening underneath him. The question is why, given that the suspect is a Lieutenant Colonel who reported directly to him and worked closely with him. And yet the Army’s Inspector General is opening a large inquiry into how weapons, munitions, and explosives have been lost and misused at a time when the White House wants to blame Iran for arming the insurgents.
http://www.theleftcoaster.com/
Maybe this is the beginning of a “soft coup” by senior military to try to save what is left of the Army and to prevent the Iranian war?
Another advantage of a Lieberman AG nomination is that the confirmation fight will pit the netroots against Democratic Senators voting their collegiality. He’s an easy confirmation, but with absolute hell to pay from us. He’s a perfect wedge to the heart of the Democratic party.
I think there may be some good news in that, per Iglesias, there are serious investigations going on, and in the NYT article about the “Petraeus” arms, they say there are investigations by several agencies going on.
Somebody out there is onto all of this. As Christy points out, there are many, many dedicated people working on behalf of the rule of law. We may not see them, but they are there.
I hope Deep Modem is right, and that Dick will resign in 3 weeks.
rep baird still insists on repeating repug TPs… sounds like he needs a reminder on what platform he ran on…. or perhaps he needs a ….primary challenger?
After participating in Baird’s town hall meeting last night, this is what I think: I think he is telling the truth about what he saw and with whom he talked. Unfortunately, I think he saw a very small part of a very big occupation, and is drawing conclusions on that small experience. He has visited Iraq 5 times over the course of our time there, to be fair. Many times he mentioned his “moral stance,” because to leave Iraq in the mess it is would be immoral. He also mentioned a few times that he didn’t care if he lost the next election, but apparently he is going to do what he thinks is “right,” even if his constituents don’t agree with him. It seems clear to me that he has lost a lot of the support he once enjoyed from the local Democrats. He also talked about danger and fear enough for me to notice. The crowd wasn’t buying what he had to say, and this leaves me hopeful that a progressive Democrat might be able to take his place.
More coming.
I’d love to see an in depth analysis of what’s really going on in Anbar province.
It clearly has nothing to do with the “surge”. It has to do with buyin off the Sunnis- but what’s really going on and what will the long term effect be?
The Sunnis are the educated western face of Iraq- they can wrap gullible senators and generals around their little fingers- they are CHARMING as HELL.
What are they really up to?
A so-called “fact-finding trip” to Iraq is simply bogus. They can’t know what is really going on “on the ground” because they simply can’t walk around and talk to civilians and militias and US forces. All major media also can’t do it. They’ve all been using Iraqi stringers for some time now.
Man, the Craig thing is really blowing up on MSM.
Biodun @ 103
Iraq was never ours to “lose” in the first place, no matter what Little Boots might prattle on about.
Email just now from FDL Book Salon guest and ACLU head Anthony Romero:
My gut tells me that the good general is gettin conned by the sunnis. They provided him with a Deus ex Machina that appears to be a road out of an impossible situation- so he took it- but watch out!!
Votus, thanks for your first-person report.
It’s hard to believe that someone could change his position as the American occupation worsens, but I suppose it’s possible. But I think he must be naive, or very easily misled. Attributes one does not want in a Congressperson.
A progressive challenger would be wonderful. Please keep us posted!
“Give us arms- we will only use em against Al Queda- we HATE Al Queda” (spits)
General “OK”
That is enough equipment for an entire army.
Gone.
Paid for by you and me.
LS @ 119
Are you really surprised about that? MSM loves this stuff. They lap it up. That’s what they do best. They can’t concentrate and focus on more important stuff.
busted
Well unlikely that it’s really gone. Someone’s got it- and that someone is undoubtedly in Iraq- and they didn’t want the stuff for dove hunting.
EvilDrPuma @ 73
Maybe they during his trip to Iraq they told him if he didn’t go along with their spin they would ‘follow him home’.
I’d almost be willing to tune in to FOX to see Shep Smith report on the Craig story, but no….
EvilDrPuma @ 22
Exactly what kind of “payback” is moving from Senator to AG in the most corrupt , worst administration in history? Senators, especially Joe, are history conscious to the extereme. Who would want to attach themselves to the worst administration in history? It negates everything you’ve ever done.
Imagine how stupid the Conn voters would feel. Not that they aren’t for rejecting LaMont but none of them voted in that fractious fight so they could get an apparatchik appointee.
I meant gone in that it is the very stuff our people need.
Emphasis on the body armor.
You bet your ass someone has it.
Blackwell and comrades?
He has visited Iraq 5 times over the course of our time there, to be fair.
so apparently *5* is the number of times one needs to be exposed to the dog-and-pony show for it to kick in…?
Here are my observations from last night’s town hall meeting with Brian Baird.
He began by repeating what he has been saying in the media recently: In the beginning he voted against the Iraq war, he goes to Walter Reed when there are constituents there, and also goes to constituent military funerals as he is able. His last trip was only two days long, but that is because the Pentagon limits the amount of time the congressional members can stay there. He went outside the Green Zone in this trip, which was dangerous–he mentioned several times that his wife was unhappy with that decision because it put him in danger, but he did it anyway. He met with Prime Minister Fiyad (sp?) of Jordan (I think). He thinks that General Petraeus and Ryan Crocker are good, decent people. He said that the Sunni Sheiks have stood up to Al Quaida. His point was that Sunni Sheiks told him that “If you [the US] withdraw troops now, you will leave us at the mercy of Al Quaida.” He said that “some” progress has been made in some areas, and that is hopeful. He mentioned that Al Anbar is clean now, and that progress is being made in Iya Sophia (I’m not sure if I got that name correct–the Sophia part is correct.) He thinks that the Iranians and Al Quaida will gain in Iraq if we leave. He believes not in an indefinite length of stay, but instead believes that we should stay until April 2008, then begin to draw down troops and bring many home.
rwcole @ 117
US Army Special Forces ally with many of the Bedouin tribes. We give them money, and small arms. We tell them “go kill AQ, and we’ll give you more money and more ammo.” We also leave them alone. We let them “police” their own tribes and areas as they see fit. If the tribe needs to “punish” a woman for insulting a male….we look the other way. If the tribe kills a gay just for being gay….we look the other way. And on and on. it’s classic counterinsurgency tactics.
