Howard Dean is first!

SURPRISE! NO KUCINICH ENDORSEMENT

http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/diarypage.php?did=4814

DFA announced that a candidate had to have at least 66% of the vote in order to get their endorsement.

With so many candidates, it was unlikely any one of them could get 66%, but if they held a new poll with only the two or three frontrunners, Dennis could get that 66% easily. So of course they won't do it.

Democrats For America is an oxymoron like Progressive Democrats. Nobody can call themself a Democrat these days and still have anyone believe that they are for America or that they are progressive. 

That's why Congressional Democrats have only a 22% approval rating among Democratic voters.

Let's tell them that they'd have to have at least 66% in order to get our endorsement.

In order to poll that high, they'd have to put impeachment back on the table, stop funding the war, stop passing free trade agreements that cost Americans jobs, and start acting like Democrats. They may have forgotten how.

POLITICAL CHICKEN(SH*T)

http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/link.php?id=45140

While the Democratic House Leadership had initially tried to table Kucinich's resolution to Impeach Dick Cheney, the Republicans voted against that, presumably after making some sort of calculation (an incorrect one, in our opinion, but it's just our opinion) that a debate on whether he should be Impeached would somehow benefit Republicans. They would seem to share that calculation with the Democratic House leadership.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/07/washin...+QuSA

By CARL HULSE
Published: November 7, 2007

.....But Democrats said it was Mr. Bush and his Republican allies who were acting irresponsibly by resisting slight increases to pay for improvements in health care and education while simultaneously seeking nearly $200 billion in new deficit spending this year to pay for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

----

Out of touch describes the Republican MINORITY these days....voting against the most vulnerable among us when it comes to expanding healthcare for MILLIONS of American children and sticking it to veterans who they send away to fight their no-end-in-sight QUAGMIRES.

Looks like Hillary's lead in NH is slipping some.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2008__1/2008_presidential_election/new_hampshire/election_2008_new_hampshire_democratic_primary

Fresh, "encouraging" and "welcome relief" news...FOR WHOM?

------------

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB11944412...

Productivity Rises, Easing Inflation Fears
By BRIAN BLACKSTONE
November 7, 2007 9:00 a.m.

WASHINGTON -- U.S. productivity jumped last quarter at its fastest pace in four years while labor costs fell, a welcome relief for Federal Reserve officials worried about the inflationary effect of rising energy and commodity prices.
.............

------------

American working people knows quite well what "productivity jump" along with "labor costs fell" means.

U.S. productivity jumped last quarter at its fastest pace in four years while labor costs fell,

That means people are working longer hours for less pay. 

Let's tell them that they'd have to have at least 66% in order to get our endorsement.

I concur. 

No sour grapes here....Kucinich supporters successfully bombarded the poll and he swept the nation.  Kudos to them. And to HQ for getting serious consideration from the prez candidates.

However, a vote for endorsement by membership, as this was supposed to be, requires that DFA not allow new people to come and register just to vote for their candidate. They did not institute controls to determine who could vote. Thanks for the breakdown which shows a much different vote when you select for "members of DFA".

I am disappointed with DFA HQ for calling this a vote for members, getting Presidential candidates and the Internet crowd all fired up, then using it to get new email addys.

They should have done that in and called it an Internet poll. But they messed up by saying it was a vote by members when they and we knew it was not.

Now the net will have fun at our expense as the links above show. Noone will be happy.

from article on Kucinich:

Nobody can call themself a Democrat these days and still have anyone believe that they are for America or that they are progressive. 

That's why Congressional Democrats have only a 22% approval rating among Democratic voters.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

The writer must have overlooked the FACT that Dennis Kuc. is a Democrat......in Congress no less! guess he's not progressive either.

