Progressive Primary Challenge to Hilary Launched

[davidswanson]

By David Swanson

On Tuesday in New York, Jonathan Tasini will announce the launch of his campaign for United States Senate, challenging Hilary Clinton in the Democratic primary.

A Democrat, at least one who convincingly opposes Bush, is very likely to win the general election in this race. This means that the primary is the real election, and the question is what kind of Democrat we want to have in the Senate.

Behind curtain number one is Hilary Clinton, a pro-war, pro-CAFTA, pro-corporate health care Republicrat who's so very much more aggravating than most of them because of the widespread pretense that she's some sort of leftist or democrat with a small d.

Behind curtain number two is Jonathan Tasini, a veteran labor organizer and strategist who opposes the war, opposes corporate trade deals, proposes to expand Medicare to universal coverage, and can be counted on to fight for working people.

Which kind of senator do the people of New York want?

And which kind of party do Democrats around the country want?

Do we want a party that follows the wishes of the vast majority of voters, or a party that continues to lose through endless futile attempts to win more voters away from the War and Corruption Party than it loses from its own base by standing for nothing.

If Hilary gets the nomination, she could lose the general election, especially if she continues to support Bush's war. But why should we take the chance of having her win? If she wins, she will immediately announce a campaign for the White House, one she will almost certainly lose or allow to be stolen, but one we really do not want her to win. The surest way to keep her out of the presidential race is to go ahead and bid her farewell in the primary.

Cindy Sheehan sent Jonathan the following statement on Sunday to be read at his event on Tuesday:

"I am so pleased that Jonathan Tasini has stepped forward to challenge Senator Clinton and to take her on as an anti-war candidate. I encourage the people of New York to take a hard look at Mrs. Clinton's dismal record on the illegal and immoral invasion and occupation of Iraq. Then take a hard look at what Jonathan is saying.

"We as people who strive for peace and justice should not support a candidate who advocates for continued killing on the basis of flimsy reasoning. It is time to hold the pro-war Democrats responsible for what they are saying and doing also.

"I fully endorse the idea of peace with justice and support the message that Jonathan is espousing, but I cannot endorse candidates because of my organization’s tax-exempt status. I thank Jonathan for his leadership, for his support and I look forward to our continuing efforts to end the war."

Tasini blogged on Monday on Huffington Post: "My campaign challenging incumbent Hillary Clinton is based on a simple – yet, in our political world, utterly radical – idea: It asks people to abandon the classic choice of lesser-of-two-evils and vote from the heart, gut and conscience. For progressive voters who do so, there is a clear choice, for the difference between the incumbent and myself could not be more stark. Senator Clinton has said she supported the decision to go to war in Iraq, and she continues to support the war, with a position that echoes that of George Bush (find a 'winning' strategy and, then, withdraw troops on an uncertain timetable). In a speech to the Democratic Leadership Council, she praised NAFTA, which cost thousands of ordinary Americans their jobs. She dismissed the idea of pursuing universal health care because she didn’t want to take on the pharmaceutical and insurance industries. And she receives mountains of campaign cash from corporate donors, including Wal-Mart.

"My positions, available on my website, offer a mirror opposite. I am a candidate who opposes the war, believes that real homeland security means bringing the troops home immediately, opposes anti-worker trade deals that send jobs abroad, believes that our economic future should not be determined by an authoritarian regime in China, and supports Medicare For All. Unlike the incumbent, I will draw my support from many thousands of people who will volunteer their energy and contribute small amounts."

Tasini lays out his positions in detail at his website, debuting Monday, at http://www.tasinifornewyork.org

Dick Morris believes, or pretends to believe, that only Condoleeza Rice can stop Hilary. We can shatter that theory in two ways this week. The citizens of the European Union can denounce Rice as a war criminal and supporter of torture. And we can launch a campaign to stop Hilary on our own.

David Swanson is the Washington Director of Democrats.com and of ImpeachPAC.org. He is co-founder of the AfterDowningStreet.org coalition, creator of MeetWithCindy.org, and a board member of Progressive Democrats of America. He has worked as a newspaper reporter and as a communications director, with jobs including Press Secretary for Dennis Kucinich's 2004 presidential campaign, Media Coordinator for the International Labor Communications Association, and three years as Communications Coordinator for ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. Swanson obtained a Master's degree in philosophy from the University of Virginia in 1997. His website is www.davidswanson.org.

[OffWithTheirHeads]

1. I'm in!

Will send him some support $ tomorrow!

[hiley]

2. Recommending

Jonathan Tasini for Senate!
;-) Can't wait to see all his plans.