Ghostman
Biodun @ 126
I am suprised, only because the MSM usually covers for Republicans.
Abu Ghraib military jury acquits US officer of all counts but one: disobeying a general’s order not to talk to others about the investigation of the abuse.
LS @ 114
Who is Deep Modem and what exactly did s/he predict? Sounds juicy.
Biodun @ 126
Ya know. If he just wanted to dispose of it and wasn’t guilty he should have plead NO CONTEST, as opposed to say, GUILTY
jkc@135
so am i – they only blow up dem scandals so this IS surprising
yellowsnapdragon @ 137
From yesterday,
BlueStateRedHead says:
August 27th, 2007 at 12:56 pm
EPU’ed from a Gonzo thread this a.m. I mentioned that anon at the Muck’s suggestion that answering subpeonas be required for confirmation. It was said in affirmationthat an anon at the Muck has a good track record for saying wise things. If this is the same anon, he has reviewed his own track record. Shorter anon:
Cheney is next.
Here it is:
Now that the Justice department is finished with it’s house cleaning, The rest of the deal Bush made to spare himself impeachment will begin. The Cheney resignation will be forth coming within the time frame I estimated last week. There are three weeks left on that clock. If you look through obscure posts from three weeks ago until last week, you will see my original predictions about Rove (perfectly timed) and Gonzales (also one week prior as stated) Deny my accuracy and attribute it to coincedence or guessing if you like, but within three weeks from this day the dark one falls. The deal has been made and the substance of it is out. I am not a mystic and do not own a crystal ball. I do however own many devices that are able to communicate messages through the air. These have been put to great use.. Cheney is next, and you heard it here first. AS I STATED WITH MY OTHER POSTS MARK THIS ONE! Do not talk of it, Just mark it! It will be a great remebrance!
Posted by:
Date: August 27, 2007 2:52 PM
http://www.democraticundergrou…..id=1655390
Joe Klein’s conscience @ 135
MSM has been agnostic recently when it comes to sex scandals.
Biodun @ 118
It has to be totally stagemanaged if for no other reason than to keep them from getting blown up while they poke their nose around. It’s beyond ridiculous and anyone with an ounce of common sense should realize they are seeing absolutely nothing on their little tours over there.
or…. craig has pissed off some repugs……..
Patraes gave the weapons to Iraqi’s so it would be a fair fight.
Mike Hickerson @ 130
But good old Joe has long since done exactly that…
Biodun @ 141
Hello all,
Do you mean ecumenical (embracing all flavors of belief?)
I think MSM would rather talk about Craig’s sex preferences than Abu’s resignation.
do-si-do @ 146
They’re talking about the Gonzo stuff right now.
LS @ 140
Cheney resigns. Jeb is appointed VP. The pull of the brush harvest makes W resign. Jeb runs as the incumbent. Jeb looks good compared to W because, frankly, who wouldn’t?
do-si-do @ 146
Exactly. Has there been a stated reason why, when he was arrested in June, this is just coming out now?
do-si-do @ 146
MSM is all about TEH SEX! It sells! Ratings go through the roofs! And yes, no one has to think with their big heads when their little ones can do it for them!
Something like that. That’s why the telly has been long since turned off in my house.
Biodun @ 92
his thesis was titled: “How To Sing Kumbaya”.
re: the youtube above.
This is alarming. I felt like I was watching a loved one tell me what a great cult they belong to and that they are really going to be OK once they leave Reality Land. I wanted to cry with hopelessness for this impressionable young man. I wanted to hug him and tell him to please please stay in touch and that we love him and want him to come stay in our house. Why? Why?
Cozumel @ 138
Depends upon the state. There is no such thing as a No Contest plea in Indiana, for example.
do-si-do @ 146:
I mean agnostic: noncommitted to covering the sex scandals of only one party.
Badwater @ 148
It would have to be someone who could pass Congress with neocon ideology…oh, yeah…Lieberliar.
Joe Klein’s conscience @ 135
Oh, the press loves a titillating sex story as much or more than covering for Republicans — though Fox News probably “inadvertently” is putting a “D” after his name on the crawl.
Larry Craig=MSM Weapon of Mass Distraction
It’s kinda like Cheney arming the pheasants- ta make it a fair fight.
Badwater @ 148
Is chimp allowed to appoint someone that is in his own family to VP?
If Poppy is behind this, look for Baker to replace Cheney for the rest of W’s term.
Jonathan @ 96
although not according to popular belief, some wars are, in fact, won by countries that do not represent the moral high ground.
Biodun @ 154
thanks! ;)
rwcole @ 158
Pheasants or peasants?
Votus – thank you very much for your first-hand report. much appreciated.
Baird did his level best to hear everyone’s questions. There were very long lines of people who wanted to talk to him. The town hall ran over 3 1/2 hours. I saw both active local Democrats and a lot of people that I didn’t recognize but who had decided to come to the meeting. Veterans for Peace was there, Code Pink, and other groups. Overall, the mood of the crowd was angry with Baird over his recent decision to prolong our involvement in Iraq, and also angry that he will not support impeachment at this time. I was struck by one sector of his constituents that were well represented last night–war veterans, from Vietnam, from Iraq–who came to voice their concerns about his new Iraq position. None of the veterans thought his new Iraq stance was going to work. John Soltz from VetsVote came here from New York to talk to the representative. He asked all of the veterans in the room to stand–roughly 25 people stood. He told Baird that his new position on Iraq provides cover for the president, and asked Baird to not support the people who put us in Iraq–the Bush Administration. Baird replied that there are “not the same people in Iraq” now as there were when this war started–referring to the US generals on the ground. He said he came to speak to us so that we could hear the “truth from the ground.” Mr. Soltz replied that our generals don’t make policy–our citizens do. Wild applause from the crowd at that point.