Now the net will have fun at our expense

Since you've stated that you don't even believe in DFA's purpose of reforming the Democratic Party, why do you care? 

sitka, good try to attack me. But please quit misrepresenting DFA. That may be what some are working for, but read this:

Democracy for America (DFA) is a federal Political Action Committee (PAC), that finds, trains, and supports fiscally responsible and socially progressive candidates at all levels of office across the country. We harness the power of our enormous grassroots network to get these candidates elected and to work towards positive change from the bottom up. We provide organizational support and training opportunities to the hundreds of local DFA groups nationwide.

to work towards positive change from the bottom up.

re·form : to change to a better state

Thanks for clearing that up. 

Reforming the democratic party has pretty much begun to fizzle out. Much of the democratic party is controlled by long-time cronies who want the energy of the newcomers, but not the ideas or changes we demand. some will continue the long slog of moving up the food chain. Hopefully, they will not be coopted, but they will have to do the bidding of the cronies in order to gain power. And by the time they get there, will they have abandoned progressive views?

Grassroots training, funding and fielding progressive candidates is still a very active, achievable goal.

Did Andrew White win or lose? What was the vote count?

Also, sitka, since I don't think you've ever tried to "reform the party" or even gone to a Dem party meeting, your experience is exactly what? and why should we give it credibility?

When netted by your own words -- attack. 

Sitka
Wed, 11/07/07
10:29 am

This is not Democrats for America, but DEMOCRACY for America. There's a big difference as we're seeing with a Congress which can't even oppose torture or not give Bush a blank check on Iraq!

This is not Democrats for America, but DEMOCRACY for America. There's a big difference as we're seeing with a Congress which can't even oppose torture or not give Bush a blank check on Iraq.

Which is why I'm for reforming the Democratic Party.

I'm also for more parties. The more choices we have, the better for us and the more easy it will be to change the Democratic Party for the better. 

I"m not too impressed by people who sit on blogs and criticize others but never get out and do anything. One-liners and constant put-downs are defeatest.

Tell us what you're doing, Sitka? Honestly.....DFA asked us to send them pics and stories of being out there trying to re-form our society.

Among other activities, I'm holding weekly vigils outside our local Dem bluedog's office against funding the Iraq war. How about you doing a benefit against the war? Use your musical talents for something positive and tell us about it?

I"m not too impressed by people who sit on blogs and criticize

Considering you spend most of every day here criticizing, you must not impress yourself much. 

You started the attack, sitka, in 11 above. Funny how that is. But, of course, you ignore the original attack. I never mentioned you until you attacked me. And I'm going to continue to do it unless you engage in discussion instead of one-line putdowns.

someone asked  What or who is a freeper?

Urban Dictionary:

1.Right-wing political activist. So-called, because it is the nickname of the denizens of the ultra-right wing Web site FreeRepublic.com. Similar to "ditto-head."

2.

A member of the Free Republic internet forum. The term applies to both activist and non activist members.

The term was originally coined by Lucianne
Goldberg in 1998 when she posted there under the posting name, "Trixie".

3.

A pseudo-conservative known correctly as a "neo-con" who likes to pretend they are conservative, but are actually a bunch of pro-corporate whores who worship the grandson of the nazi facilitator Prescott Bush. They are lead by Jim Robinson who, not unlike screaming liberals, will boot you from his site if you say anything wrong about El Presidente Jorge Bushy.

4.Someone who believes:

1) that GWBush is infallible, and every action he has done has made the United States better, stronger, and more fair;
2) that racism in America has been defeated, and everything would be all right if 'those damn darkies would just get off their lazy asses, quit welfare, and get a job for a change';
3) that peace can be obtained only by saturation-bombing all the civilian population centers around the world, especially in the Middle East;
4) that Dubya is actually a competent and intelligent leader, and even won all 3 debates;
5) that God wanted the United states to be a Christian nation, and that Bush is the second coming of Christ, and that true Christians act towards the destruction of civilization, since Christ in Bush is here and the Rapture must be brought about;
6) and finally, that all of this is logical and well-reasoned.

You started the attack, sitka, in 11 above.

I just wondered why someone who has stated he doesn't believe in DFA's core principle cares what others think of it. 