[OffWithTheirHeads]

6. Me too!

[farmboxer]

3. I have been disappointed in Hillary

with some of the things she has supported. Anyone is better than Bush, but that is not saying much.

I hope we can get some politicians who will support "We the people", as "YES" we can affore universal healthcare for all Americans.

[snowbear]

4. I just want Hillary to tell NY voters that she is NOT running 4 President!

I don't want to see her ousted from her U.S. Senate seat -- -- I thought a majority of NY residents thought she was doing a good job?

I just want her to make it perfectly clear to American voters that she promises she WILL NOT RUN for president in 2008.

Maybe then, it will finally shut people like Chris Matthews, Monica Crowley, and the likes, up!

[hiley]

11. Last time Bill Clinton ran for Govenor

he said I am running for Govenor not President in i think it was two years. One is not able to just trust that if she says she is not running in 08 for President that she won't.
really

[OffWithTheirHeads]

5. I just sent him some money

and e-mailed all my progressive friends, however, Losts of DU is asleep so we need to keep posting in the daytime.

[padia]

7. broke in red CA

I'm just posting to keep page alive voted for it to be greatest page.

[hiley]

15. thanks!

Our Campaign Begins Today!
Submitted by Jonathan Tasini on December 5, 2005 - 6:00am.

This is your campaign.

I may be the candidate. But, we’re trying to ignite a movement.

A movement to stop an immoral and destructive war.

A movement for a better New York.

A movement for a better America.

So, before I go on, we need to build this movement right now: with people and money.

<clip>

http://www.tasinifornewyork.org/

Poll
A Poll: What Kind of Democratic Senator Do You Think New Yorkers Need?:
A pro-war candidate, who opposes bringing our troops home now, believes NAFTA was a good thing, supports trade deals that cost American jobs, who opposes a real universal health care plan and who gets large amounts of money from corporate donors?
A candidate who opposes the war and wants the troops home immediately, opposes anti-worker trade deals that send jobs abroad, supports Medicare For All and gets his support from people like you.

GO VOTE on his poll
http://www.tasinifornewyork.org/


The Iraq War: Jonathan's Position

My position is a responsible one: the troops must be brought home now. It is the best solution for our country and for Iraq. I reject the myths that have been promoted against proponents of withdrawal.

My opponent voted for the war and supports the idea that there is a "winning" strategy for the war.

<clip>

http://www.tasinifornewyork.org/issues/iraq

[Rainscents]

8. This is great news!!!

GET HILARY OUT!!! No more war and corporate monger!

[election_2004]

9. While I don't think Tasini has a chance against Hillary....

Perhaps Tasini can get Senator Clinton to pledge that she won't run for president in 2008, if reelected to her New York Senate seat. That would also innoculate Hillary against Pirro or whichever Republican she faces in the '06 General Election.

That way, Hillary keeps her Senate seat, and downticket Democrats don't have to worry about Hillary hurting them as the new face of the national party in 2008.

WIN / WIN

It would be nice to end all of this bullshit.

[hiley]

13. pledge? that is what Bill Clinton did and it did not matter in the end..

<clip>
After his election to a fifth term in 1990, Clinton was more successful in getting his legislative program enacted. Based on his overall success at the legislative session in 1991, Clinton announced that, despite a campaign promise in 1990 to complete a four-year term, he intended to run for president because he had accomplished his goals for the state more quickly than he had imagined.
<clip>

http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761564341_2/Bill_Clinton.html

[lyonn]

66. Better yet, Tasini may get Hillary off square one

Hillary ought to listen to the polls. People don't believe in this war, want to be able to have health care without selling their first born to pay for it, and in general, act like a democrat. We don't need dems in office that cater to the corps. who are literally running this country. We need politicians that can speak to issues like the Federal Communications Comm., FEC, oversight on illegal actions by our representatives, intel agencies. Lordy, everything has been screwed up and so damn few dems are screaming about it.

[hiley]

10. this needs more

recommends!
come on du

[onenote]

12. I'd rather spend my $ supporting Democrats trying to unseat repugs

My number one priority is working towards Democratic control of the House and/or Senate, or at least increasing the number of Democratic members so as to make it more difficult to the repugs to push their agenda. So, for that reason, I will not be diverting any of the resources that I have available for political contributions to races run against sitting Democrats. I understand that some DUers may have different priorities, but I personally think that we'd be better off concentrating on fighting repug control above and beyond anything else.

onenote

[MrBenchley]

14. Amen to that....

Let's see this twerp run against somebody like John McHugh or Tom Reynolds....

[hiley]

16. MrBenchley why you calling names

already?