So the MSM sat on the story, with one thumb in their mouth and the other thumb up their butt, waiting for Bush to yell “Switch”. Don’t all local papers publish arrests in their Sunday papers?
http://www.house.gov/apps/list…..7iraq.html
Here’s a link to Baird’s official position-
Bottom line- this war was a terrible mistake- but we can’t compound that mistake by allowing millions of deaths and a total collapse of Iraq on the way out. We broke it- we own it.
He seems oblivious to the politics of his announcement..
He may be naive.
Badwater @ 148
Come on! Cheney resign? Not a chance. He didn’t sell his soul to the devil to keep him alive this long just to resign.
CC @166 – yeah, how stupid does the Idaho Statesman look now? They are doing a big piece on the “rumors” surrounding our Senior Senator, and they miss an arrest TWO FREAKING MONTHS AGO? Nice job, there.
Actually, it’s called the Police Blotter. Did Craig get special treatment? It should be easy enough to see if the local paper published a blotter and kept his name off it.
jim oconnor @ 110
The myth of Petraeus is just that, a myth. He became famous for training large numbers of Iraqi troops, but where are those troops today?
The losing of all the arms and equipment is more evidence that Petraeus is not much of a manager. Like Bush, in fact, exactly like Bush, he is a Big Picture guy who doesn’t sweat the details, even when those details prove the policy won’t work.
Anbar? In many ways this is the weapons scandal all over again. I am willing to bet that Petraeus has not given any thought to the long term consequences of arming the Sunnis out there. It is all for the short term, make it look good on paper and for some photo-ops, but where will it all be in 6 months or a year?
Ditto the “surge” in general. Sporadic, erratic “gains” that are even now mostly in the eyes of the true believers. They will disappear soon enough too. I think that some of the generals already know this and are positioning themselves so that they can argue that they didn’t lose Iraq and that the fault is someone else’s.
You’re welcome, Selise. I’ve got more from Baird’s town hall meeting: Another question to the representative was along the lines of “Shouldn’t we be getting rid of this Administration?” He replied that “we don’t have the votes for impeachment” and was promptly booed and shouted down several times. Several people tried to make a case for getting him to support impeachment, but to no avail. Baird said that there are not enough votes in the Senate for impeachment, and that it would work in favor of the president’s popularity. He said that there will be an election in one year, and that’s soon enough to get rid of the Bush Administration. I’m paraphrasing, but that was the gist.
Partway through Baird was asked “Do you think you’ll be re-elected?” and he replied “It doesn’t matter to me.” Later, he was asked why he had voted against HR 3159, which would have given soldiers a minimum period of rest between deployments. Baird replied that we shouldn’t pass laws we can’t execute, because there are not enough troops on the ground to make that resolution work.
Bustednuckles @ 125
Does anyone know what “flavor” of Kalashnikov is being diverted? Who are the arms dealers involved?
Those arrest records are public documents I believe- but how would anyone know to search em..They probably snag thousands every night in washrooms around the country- would take a concerted effort to check em all daily for “celebs”.
I’m sure that’s what Craig was counting on. He postponed a decision about running until to Sept. to see if anyone would catch it. If he had pled “not guilty” there would have been a trial- and THAT would NOT have slipped under the radar.
The TPM Anon predicter – Does anyone have a link to the earlier posts where Rove and Gonzalez were predicted?
Biodun @ 92
Thanks. That explains a lot! Brains and no common sense. I’ve seen that about a billion times in my life!
Jonathan @ 96
Fine — let’s use Bush’s “Mission Accomplished” to beat him over the head –
How ’bout saying something like: “We found NO WMDs and no evidence that any were built, and we deposed Saddam Hussein. Since the Criminal-in-Chief declared ‘Mission Accomplished’ why aren’t we bringing the troops home?”
Votus @ 116
Thanks for the info.
By any chance, did anyone mention how the British are leaving Basra? The British admit they’ve lost control of that major city, and they are pulling out. I’m curious what the distinguished gentleman thinks of that development, and what exactly he thinks the US military is going to do about it (if anything).
Re” Petraeus:
Don’t forget that he was/is a BFF of Judith Miller…
TJ @ 175
I’m not sure, but it may have been some postings by the mystery poster over at http://www.Cannonfire.com.
My question to Baird – find any good deals on rugs?
Bustednuckles @ 16
Tell him to cut out that “don’t want to lose” meme. That is just crap, designed to ring the chimes of knuckledraggers.
Do the troops who didn’t come back, or who’ve lost limbs, or who will never psychologically be the same think they’ve “won”? This “winner/loser” and “quitter/stay the course” simplicity has no place in a national issue of this magnitude.
Votus @ 116
This is our current problem. It is very difficult for any elected official to acknowledge that this disastrous foreign policy decisions will have positive consequences. None of the objectives, either the pretexts that were used to justify the invasion, or the real goal–a compliant client state–are simply not attainable
The moral side of this, that US has turned Iraq into a smoking carcass, killing hundreds of thousands, displacing more than a million, also has to move a legislator who is appalled at what has happened so far, not to mention the conflagration that will follow.
So if we are going to persuade these people, we have to acknowledge what they are talking about. We have to say that we recognize that the situation is a disaster, and that we understand why they feel like we can’t just walk away.
But.
The situation today, wrt all the issues that they are concerned about, is worse than it was a year ago, which was worse than it was the year before. Doing more of the same, in six month units of time has consistently made the situation worse.
At this point, we have to acknowledge the fact that none of the US objectives can be attained. And that we are doing more harm than good by remaining.
Also, we need to make a political point. In 1968, the vietnam was Johnson’s and Democrats’ war. In 1973, it was Nixon’s war. If the Democrats don’t establish, very clearly, that they want this occupation over as soon as possible, no more imitating Mr Micawber, waiting for something to turn up, then this going to be their occupation too. That’s what the Congressional favorability numbers should be telling them that.
I started a thread at TPMCafe about this, if you are interested. There are lots of interesting comments there.
This was my favorite part of The Oregonian article: “We don’t care what your convictions are,” said Jan Lustig of Vancouver. “You’re here to represent us.”