That's hardly an attack. 

I love the last quote in the video in this thread:

"And for everybody who thinks Dean is too angry, well, why aren't you pissed off too!"

Priceless. Get pissed and then get to work creating a more progressive future.

130.

Huron John
Wed, 11/07/07
9:11 am

Reply to this


SURPRISE! NO KUCINICH ENDORSEMENT

http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/diarypa...
Dennis Kucinich won the Democrats For America straw poll with 44% of the vote, almost twice as much as the runner-up Obama. But DFA refused to endorse him.

DFA announced that a candidate had to have at least 66% of the vote in order to get their endorsement.

With so many candidates, it was unlikely any one of them could get 66%, but if they held a new poll with only the two or three frontrunners, Dennis could get that 66% easily. So of course they won't do it.

Democrats For America is an oxymoron like Progressive Democrats. Nobody can call themself a Democrat these days and still have anyone believe that they are for America or that they are progressive.


_________________________________________-


WOW, now even that surprises me. IS the Kucinich folks supporting limited participation to Front Runners and not giving everyone a chance?

You think they would have been happy being able to participate in the poll, without resorting to complaining of not receiving an endorsement because the didn't reache the 66 percent for one. Something they knew but were leaving off even their emails and website asking for the vote. According to Dennis, he should have been happy "shocking the pundits to win this poll".

But at least the supporter could get the name of the organization right if he wants to complain that their successful win with wasn't good enough. It is Democracy for America and, they should try to be honest and post the correct winning numbers while he's asking to limit the poll to only top tier candidate.

Candidate % Votes
Representative Dennis Kucinich 31.97% 49364
Former Vice President Al Gore 24.77% 38242
Former Senator John Edwards 15.6% 24078
Senator Barack Obama 13.86% 21403
Senator Hillary Clinton 4.21% 6504
Governor Bill Richardson 4.09% 6309

WOW, now even that surprises me. IS the Kucinich folks supporting limited participation to Front Runners and not giving everyone a chance?

The worm has turned.

Exactly, Linda. DFA is not Democrats for America. It is Democracy for America. THat is a much larger project than just trying to re-form the monolithic Democratic party.

If some want to continue doing that from the inside, good for them. We will need them if they don't get coopted in the process.

PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

http://www.counterpunch.org/

The US dollar is still officially the world's reserve currency, but it cannot purchase the services of Brazilian super model Gisele Bundchen. Gisele required the $30 million she earned during the first half of this year to be paid in euros.

When the dollar ceases to be the reserve currency, foreigners will cease to finance the US trade and budget deficits, and the American Empire along with its wars will disappear overnight. Perhaps Bush will be able to get a World Bank loan, or maybe one from the "Chavez bank," to bring the troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan.

Even America's British allies regard President Bush as a threat to world peace and the second most dangerous man alive. Bush is edged out in polls by Osama bin Laden, but is regarded as more dangerous than Iran's demonized president and North Korea's Kim Jong-il.

President Bush has achieved his dismal world standing despite spending $1.6 billion of hard-pressed Americans' tax money on public relations between 2003 and 2006.

Clearly, America's leader and America's currency are poorly regarded. Is there a solution?

Perhaps the answer lies in those 737 overseas bases. If those bases were brought home and shared among the 50 states, each state would gain 15 new military bases.
Imagine what this would mean: The end of the housing slump. A reduction in the trade deficit.

And the end of the war on terror.

The American empire is being unwound on the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan. The year is two months from being over, but already in 2007, despite the touted "surge," deaths of US soldiers are the highest of any year of the war.

The Taliban are the ones who are surging. They have taken control of a third district in Western Afghanistan. Turkey and the Kurds are on the verge of turning northern Iraq into a new war zone, another demonstration of American impotence.

Bush's wars have endangered America's puppet regimes. Bush's Pakistani puppet, Musharraf, is fighting for his life. By resorting to "emergency rule" and oppressive measures, Musharraf has intensified his opposition. When Musharraf falls, thanks to Bush, the Islamists will have nukes.