[radio4progressives]

20. That's what "Mr. Benchley" is about , and why he is here... n/t

[MrBenchley]

23. Why not? It's called freedom of speech.

[radio4progressives]

29. no argument there! just saying, you're here to demonize critics and

opponents of the DLC. That's your purpose. Ann Coulter believes in free speech too, for some.

[hiley]

31. exactly!

;)

[MrBenchley]

48. I see no reason why

people who work against Democrats oughtn't to get an earful. I sure don't see any such concern about "demonizing" when people spout hate-filled rubbish against the DLC.

"Ann Coulter believes in free speech too, for some. "
And she tries to shout down people she disagrees with and she hates Hillary too!

So how am I keeping you from saying anything about anyone you wish? Oh that's right, I'm not.

[Usrename]

70. Good point

It is one thing to direct friendly fire at a Democrat that is already under attack by the right wing. It serves no purpose. To win back the Congress will take unity. Fragging people that are in the enemy crosshairs does not promote unity. It destroys it.

Leiberman, on the other hand is the darling of the right wing. Bush vomits, Leiberman licks it up. A progressive should run against him.

[TankLV]

84. Ouch! Mr. "benchley" must be smarting from his own advice!

[Cascadian]

78. DLC is bringing this on themselves.

My hope by 2008, the DLC will become a detail of history. Nothing else.

By pandering to the Neocons and trying to be "me too" people just does not wash anymore. When will you guys get it? The people WANT Democrats to distinguish themselves from the Republicans, not go along to get along. Hillary will not get the nomination for the Democratic candidate for President if she keeps going on the way she is. To vote a Democrat just because she or he is Democrat is just plain naive, shortsighted, and borders on the stupid. I hate to say it but it is. Vote for somebody for their principles, not just because they have a "D" at the end of their names. I am happy people like Tasini in New York and newly elected mayor of St. Paul Chris Coleman are finally standing up to the Republican-Lite politicians like Hillary Clinton and Randy Kelly. Joe Lieberman (Where has been lately???) also better watch his back as his seat maybe lost as well.

No. The Democratic Party can only be saved by those who will stand and act like Democrats and not those who pretend to be something else.

GO TASINI!

John

[hiley]

32. actually it is name calling

in the guise of promoting the DLC not a Progressive Agenda.

[MrBenchley]

49. Actually it is freedom of speech....

[hiley]

67. Okay "freedom of speech to Call Names for No Reason"

What is with the arguing?
Would still fall under Name Calling, in fact senseless name calling.
Really, benchley he is a twerp according to you because why?
Never gave a reason for name calling did you, benchley?

[MrBenchley]

69. Hahahahaha....

"What is with the arguing?"
You mean you don't think anyone has the right to disagree with you?

"Never gave a reason for name calling did you, benchley?"
Yeah, I did.

[hiley]

79. nit pickin' and arguing are not

the same as simply disagreeing and you know this already.

no you did not give a reason, only gave dlc doublespeak like every other day with a team of dlc lovin' buddies.

[Solon]

86. why not follow your own advise...

what you said was inflammatory, so refrain or be a hypocrite.

[TankLV]

83. While the rest of us call it STUPIDITY and WILLFUL IGNORANCE!

[TankLV]

82. You continue to suppor LIEberman after his latest diatribe SUPPORTING

BUSH* - AGAIN - and SCOLDING DEMOCRATS WHO "DARE CRITICIZE" that AWOL criminal!

Yeah - we should take advice from you!

[mikelewis]

64. In some ways, it is fighting against Republicans...

If we want to contend for control of this country, we must represent the views of the majority of the people. Right now, the majority of the people are dissatisfied with the direction we are headed. We need someone who can translate that to our government. I don't believe Sen. Clinton does that adequately. You may but let the polls decide and don't discourage those who think that we need to fix the Democratic Party before we try fixing the country.

[understandinglife]

17. The EU should sanction Rice; DU should support ImpeachPAC.org

Thank you David for all you are doing and I will certainly support Mr Tasini.

I hope everyone gives as much support to the Bush Crimes Commission as possible: www.bushcommission.org

Recommend.


Peace.

[radio4progressives]

19. Thank you David Swanson and all YOUR GOOD WORK! n/t

[saracat]

18. I appreciate what he stands for but this is a waste of resources.

We need to put our money into competting in every district , not wasting our dollars forcing a primary on a safe seat! Think of the republicans we could fight with that money and enthusiasim! We havecandidates who can't afford a general election run and this guy wants to waste money on a contested primary? To make a point? We need to WIN to take back the Congress in order to end the war.

[radio4progressives]

21. The Iraq War is just as much of a Democratic War as it is a Repug War

and that's the PROBLEM with your arguement.