More of us should be saying that to our elected officals!
from Votus’s fine reporting, it seems to me that it may be time to get Howie involved to look for a primary challenger for this guy.
His “everything’s looking peachy – give it more time” – “but there aren’t enough troops on the ground to pull it off” – without keeping all troops perpetually in Iraq, without leave, is – insane.
rwcole @ 117
I don’t have the link but larry johnson tells us exactly what’s happening there…go to his page and look for the article
Don’t know this guy- but if I had to guess- I’d guess that he’s sincere in what he says–terminally naive- but sincere.
Actually, it’s called the Police Blotter. Did Craig get special treatment? It should be easy enough to see if the local paper published a blotter and kept his name off it.
I can’t believe this went uncovered for so long. Every police department and court has people more than willing to drop a dime when any high profile person is arrested. Regardless of politics. Some snooping/sluething is in order.
LS @ 180
Correction:
http://cannonfire.blogspot.com/
Votus @ 172
Jeeze, it sounds like James Carville or Rahm “prepped” these guys!!! “Let’s not try because we can’t win” crap.
Might as well say “Let’s not win because we won’t even try.”
And they wonder why Dems are perceived as “soft” and “spineless”?
ccmask @ 170
To be fair to the reporters, as Jonathan Weisman pointed out at his WaPo chat this morning, the June arrest happened in Minnesota; it was an airport police arrest, thus may not have gone into the regular blotter reviewed by local reporters; the August court case was the same day the bridge collapsed.
Some courthouse reporter in Minnesota is kicking him/herself for missing this story, but there may have been no conspiracy to cover it up. Or not.
Votus @ 165
Thank you as well. Your perceptions are spot on!
This is what CHS launched with the “You work for us” campaign. Thnks to all of you who give me hope in times of despair mixed with intermittent bouts of Euphoria!
“I was struck by one sector of his constituents that were well represented last night–war veterans, from Vietnam, from Iraq–who came to voice their concerns about his new Iraq position. None of the veterans thought his new Iraq stance was going to work.”
So war veterans were a part of the “angry mob?”
BTW, thank you Votus, for your insights. They are very well written and objectively presented.
rwcole @ 174
If he hadn’t plopped down his Business Card it probably would have gone unnoticed.
Timeline: Larry Craig was arrested in June. But he pled guilty to disorderly conduct this month. He issued a statement yesterday after Roll Call reported it. It’s in the news now only because Roll Call reported it. Idaho Statesman had been on the Craig’s beat for sometime. It published its own story yesterday–also because of Roll Call.
jayackroyd @ 183
Nail. Hammer. Bang.
Mauimom @ 190
I hope this was a misquote. Otherwise, does the Congressman not know how impeachment works?
Big Source of Clinton’s Cash
Is an Unlikely Address
“He now opposes a withdrawal timeline – and said he thinks that most of the country agrees with him.”
I’m wondering who got to him to change his mind?
OT
what kind of fuckery is this, Big Decline In US Poverty Rates. I smell a rat.
jim oconnor @ 188
Well, if the arrest was in Minn., then someone there had the pull to keep it off the blotter. I don’t think it would have been Idaho.
Rachel Maddow has been saying for awhile she thinks Jeb would get the vp spot if cheney goes. Jeb was one of the PNAC mob.
One would hope & pray this country has had enough of the bush family already (they’re like kudzu) but there’s those braindead 25%ers….
weffie @ 184
Makes me think that being “Servant of the People” is an honored concept that is beyond comprehension for some of our elected officials….
Biodun @ 195
The Statesman had held its story before because it could not confirm parts of it.
Too bad Larry didn’t use Craig’s list. Could have kept him out of trouble :))
Joe Klein’s conscience @ 69
‘nother thing: oleJoe’d have ta be confoimed for AGhoul post. Correct?
S’pose Leahy could contrive to do so wit’ a tight little cage of a Senatorial signing statement? – just ta keep the pig from strayin’ too far into the garden, a-course…
man-o-man, if i wrote the laws…
Adie @ 206
IIRC what I read about CT laws, the R governor would appoint a replacement until a special election (prol’ly in ‘08) for the remainder of the term.
jayt @ 185
someone needs to communicate to the leadership that this the risk they are running. Fracturing the party with anti-war primary candidates.
They should have noticed by now that there is an infrastructure in place for finding and supporting such candidates…..
LS @ 140
Chills and goosebumps! Sounds like lots of folks have been talking over unsecured cellphones or cordless phones. Or maybe Deep Modem works for the NSA?
Jeb as VP?
Will never happen in my opinion.
Jeb’s only chance of stayin alive politically is to stay as far away from the stench of his big brother as possible–shit’s hard ta wash off.
I agree with the comment of TeddySanFran #99, Baird sounds like he has been brainwashed. It is all a little too Manchurian Candidate for me.
Where was he for the first 4 years of the war? If it is a mistake to leave now, wouldn’t it have been a mistake to leave then?
If it was all just about getting the “right” people there, why wasn’t that his demand anytime the last 4 1/2 years? Why did he have to wait until now to enunciate it?
There is something profoundly contradictory between his previous stance and actions on the war in its first 4 years and now. He was either terribly wrong then or terribly wrong now. Either way he doesn’t belong in Congress. Indeed why doesn’t someone ask him, if you are
wereso wrong, shouldn’t you resign and let someone with better judgement represent the people of Washington state?rwcole @ 167
now, rw, don’t go indulging in hyper bowl at a time like this ….
LS @ 61
“involves a senior American officer who worked closely with Gen. David H. Petraeus in setting up the logistics operation to supply the Iraqi forces when General Petraeus was in charge of training and equipping those forces in 2004 and 2005, American officials said Monday”
Pretty much says Petraeus was in charge and the officer followed his orders, doesn’t it?
I don’t really read it that way. It strikes me more as implying that one of Petraeus’ deputies was either incompetent or corrupt. Of course, it is also possible that the unnamed “officer” is an Agency mole, tasked with using his position to divert weapons and supplies to field assets that the Army has no knowledge of, and may even be fighting-remember the Sy Hersh story about the US supplying Sunni militias? Sure as hell can’t get those weapons through normal channels!