American generals used to say that the wars Bush started in the Middle East would take 10 years to win. On Oct. 31 General John Abizaid, former commander of US forces in the Middle East, put paid to that optimistic forecast. Speaking at Carnegie Mellon University, Gen. Abizaid said it would be 50 years before US troops can leave the Middle East.

There is no possibility of the US remaining in the Middle East for a half century. The dollar and US power are already on their last legs, unbeknownst to Democratic leaders Pelosi and Reid who are preparing yet another blank check for Bush's latest request for $200 billion in supplementary war funding.

There isn't any money with which to fund Bush's lost war. It will have to be borrowed from China.

The Romans brought on their own demise, but it took them centuries. Bush has finished America in a mere 7 years.

Democrats For America is an oxymoron like Progressive Democrats.

As Indy just pointed out, it's not "Democrats" For America. 

Monica, I knew that was going to be a problem when I heard Edwards going on the heavy attack mode. I didn't think Trippi was going to be that active in the JE campaign, but realized after the aggressivenes, that he would be.

Why is it I shutter whenever I hear a political worker has worked on a Gephardt campaign. They always go on the attack mode. And why do they keep doing it, it's not like it has ever shown to be a winnning tactic?

Bush is edged out in polls by Osama bin Laden

That's odd since Bush has killed many thousands more people.

I knew that was going to be a problem when I heard Edwards going on the heavy attack mode.

He's been in attack mode all along. He was just letting his wife do it. But that obviously didn't work, so now he has to sling his own mud.

The thread topic is a nostalgic look at Howard's failed attempt to reform the Democratic Party from within, an attempt that I and countless others supported enthusiastically, and funded generously.

It was fun, it was heady, and it failed.

 The DLC DINOsaurs are firmly in control.

Say goodby to the "Democratic Wing" as a force within the party.

What next? A new progressive party. The Democrats are the Whigs of the 21st Century.

The thread topic is a nostalgic look at Howard's failed attempt to reform the Democratic Party from within

You can only say it's failed when it's over -- which it isn't. 

Linda and Sitka:

I'm dyslexic and didn't even notice the mischaracterization of DFA when I posted the excerpt.

My Bad

Shouldn't  affect Dennis' appeal to progressives, especially as it becomes more and more clear that Gore is not going to get into the race

 The DLC DINOsaurs are firmly in control.

As they have been for some time. The point is to undermine and displace them -- which is what DFA is about.

Hey, John. Nancy Pelosi was elected speaker, something I rejoiced  at the time. Only to realize she is hostile to progressives now. what a disappointment.....interesting read here. and they are going to roll over us on iraq. Watch....

http://openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=2213

35.

It's over

Oh dear!!! The memories again of every detail of Dean's brilliance.

How unfortunate that he was brought down in part by some of his own  Democratic candidates. Hard to forgive that.

Wouldn't you love to get into Howard's mind and find out which candidate he supports if Gore is not in the mix?

Shouldn't  affect Dennis' appeal to progressives,

Some things about him are unappealing, but he and Gravel are the only real liberals running. 

Linda*in*SFNM
Wed, 11/07/07
11:04 am

Edwards is drawing a contrast between his views on Iraq and Clinton's. That is not a personal attack. You don't win elections by posting positive feel-good visions. Voters deserve a contest, not a unity fest.

It's over

Since that is your opinion, I have to ask you the same question I did of Indy. Why do you post on a blog when you don't believe in it any longer? 

Wouldn't you love to get into Howard's mind and find out which candidate he supports if Gore is not in the mix?

I'd guess Hillary. 

Does DFA vote reflect in any way how they will "vote" in Iowa? Is Iowa progressive? Probably not, though Phil may have an opinion on that much more worthy.