[saracat]

22. But the Democrats can provide the only solution.

And like it or not, and there are times I don't, the Democratic Party is the only game in town for ending the war. Our national leadership has stepped up to the plate recently and any attempt to water them down by decreasing their numbers is foolhardy.I donn't like Hillary's stance on the war but she is a safe seat, and will be outvoted by the majority we elect in 2008.

[radio4progressives]

26. I really wouldn't worry about HC - she's got the full Machine Behind her

Multi-National Corporations and all the front groups financing her and controlling the levers of power. So, i wouldn't worry too much about this challenge from an ordinary citizen, who never has the backing from the big guns.

On a side note, I'd like to know what initiatives/proposals Hillary Clinton has put forward in the Senate in her first term, foreign or domestic.

Anyone know?

[mcscajun]

30. You can find them all here...

http://clinton.senate.gov/news/statements/index.cfm

Every initative she has proposed, amendments she's been successful with, public statements on issues.

[saracat]

38. I'm not worried about her. I am worried about the other

candidates who could use that money to compete against the GOP!

[hiley]

33. Hillary is not providing "solution" much less the "only solution"

She is providing the same old speak.
Her seat is not safe remember the protesters this week end.
http://www.wbbm780.com/includes/news_items/news_items_more.php?section_id=4&id=22445

http://www.canofun.com/blog/viddate.asp

[saracat]

39. I didn't say she was "providing a solution". I said a "Democratic

Majority" was the only way to "provide a solution".

[hiley]

44. Democrats are not providing a solution either.

The DLC stranglehold is smothering the DNC and it is not acceptable to the majority.

People want the troops out of Iraq, now.
You don't "go along to get along,"

Going along is what got American into this hell.

[onenote]

52. "People want the troops out of Iraq, now."

A growing number of people do. But I haven't seen evidence that a majority shares my view that we should have an immediate total withdrawal. At best, a majority is coming around to the view that we should begin withdrawing troops soon. Its not enough, but its progress. IMHO we should be focusing on the repugs who would oppose even discussing withdrawing our troops. Believe me, if we beat them, HC is not going to be a problem. But if we don't beat them, it won't matter what HC thinks.

onenote

[saracat]

65. You are 100% correct.

You make my point better than I did!


"IMHO we should be focusing on the repugs who would oppose even discussing withdrawing our troops. Believe me, if we beat them, HC is not going to be a problem. But if we don't beat them, it won't matter what HC thinks."

[TankLV]

85. It is BUNKERBOY'S nnd the REPUKES war - plain and simple.

It's THEIR WAR OF CHOICE BASED ON LIES - it wasn't the DEMS who pushed this bus!hwar!

I hate revisionist historians!

[Lerkfish]

24. so...one should instead support candidates who DON"T have a stand you

like?

I'm pretty certain that's the whole point of a primary, to determine which candidate's platform better REPRESENTS the constituency.

or, are you perhaps saying we should always shoo in incumbents unchallenged? If so, why hold primaries at all?

[radio4progressives]

27. Sorry, I'm not sure I follow.. need a bit more clarity..

are you responding to something i said?

[radio4progressives]

Disregard! My mistake! n/t

[saracat]

41. The purpose of a primary is to provide us with a winning candidate.

They already have one in NY. In some instances it is best to have an uncontested primary. One reason for it would be the fact that Union and PAC money cannot be released to campaigns until after the primary. That being said, by the time the usually poorer Dem candidate gets their money, it is too late and the Reugg wins ! Democratic candidates need all the money they can get as soon as possible. It also isn't a good thing to have them attack one another and hand ammunition to the other side.This isn't about who we like as it is about winning. And we must win.Otherwise we accomplish nothing.

[Lerkfish]

46. well, but when the people telling me that are the people who are backing

the incumbent, it makes me wonder.

Say the incumbent DIDN't have your back on the issues. Say you wanted to run Hillary against Paul Hackett as an incumbent. Would you feel the same way?

Personally, I'm against uncontested primaries, mainly because it allows the party machine to be kingmakers and removes it from the populace by at least one step. If Hillary is the clear choice, then the primary will determine that.

If there were more than two parties, I'd have no problem with uncontested races.

just IMHO.

I also have trouble with the "vote DLC or you'll lose" line because that hasn't born out that well overall.

yes, we are in a struggle against the republicans. But I think its a mistake to attempt to emulate them to beat them. I think it makes more sense to be clearly an alternative.

you're free to disagree, but I think I'm right regardless. :)

[onenote]

50. Its not a question of "backing" Hillary, its how to use limited resources

IMHO. At least that's how I see it. I'm not from NY and don't have a particular preference for Hillary (and I definitely don't think she would be the best choices as Democratic party nominee for pres in 2008).