It looks to me like an Agency gig that has become public knowledge.
“This was my favorite part of The Oregonian article: “We don’t care what your convictions are,” said Jan Lustig of Vancouver. “You’re here to represent us”
I don’t agree that a congresscritter should take a poll before every vote or position and dutifully represent the (often uninformed) positions of his/her constituents…
That’s a very bad political model.
rwcole @ 210
jeb would have a shot if he became the ag and then jailed his brother for crimes against America
they he has a shot
Mauimom @ 190
This was also the theme of Rep McNerny’s visit here. I think this may be the leadership’s message. It’s consistent with the strategy articulated by Schumer right after the mid-terms, that the republicans will be forced to cave, so that they’ll have to own both the inception of the war, and it’s failure.
I thought that underestimated Bush’s ability to hold the legislators in line then. Schumer said “by the summer” the republicans would cave. Despite it being clear that many of them will lose their seats, they still seem to be holding.
The rumors of a big Al Queda strike keep circulating..Congresscritters who believe the rumors may be preparing for the repeat of the 9/11 mentality.
New thread.
http://www.firedoglake.com/200…..e/#respond
Brisingamen @ 209
That is a little disconcerting. Maybe Jeb is the one to go next (I would have thought Bush resigning so Cheney could rule would be more likely).
Jeb trying to lay low until the stench of his brother wears off would make political sense to those of us who confine our thinking to “the box.”
But for those who like to think outside the box of legal, ethical or Constitutional behavior might come up with different answers to their equations.
If there are either no elections, or if they got the bugs worked out from the 2006 elections so they feel relatively certain of victory even if we’re allowed to think we’re voting, then Jeb might give it a whirl.
God help us all.
Republic oversight at work:
“Questions about whether the American military could account for the weaponry and other equipment purchased to outfit the Iraqi security forces were raised as early as May of last year, when Senator John W. Warner, Republican of Virginia and then the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, sent a request to an independent federal oversight agency to investigate the matter.”
Interesting that the Lt Colonel in the Petraeus story is a female.
kdh22 @ 176
Whoa there, cowpoke! I believe you’ve mounted that steed cross-wise. Now ease back down, set a spell and – um – think?
Pachacutec is quite a respectable dawg rangin’ across this land, and… Well… Some students are more savvy than others, no matter whut they studied in skool.
Say. Whut wuz YER major, crossing guard?
ticktock@199
hmmm perhaps a person who mentioned an airplane ride…..
petwrecker @ 200
prolly decided not to count the homeless, or those who buy on credit.
I’m sorry–I have more to share, but am I hogging up too much band width? What is the best way to share a fairly large amount of information?
votus maybe you can post a thread???
Votus @ 224
all i’ve seen are comments urging you to keep it coming, and lots saying “THANKS”. ;->
juslin @ 225
Yes, doesn’t Christy have a series of some kind of American tour where commenters post their interactions with Senators and Reps? Perhaps you could email her?
From yesterday,
BlueStateRedHead says:
August 27th, 2007 at 12:56 pm
EPU’ed from a Gonzo thread this a.m. [snip] The Cheney resignation will be forth coming within the time frame I estimated last week. There are three weeks left on that clock. If you look through obscure posts from three weeks ago until last week, you will see my original predictions about Rove (perfectly timed) and Gonzales (also one week prior as stated) Deny my accuracy and attribute it to coincedence or guessing if you like, but within three weeks from this day the dark one falls. The deal has been made and the substance of it is out. I am not a mystic and do not own a crystal ball. I do however own many devices that are able to communicate messages through the air. These have been put to great use.. Cheney is next, and you heard it here first. AS I STATED WITH MY OTHER POSTS MARK THIS ONE! Do not talk of it, Just mark it! It will be a great remebrance!
Posted by:
Date: August 27, 2007 2:52 PM
http://www.democraticundergrou…..id=1655390
Dare one hope?? Could this be our Deep Throat? Anybody know if his claim to accurate predictions is correct?
rwcole @ 167
Why didn’t he make this position of his clear in the LAST ELECTION…essentially it’s a position of permanent occupation if Iraq is unable to “get it together”. As long as it’s “broke” we HAVE TO STAY.
If he had enunciated his policy agenda in this way (which is essentially that of Bush, BTW) I seriously doubt that he would have engendered the sort of support he did in the Primary, and General election.
In essence Mr. Baird was elected on false pretenses, since this would have been a philosophical position that he must have had prior to his running. It’s not a “change of mind” at all, apparently. It’s a fundamental precept of his that he should have made people aware of. In a sense he was a “stealth Republican” on this issue…he had no intention of withdrawing unless “We Won”. Why didn’t he state this before?????
If anyone nominates Jeb Bush for anything above dogcatcher, I hope someone will ask him about this.
In 1989, Jeb Bush was the campaign manager for Ileana Ros-Lehtinen for US Rep from FL.
from wiki:
In the 1980s Ros-Lehtinen lobbied for the release and pardon of Cuban exile Orlando Bosch, who had been convicted of terrorist acts and has also been accused of involvement in the 1976 bombing of Cubana Flight 455, which killed 73 people, helping organize an “Orlando Bosch day” to gain support for his release.
Jeb interceded with his father to obtain a pardon for Orlando Bosch, over the objections of his own DOD.
Jeb Bush, doing his part in the War of Terror.
Okay, I’ll keep it coming, but in shorter chunks so as not to take up as much space.
To catch up with earlier comments:
Apologies if I left the impression that Baird does not understand how impeachment works. Of course he does. He was only saying that if impeachment could get voted out of the House, that it would likely not succeed in the Senate due to a lack of votes.
Also, to my recollection, Baird did not mention Basra, but I might have missed something.
More from the town hall:
Baird mentioned that he is not for starting a draft. He said that he wants the US to stay longer because we are making progress in training Iraquis and making progress on the political front. He said Maliki has no good options if we leave now, and if we stay it allows breathing room so that things can get better. He also thinks more Americans need to enlist in the military.