How about NH which had  Dean 40 points ahead of Kerry at one time yet chose to be nothing but a follower of the Iowa vote?

sitka,

All talk and no action. I'd love to hear from you after you've gone down to your local dem party offices and work your butt off for a couple of years. My guess is you'd last about a week before getting disgusted....so knock off the cheap talk. You don't even believe what you're writing.

Reforming the Dem party is only one aspect of DFA. There are many other projects to get involved in without necessarily supporting that one.

Regarding the Pulse Poll, Gore beats Kucinich in Florida. I see significance in that.

Gore/Obama '08

44.

sitka

LOL

Hi Joan,

Let's dispense with the notion that this is a "DFA vote". It isn't. It's an Internet poll and shouldn't have been represented as a "vote by DFA members". I'm still waiting to see how many of the Kucinich voters (and others) who signed up for the first time just to vote. Not likely to see them here again. But DFA got a few more email addys.

47.

Progressive

Since our votes will not be represented in Denver, it really doesn't mean much.

50.

Hi Phil,

Yes, it was really all about email addresses. They've done it before many times.

But if the poll hits the bigtime media, it will have made a statement -- what I'm not sure:))

More Pulse Poll reactions from your truly.

Gore not overly strong in Colorado, but Obama looks good in both Colorado and Missouri.

What's up with Kucinich blow out in NE?

If nobody gets 50%+ votes in Iowa, and Hillary has the bulk of the vote, it's all over for Edwards and Obama in Iowa. Richardson, Biden, and possibly Dodd will give their votes to Hillary.

If however Edwards or Obama has the greatest bulk of the vote and no candidate has 50%+ votes, Kucinich would throw his votes to Edwards which may or may not make a difference. Many other scenarios though.

The bottom line in Iowa is: Hillary must not win on the first round. Then better results can happen.

All talk and no action.

I'm always amused at bloggers who criticize others for blogging. 

37.

Huron John

Linda and Sitka:

I'm dyslexic and didn't even notice the mischaracterization of DFA when I posted the excerpt.

My Bad

Shouldn't affect Dennis' appeal to progressives, especially as it becomes more and more clear that Gore is not going to get into the race.

_____________________

No John, there's many other reasons why he doesn't have the appeal.

btw, it's only clear to folks who are HOPING Gore won't get in the race.

If you read the Rolling Stone interview, he even asks we keep our energy stored in case he does ....and gives many reasons why he probably will! :)


Time for
a COOL
change,
Gore
2008

The bottom line in Iowa is: Hillary must not win on the first round.

I just can't be sufficiently anti-hillary when Edwards and Obama are the alternatives. 

Progressive Avenger?????????

...Gore not overly strong in Colorado???????????

Where?


For the state of CO Candidate % Votes

Representative Dennis Kucinich 32.72% 1242

Former Vice President Al Gore 23.92% 908

Senator Barack Obama 14.49% 550

Former Senator John Edwards 14.28% 542


I just don't like when folks make incorrect statements.
http://www.democracyforamerica.com/pulse...[PpCache][state]=CO

If you read the Rolling Stone interview, he even asks we keep our energy stored in case he does

My energy is in the vault. 

DLC Mission Statement

The Democratic Leadership Council, DLC, is the political arm and leadership of the 20% minority professional middle class, the leadership of the Democratic Party, and exists solely for the purpose of mining and harvesting intellectual capital and resources from the 70% majority common population for the purpose of strengthening the 20% minority professional middle class and culture, and weakening the 70% majority common population as a class and culture, so that the 70% majority common population as a class and culture is and will continue to be weak and easily controlled by the Democratic Party and the combined duopolistic interests of the classes and cultures of the American aristocracy and the professional middle class represented by the Democratic Leadership Council, DLC.

Well, it's been exciting, but my tiling is waiting for me.

....good news, they aren't crooked and the mixture of glue seems to have worked...


Be well bloggers at DFA!

It seems like Obama may need to step up his game courting DFA. I don't think he is, as effectively as possible, marshalling the resources of this organization.