Votus @ 224
your info is great, please keep it coming… (i think jane and christy have warned us to not go over about 300 comments as long comment threads can be a problem)…
Also, votus, your excerpts could easily be two to three times as long without any problems. Even if they are longer all that happens is that they kicked into moderation which isn’t a big deal.
perris @ 186
every once in a while i see the need to requote this bit of poetry. today it’s for Brian Baird, and it goes somethin’ like this:
“Now it is not good for the Christian’s health to hustle
the Aryan brown,
For the Christian riles, and the Aryan smiles and
he weareth the Christian down;
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white with the name
of the late deceased.
And the epitaph drear: “A Fool lies here who tried
to hustle the East.”
Rudyard Kipling, “The Naulahka”
in this case, the analogy isn’t an exact one. Baird is the one who got hustled, but it will be somebody else’s sons and daughters who die. Having a PhD don’t make you smart. Baird is the proof of it.
i know, this is way EPU’d but maybe a few will read it …….
More from the town hall:
More people came to the mic. One lady angrily told him that we helped to get you elected and now we will work against you if you continue to support the Bush agenda. She said if his constituents don’t think that we have the votes to get him re-elected, then maybe we won’t vote because we can’t win [take that, tired old impeachment line!]. She said the oil benchmarks are lies, and she asked him to get back to the “moral man” he was 2 years ago. He said, in terms of the upcoming Iraq Supplemental spending bill, that he will vote for funding for troops on the ground, because you can’t freeze funding while troops are on the ground. He said the US needs to instill a new sense of patriotism in the Iraquis, and mentioned the recent Iraq Soccer victory.
Votus.
Belatedly, I’ll volunteer to “lurk” & cease with the ditsy comments. I suspect others are holding back also, except for those wanting to respond directly to yours. So please don’t take dearth of other comments to mean lack of interest. Your info. is fascinating and useful, as are the responses to what you offer.
Christy has another thread up and going, so what’s the harm? ;->
We’re listening. Please go on.
More from Baird’s town hall:
Vancouver for Peace told Baird that the US does have a moral obligation to Iraquis, to end this occupation. They asked why is Bush’s plan more likely to work rather than diplomatic leadership, and where is the leadership? Baird replied that we have to support the nations in the region, and we should try to conserve on our energy use in order to get off of foreign oil.
right out of white man’s burden.
that’s obscene.
Votus @ 235
I would be happy to see a new sense of patriotism here in the US. Starting with a bunch of the current criminals running it going to jail.
Baird did receive credit for the good things he has done: he got applause for his work on education, for voting against the FISA act, for voting for the Buy America Act, for helping take steps to bring peace to Israel and Palestine, as well as his work to keep our local VA hospital open, and aid for veterans. When the Office of Inspector General was set to expire, he voted so that wouldn’t happen. He said the Democrats will try to fix FISA in September. However, according to my somewhat on the fly count, the crowd agreed with his positions approximately six times over the course of the evening, but disagreed with his positions 19 times, based on crowd applause or boos. Toward the end I stopped counting, so take it for what it’s worth.
I seldom say this but WTF? fahrender has it right. This sounds like the White Man’s Burden. WE need to instill patriotism in Iraqis?! How do we do that exactly? Use an IV or is that by mouth? And why is that our job again? And the soccer team? Is the man on drugs?
I should type faster. selise said it first.
This argument that we want to “win”… win what?
Win freedom and liberty for them? The WH is stripping away those freedom’s and liberties at home… why would they support them over there?
Win back our good name? So murder and oppression of women and children by our “technological superiority” will rebuild what the rest of the world thinks of us? (I’d be curious to see the ratio’s of innocent deaths to valid targets for the last 300 years. What was the ratio during the civil war vs. the Iraq invasions? Are we getting more accurate yet?)
Win the oil? Is that for “us” or is it for the big oil companies? If we shut down the war machine, would it extend the amount of oil that is currently available?
Win the biggest debt? I don’t think anything else on this planet has created more debt to the American people than this fiasco. So are you all willing to sell your houses and cars to pay for this, or do you think our children owe it to us to pay this one off?
Winning is not a valid reason!
If you want to argue that we owe it to these people to rebuild their country because we messed up, I could accept that. BUT ONLY if we give the attention and care and publicity that our soldiers deserve, not hide them behind top secret documents and lies.
Our children that join this action are being taken advantage of and destroyed…
And so is America!
Good luck, all!
More Baird town hall:
He was told several times by people who knew him and had worked on his previous campaigns that Baird had “broken my heart” over his new Iraq position. Baird reiterated that the War was wrong to start, a mistake, but now we’re there. He said he knew that some of the people in the room were mad at him, but we weren’t there in Iraq like he was. If we draw down now it will get vastly worse. Someone then shouted out, “Are they [the Iraqis] your constituents?” He said no. He agrees that the outcome of staying until April is uncertain, but he says he wants to give our generals and the local Iraqi leaders until April, and for us to hold judgment until we see the upcoming Petraeus report. A friend of his stood up and told Baird “You’ve screwed up and you have to change course,” which got huge applause from the crowd.
Baird said that his recent decision was not a quick one, and that he sincerely believes that there could be a chance of success, and that we are making progress there. He does not want to stay forever, but that if Jordan falls, we are in trouble. He said, and in my opinion this is the key, that “I may be wrong, but I’m being honest.”
i’m curious about what he’s done in this area – not many in congress are willing to take any positive action for, i think, fear of becoming a target of the lobby that shall not be named.
I am going to comment on “the deal” which supposedly keeps bush from getting impeached
this is not acceptable
they will rise again, in our lifetimes too, they will rise like the nixon minions, like the reagen minions
they will rise unless we expose their depravity, unless we bring them to the bar of justice they will be turned into icons
take a look at the traitor oliver north…he is actually considered an icon among these neo fascists
and look at cheney…he has risen to the office of the vice president and he has elevated his postiition to be even more powerfull then the president’s position
I do not want a deal, I want the criminals prosecuted
is he aware that iraqis want us to leave also? sound like the only people he’s representing are the generals and the iraqi puppet government.
Votus @ 172
That’s like saying you should run your sled dogs to death “because you don’t have replacements”. here this guy is talking about an open-ended committment in Iraq because there will be deaths and chaos if we withdraw…and yet he is going to allow the troops to shoulder more and more of this burden.
That’s a prescription for a disaster for our military! Long-term!
Baird seems intent on staying “until we win”…That’s precisely what Bush has said and is contrary to what he told Constituents when he ran for office.
I’m beginning to suspect this guy was a “Stealth Candidate” and has suckered a lot of people with his jive.
Would he REALLY AGREE with a April “substantial reduction” of troop levels? If so, then why won’t he agree of a firm timetable?
And why hasn’t he pointed out in his discussion that the actual NUMBERS of sectarian deaths are DOUBLE what they were in January, before the surge…and that the NUMBERS of SECTARIAN Killings are up 35% even in Baghdad. The ACTUAL NUMBERS ARE HIGHER than in January! [This despite the fudging by the Pentagon that claims that the “proportion” of sectarian killings is down in Baghdad…a mere consequence of the incredible rise in muders elsewhere]
Why didn’t he discuss the collapse of order in the South and the battles between, not al Qaida, but the Shiite Militias? Is he aware that these provinces DWARF Anbar in size and population numbers. The British are leaving…and it means that the US military will soon have to take on TWO major Shiite militias.
I think that Baird should do the honorable thing and resign…he lied about his position to his constituency, mislead them to win office.
rwcole @ 117
Ask, and ye shall receive…
Iraq Tribal Study – Al-Anbar Governorate
More town hall:
Iran was brought up. He said he was not saying that we should invade, but we have soldiers there in harms way, and that “the US should not underestimate Iran.” He emphasized that. Around this time he made a comment that he sometimes feared for his family in DC. I may have misunderstood that comment–I don’t know if he meant that in terms of Iran or what exactly. But he did bring up the idea of fear.
He seems like a bit of an oily tick to me. When I was at school, we used to line up four or five of his sort, make them bend over, and use them as a toastrack.
This is my last comment from the town hall:
Near the end he was asked a very telling (to me) question from an audience member: what does success in Iraq look like to Mr. Baird? Reply: Success is having a “relatively secure country.” If, on a scale of zero to 100, with zero being worst case scenario-war, and 100 being best case scenario-peace, Iraq has gone from the likelihood of massive loss of life to a 20 percent chance of a relatively secure country now, because our training and tactics have gotten better. The questioner then put it to Baird, (with the assumption that we are losing roughly 100 US soldiers per month in Iraq): You are taking a gamble of 500 US solders’ lives for a 20 percent chance of success. Mr. Baird apparently thinks that is a risk the US needs to take, at least that is what I got from it.
Baird’s rationale is a jumble of White House talking points. It makes no sense. And I agree that he ran under false pretenses and should resign. You don’t OD on the koolaid overnight. This had to have been in the works for quite a while.
thank you Votus!
rwcole @ 214
But when he misleads those Constituents about what his principles ARE, and then doesn’t listen to them and takes an utterly contrary position (and asserts that “the majority of America agrees that we should have no timetable”) they have the right to make it clear that he’s violating the link of trust with them.
I seem to hear from Baird that his essential position was always…”Break It…You Fix It”. But short of Bush winning a miraculous victory at some stage of the occupation…how was he justified in running as one who opposed the OCCUPATION.
In fact, he supported IT! He had no intention of supporting any withdrawals UNTIL the US had PACIFIED Iraq to the degree that the Iraqi Army could take over (”They stand up- we stand down”).
I’m having a real hard time seeing where this guy diverges from Bush at all?
You are welcome, Selise. Like I said earlier, I am actually feeling a bit optimistic that the possibility of gaining Progressive Democratic representation here might be achievable, in light of these recent events.
Looks like it’s gonna be a hum-dinger of an ‘08 election cycle around here.
PeterK @ 228
hey, remember when skooter’s sentence was first commuted?
I said I thought the cia would make some very uncomfortable info public
my reasoning;
the president didn’t want to investigate the asset exposure they wanted to sweep it under the rug
someone in the cia forced the president’s hand, they made him initiate an investigation
now how could that happen?
with the threat of information going public…so the investigation and trial
then the president commuted skooters sentence…all deals are off, the info is going public
if anons info is correct then I believe this is why congress knows what it knows
now as far as “spying on political adversarys”
that is what I’ve been saying all along, that the president was stealing our information, that he was stealing trade secrets, personal secrets and information to hold political oponents at bay
we keep hearing that if we leave it’ll be a bloodshed… uhhh isn’t that whats going on NOW?!
votus i love this 1st person report from your townhall meeting – very enlightening… thanks!
Baird’s actions make perfect sense if you understand what the real goals of the US (Republicans and Democrats are): http://leninology.blogspot.com…..pital.html
Interestingly enough, despite the fact that Baird has gotten far greater coverage for his public statements about supporting the occupation, what Votus reports him saying from the meeting in Vancouver is pretty much the same as what Se. Ron Wyden (D-OR) said across the river in Portland a couple of weeks ago:
http://www.oregonlive.com/publ…..amp;coll=7
* We should wait for the Petraeus report to see what progress the surge has made
* We can’t pull out because it’ll be a bloodbath
* The Iraqis aren’t doing enough to come together
I meant to add, the Senator wasn’t received very well, either.
juslin @ 258
in point of fact there was LESS bloodshed in anbar provence BECAUSE we left
Representative Baird, what about our moral obligation to OUR own citizens and soldiers. Do we waste their lives for what? Where is your moral obligation to the mothers, fathers, wives, husbands, sons, daughters and siblings of each and every service personnel who dies or is wounded in this horrible mistake of a war? What is your moral obligation to them!