Price of oil is nearing $100 barrel. Gas prices will continue to rise. Heating oil will be at least 25% more this year than last year. Dow is down 140 points right now.

So much for an economic recovery. The bottom is falling out. Housing market still falling and I'm trying to sell my house and downsize a bit.

Dow trivia: During the Clinton years, the Dow rose an approx. average of 1000 points per year.

During Bush's almost seven years, the Dow has gain an approx. average of 260 points per year.

20.

Indy Steve
Wed, 11/07/07
10:45 am


I"m not too impressed by people who sit on blogs and criticize others but never get out and do anything. One-liners and constant put-downs are defeatest.

Tell us what you're doing, Sitka? Honestly.....DFA asked us to send them pics and stories of being out there trying to re-form our society.

Among other activities, I'm holding weekly vigils outside our local Dem bluedog's office against funding the Iraq war. How about you doing a benefit against the war? Use your musical talents for something positive and tell us about it?
------------

Indy what are the basis of your believe that someone (anyone) should seek (or are seeking) chance to impress you?

How do you know that people "who sit on blogs and criticize others" are "never get out and do anything"?

They might use some chances "to re-form our society" others then such a "positive" action as "holding weekly vigils", for example.

I happened to believe that one of the best best chances to influence changes this country desperately needs IS to try to do it on our WORKPLACE first and foremost (although, of course, those who march for peace in Washington DC may influence those changes even more effectively, but apparently you are not talking about such type of actions).

Linda wrote: btw, it's only clear to folks who are HOPING Gore won't get in the race

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

And who would that be? I wanted Gore to enter. My sense is you will be promoting Gore right up to the convention. But to most people, it is pretty clear that he's not entering the race short of something extraordinary happening.

Better to put energies into something realistic and at least reasonably achievable. But I speak for myself and noone else.

I think the people here at DFA have pretty much made up their minds.

former
Wed, 11/07/07
11:54 am

It's an expression. There are many ways to be involved. But sitting on the blog and criticizing everyone with one-liners isn't one of them, IMO.

And I"m referring to one blogger in particular whose workplace is the blog so I guess he is doing something in his workplace. I'm for discussion of issues and tactics, not constant bumpersticker put-downs. But then, I guess I still want to change the world. Sorry.

58.

I just can't be sufficiently anti-hillary when Edwards and Obama are the alternatives. 

There are many other scenarios possible. Dodd has been moving up a small bit, he could blossom in Iowa. Even so, you probably don't support Dodd either.

ABC -- Anybody But Clinton

bbl

Better to put energies into something realistic and at least reasonably achievable.

Huge Dem victories in my city. Dem mayor reelected and 8-1 dem council. The progressive candidate I helped with didn't win her race, but she got the most media of any Council candidate by far. So, the issues were raised.

Victories come in a variety of ways, even if you're on the short side of a vote.

Sitka
Wed, 11/07/07
12:02 pm

We'll see. we haven't had a vote yet. And my feeling is that Iowa will break Edwards' way, leading to a two-way race between him and Clinton 2.0. As long as we can get to a point where clinton has been lowered and either Edwards or Obama can take her on in the later primaries, it's  step forward for progressives.

ABC -- Anybody But Clinton

Dodd's record is virtually identical to Hillary's. As is Edwards'. Obama didn't vote for the invasion, but he leaves me with impression that he would have if he'd been in DC at the time instead of the IL statehouse.

Anybody But Clinton is meaningful only if you support someone who is really different from her. Gravel and Kucinich are the only two I see in that regard.

Gravel is a weak candidate, would be a disaster as a President, and he's no progressive. Unless you want a national sales tax of 25% and think that is a progressive move!

Gravel is a weak candidate, would be a disaster as a President, and he's no progressive.

Looks like I'm stuck with DK as the only alternative to the NeoDems. 