Ghostman @ 40
we become winners by not unnecessarily losing any more precious american and iraqi lives, not to mention the billions of dollars that seem to just walk out the door there.
perris @ 246
I agree, perris. I;’ve been saying this for years, before Bush Senior was elected. Hell, I screamed out loud in a grocery store when I heard on the radio that Poppy was gonna be head of the CIA…I was only 26 then and 5 years outta Vietnam.
These people are like the undead, they just keep coming back and if someone blows the whistle on them they go after that person with a vengeance.
The Robin Williams movie, Man of the Year, shows what happens to people who decide to do the honorable thing.
They are made to appear crazy even though everyone they know says they are stable people. I’m talking about the woman who played the computer company employee who was injected with drugs and hospitalized so she could be written off as crazy.
Mike Riconosciuto was a contract employee of the CIA who worked on something called ProMIS, a computer system that when he was finished with it was able to compromise any Windows-based system (ever notice that most government-intel agency computers are made by Apple?). When Riconosciuto started talking about what he knew he was arretsed by the govt for fraud supposedly using a credit card he wasn’t entitled to but which he had been given by his CIA handler. When he became expendable, in order to dirty him up, he was arrested for using a card he was authorized to use.
These people are never going away until we do what South Africa and Honduras have done. Truth and Reconciliation Commissions. Full declassification of the CIA records and other government secrets that are no longer needed to be kept secret.
National Security is a term thrown around when the criminals need to protect themselves and their schemes….there is really very little that we need to, or are able to, keep secret from people who want to find out our official secrets.
I don’t want my kids and grandkids having to watch everything I’ve tried to teach them be invaslidated by the criminals of both parties who have turned this country into a kleptocracy to rival any African nation.
Votus @ 250
He “feared for his family in DC?” Wow. This sure sounds like the bushco propaganda machine is saying something like: ‘if we don’t take care of these terrorists in Iraq they will hit us in Washington with a dirty bomb or bioterrorism.’ Would be a good way to scare people in congress, and it’s ALL secret of course. I don’t see this storyline as inconsistent with the sort of capitulation we are seeing from congress members.
Oh, and I believe anything bushco says about terrorists are LIES ALL LIES.
Hi FDL. It’s nice to blog here. At the very least, friendlier and far more egalitarian, if you will excuse a big word.
We ought not be surprised at Mr. Baird or at any of the Democratic members who have either acquiesced to the war or supported it outright.
Having been elected in 2006 to put a stop to things in Iraq, the Democratic members of Congress merely feigned opposition and gave Bush everything he asked for.
It is a tough thing to prove what I am about to say, but I cannot escape the thought that feigning opposition and supporting a continuation of the war might be a strategy to reap greater gains in 2008 by keeping the slaughter (and thus US voter anger) going.
If that is behind the lack of leadership of the Democrats and, particularly, the decision to take impeachment off the table, then the Democrats would be guilty of risking the lives of our kids and innocent Iraqis for the sake of political gain.
Baird’s support would only play into that scenario, albeit in a kind of left-handed way
(forgive the slur on southpaws).
Perhaps I am dead wrong about this, but I have seen the hardball played by those in Washington, and it is a scenario well within the bounds of reason. It is akin to keeping the Foley/page sex scandal under wraps until 2006 election time, thus putting more young pages at risk for political gain.
Politics when played by the major parties is a game of power and not any longer one of principle. It is against that ethic that I am running for Congress as an independent, unaffiliated and un-owned.
I think that others will join me, and I pray that we will strike a nerve in the electorate which, according to CNN’s latest poll, gave Congress a rating of only 18%
Thank you for all for bearing with me and for understanding my mission.
Steve Porter
the new’s opener. “He was confronted with an angry mob.”
Do they know what an angry mob is? More like he had to talk to the people that voted for him. then they interview him but don’t questions him. Nice unbiased reporting you got there in Washington.
From what I understand, he was only in Iraq for two days and stayed most of that time in the green zone. He then went to other parts of the middle east.
How could he pick up so much information in such a short period of time unless it was spoon fed to him by…well…you know who.
jack jett
http://www.YabbaDabbaHubbaDo.com
Fuck Baird. Run a Peace and Freedom Party candidate against him in the November ‘08 election. Let him know he can lose.
Diane @ 12
Since studies show Al Qaeda is stronger and our enemies are growing, rather than shrinking, it’s clear we are losing and the only way to avoid a complete loss is to change our strategy — beginning with leaving Iraq.
Avoid losing, leave Iraq!
EvilDrPuma @ 14
I think he needs a little re-education, but not a great deal of opposition. IMO we should focus on flipping R seats to D seats this election.
Still, isn’t it amazing how these people (freshmen mostly I suppose) believe all the crap this administration and it’s military tells them. In light of how it’s been demonstrated that the administration has lied consistently and constantly since they were appointed it’s a wonder anybody believes them when they sneeze.
perris @ 33
They probably just can’t believe the military (who are supposed to be non-partisan) would lie to them this way.
War is pretty messy and dangerous and it’s probably impossible for any civilian going over there to get an idea of what’s really going on. It’s like trying to track all the ‘lost’ money and weapons…impossible.
rwcole @ 37
Yep, precisely what I’ve been saying for about 10 years.
They can’t be racists or White Supremacists or anything crazy like that, but they can be small-government, low-taxes types.
Kathy/Fozzetti @ 60
If such a thing happened they should bring it back, take pictures and show it to the press to confirm the military is corrupt.
leinie @ 169
You just can’t get a man to say something he’s being paid not to say.
Steve-AR @ 173
I’m curious, why does the US military have 100,000 AK-47s? It certainly isn’t standard US military issue.
SufiLizard @ 219
Consider that the 2000 presidential election in Florida has a curious connectin from JEB to an Irish company (which owned Sequoia electronic voting machines at that time) to the ‘hanging chads’.
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=4994
So it takes guts to change your mind to *supporting* the war, but it shows cowardice to change your mind to *opposing* the war, at least according to the news anchor.
Something tells me Baird will be out of a job in a couple years.
rwcole @ 50
I’d like to think they are going to spend the rest of their time avoiding prosecution but I fear they have one major task left to do- attack Iran.