On Washington Journal this morning they discussed the Peru trade agreement - I missed most of it b/c I was watering, but at the end, Greta said something to the effect that in another trade agreement, Bush signed it, but also issued a directive not to follow the provision for enforcing child labor laws. In other words, Bush signs stuff, then changes it. I guess he thinks he's a king. My disgust grows daily. And to a lesser extent, my disgust w/ Pelosi, Hoyer, and Reid does too. And yes, Indy I'm only blogging.

Btw, Fred and Paine need to phone home.

Since that is your opinion, I have to ask you the same question I did of Indy. Why do you post on a blog when you don't believe in it any longer? 

I don't "not believe in the blog". The blog is many things, most importantly a forum where people who are progressive can exchange ideas in a (mostly) civilized manner. You, Indy, Phil, Lindas, Monica, Joan, and many others make honest statements of opinion here, many of which I'm in total agreement with.

What the blog has ceased to be, is a vehicle for change within the Democratic Party. The Dean campaign generated high expectations, which were cruelly dashed by the Democratic Establishment in 2004. There has been no concerted effort by DFA  (or anyone else, including PDA) to "take back the Party" since then.

That's why I've foresaken the Party and favor the creation of a new progressive party.

I've been posting on this blog and its predecessor since the summer of 2003, and see no reason to stop.

Since nobody bothered to mention a new thread and I was left answering Indy on the last (in between vacuuming the house, etc), I'll bring my posts over.

What the blog has ceased to be, is a vehicle for change within the Democratic Party.

I disagree and think you serve the cause of reform on this blog even if you no longer believe it resides here.

131.


Monica Smith
Wed, 11/07/07
9:16 am

You are wrong in saying that Edwards "put clinton down". He did not make a personal attack but a factual statement on what she would do in Iraq compared to what he would do.

That is called creating a clear contrast on an issue which is exactly what we need in elections. A primary is a contest between competing visions....not a unity event. I fail to see why you find differences on issues offensive.

_________________
For Monica: Clinton says she would keep combat troops in Iraq to conduct offensive operations. They need bases and air support and will be attacking "insurgents". People will die with US weapons and personnel. That is a continuation of the war, is it not?

___________________
134. No, Indy, that is not war. That is a massacre of the people of Iraq. "Insurgents" are people who resist those who presume to govern without popular consent. If the people of Iraq were equipped with sufficient military hardware and weapons to mount a proper defense against the invasion and conquest of their nation and the quislings who have assented to these events, they might be categorized as a resistance or revolutionary force. That the United States governmental officials have convinced themselves that the invasion and domination of the territory of Iraq is somehow justified because no effective opposition has been organized by the world community does not change the facts on the ground. The people of Iraq are being slaughtered, bombarded, and herded from their homes.

It is to our shame that five million people, out of an original twenty-seven million, have been either killed, displaced internally, or forced to flee to adjoining states.
______________________
133. You cannot have a factual statement about what someone "would" do. It ain't a fact if it ain't happened.

_____________________

For the record, when Dodd was asked by Russert if he would have troops out in his first term, the adjective "combat" was not used and Dodd said simply, "I will do that."

"will do" is the simple future. It's not the subjunctive and it's not conditional. I think most people understand that the future is uncertain and subject to change. Hedging one's answers with conditions and hypotheticals is either a sign that the speaker doesn't trust his/her audience to understand that, or is unwilling to make a definite commitment.

That Edwards is committed to redeploying combat forces is disingenuous because it counts on achieving a highly unlikely situation--i.e. that the U.S. military presence on the megabases will be tolerated and no longer subject to mortar attacks and disruption of their supply lines (as was the original plan). For some reason, it was thought that Saddam Hussein was the sole impediment to setting up "enduring" bases which would receive the military assets that are no longer needed or wanted in West Germany, as well as some of the military assets that will no longer be needed in South Korea when there is peace with the North. And then, of course, there's the problem of Diego Garcia. The Arabian Peninsula seemed like a good place to situate these assets that are designed, as ever, to keep Russia and China in check.

As it turned out, Saddam Hussein was not the sole impediment but, wonder of wonders, was actually representing the values of a large number of the Iraqi people who, quite rightly, perceived no benefit from having the infidels in their midst, especially not after these infidels were responsible for the destruction of their cities, their heritage structures and their religious compounds. Why would anyone in their right minds want to have the equivalent of a Mafia organization in their midst?

If you think that the mega bases are simply part of the support system of the combat forces that have been dispatched to "pacify" the population, keep in mind that the invasion force actually set up 118 bases, or more. The mega bases are a different critter. They don't "support" the troops; the troops provide them with "security" by protecting supply convoys and trying to keep Iraqis out of a perimeter area that's sufficient for mortars and shoulder mounted missiles not to reach the working interior. That's why many of the Baghdad neighborhoods have been emptied out--to secure the green zone from such random and disorganized attacks.

We are approaching a critical time because, it's my understanding, the U.N. approval of the occupation, which relies in part on testimony from the Iraqi government, is coming up for renewal shortly and, since basing rights still haven't been secured, it's quite likely that the Iraqis are going to call the U.S. bluff (about only staying where we're wanted) and petition that the U.N. approval not be re-authorized. I encourage you to read the Helsinki Agreement. I've posted it on Hannah. The U.S. allegation that the "feuding" parties in Iraq have not reach a political consensus is a lie.

Indy Steve:

The way I see it is if a pack of cannibals are after you, would you be willing to discuss the issues with the individuals cannibals?  Or, would you be concerned that they were all cannibals.  In this metaphor, all members of the DLC are the cannibals.  When we discuss issues, we need to discuss issues with someone that isn't a cannibal. 

btw, there is yet another new thread:
http://blogforamerica.com/view/22869

ATTACKING IRAN--WE CAN BE FOOLED AGAIN

AND AGAIN, AND AGAIN

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_robert_w_071106_attacking_iran_3a_the_.htm

Lest we get fooled again:

People will die in this new war in Iran as they are in Iraq, as they did in Vietnam—as people do in war—by the tens of thousands or millions . . . one irreversible death at a time. 

"Can we be fooled again?" Evidence shows, OBVIOUSLY.

"Fool me one, shame on You,
Food me twice, shame on me".

...too bad he couldn't even get that right.

...just a drive by.

This broke my heart. Please watch and see what folks are going through. I hope she gets her surgery soon.

http://current.com/items/85716391_transs...

59.
Linda I didn't say he was weak, just not overly strong. Not as strong as Florida, Connecticut, etc.

The National Initiative For Democracy would be wonderful for the people, maybe not corporations:

 http://www.ni4d.us/

There  is no way a DLC corporate Republican Democrat will be interested in Mike Gravel's National Initiative For Democracy, but I voted for it, and think it would be great for the greater majority of people.  Perhaps, Dennis Kucinich could consider it when he gets elected, if George W. Bush doesn't declare Marshall Law because of his war on Iran, so Bush won't be able to be replaced. Possibly our ally Pakistan's Marshall Law was a practice run, so the United States can see how Marshall Law is going to work, since the United States has put into place the procedure for the president to establish Marshall Law,  so that Marshall Law can be enacted by the President in the United States whenever the RIGHT WING deems necessary, just like Pakistan.  If it looks like a Democrat other than one of the DLC duopoly will be elected by the people, then Marshall Law would be the Republicans alternative, after the RIGHT WING bombs Iran, to hold office as long as their war lasts.  Hopefully, this won't happen, but Marshall Law is a very real possibility with the EXTREME RIGHT WING ADMINISTRATION that is currently in power.

Very interesting regarding the Pulse poll, Obama does quite well in Utah and Idaho, even beating Gore in one of them.

Is he our candidate with the most cross-over appeal? I think there was a previous poll indicating such.

85. Martha--just a comment from a picky retired librarian--
it is "martial" not Marshall Law.

sorry, folks--just trying to keep the blog up to
standard ;)