However, I don't see any indication that the people of NY state are dissatisfied with her to the point where it makes sense for $$ that could be used fighting repugs elsewhere will be spent in a quixotic primary fight. The numbers in New York have remained pretty steady: HC gets 60% approval ratings, including 80 percent plus approval from Democrats. If there was a significant sign of dissatisfaction by rank and file Democrats I could see where a primary challenge might be a good thing, but as it stands, it just seems like money wasted. http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x11373.xml?ReleaseID=835

onenote

[Lerkfish]

74. a little more info for you: 60% of americans oppose the war

http://www.nynewsday.com/news/local/wire/connecticut/ny-bc-ct--poll-iraq1206dec06,0,3136631.story?coll=ny-region-apconnecticut

while you guys are diddling around, worrying about whether a fight is quixotic, you've not been paying attention. the american people do not approve of this war.
I'm afraid it may be your better -funded but clueless DLC candidates that will tilting at windmills, and we will all suffer for it.

[CTD]

25. But what/who is "we"? That's the problem.

Hillary and the DLC Dems don't *stand* for anything. They are Republican-lite. So why bother voting for them?

To me, this is not some "Our Team" vs "Their Team" thing. I don't care what party label my representatives (at any level) wear. I care about what positions they hold and how hard they will fight for them.

I have a hard time seeing how Hillary would be significantly better than W. Sure, anyone intelligent enough to put together a coherent sentence would, strictly by definition, be a better president than this dipshit. But, really, beyond that, how is Hillary any different? Because she pays lip service to womens' rights and the environment? First, no one is going to outlaw abortion and, second, Hillary would be just as quick to sell out to the corporations as W.

I support anyone looking to oust pro-war pro-corporation incumbents, regardless of party.

[onenote]

35. that's a pretty naive approach to politics imho

While you may disagree with HC on the war (I know I do), there is a world of difference between HC and W and, indeed, most repugs. When it comes to civil rights, the environment, womens' rights, programs for the elderly, needy, etc., HC, and indeed any Democratic Senator I can think of (now that Zell is gone) is better than chimpy and, indeed, better than any Repub senator. My first goal is to block the repubs from succeeding anymore than they already have in adopting reactionary legislation and appointing reactionary judges. Once that goal is accomplished (by electing more Democrats, even DLC Democrats), my next goal is rolling back what the repugs have done and pursuing a progressive legislative agenda.

Now that means that while I want the war to end now I am not willing to accept continued reactionary rule to accept that result. Put another way, if the war had never happened, would I be happy with what chimpy and his gang have done in terms of gutting social programs, undercutting civil rights and environmental laws, fawning over the gun manufacturers, energy companies, Halliburtons, etc., giving tax breaks to the rich and cutting programs for the poor? No.

If a repub who wanted to stop the war tomorrow but was wrong on every other issue I cared about was running against a Democrat who wants the war to end eventually but seems clueless about how to accomplish end, I'd still go with the clueless Democrat. I respect the fact that others disagree and would rather end the war first and then worry about beating the repubs. But my view is that electing Dems (even those who haven't gotten to the right place on the war) is the best way to accomplish both ends.

onenote

[hiley]

40. naive approach?

At least, two Senators jump into my mind immediately.
How many more dead soldiers are enough for you?
What about the maimed soldiers that there is already?
45,000, not enough?
Hillary has to go.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Iraq_Coalition_Casualty_Statistics

[onenote]

43. which of these results will end the war faster?

Defeating Hillary, but ending up with DeWine re-elected in Ohio.

Re-electing Hillary, but getting rid of DeWine?

IMHO, the latter approach is more likely to result in the war ending sooner than the former. That's why my money will be going to whoever runs against DeWine, not to someone running against Hillary.

onenote

[hiley]

45. It is possible to fight more than one battle at a time.

This dlc doublespeak is not cutting it. It is like the arguement to support Joe Lieberman because he might be appointed by bush to DoD later.
So what, please leave Joe.
he is a not progressive anymore than Hillary Clinton.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/12/5/122357/097
Americans want the war to end now.

[onenote]

47. money makes the political world go 'round

And the Democrats don't have enough money to wage effective battles against all of the repugs that they can and should be fighting. So, while it may be possible to fight more than one battle at a time, its also important to use limited resources to the best possible effect.

As stated, I want the war to end now. I don't think that is more likely to happen just because someone mounts a primary campaign against Hillary. I think it is more likely to happen if credible campaigns can be launched against incumbent repubs. And while you and I and lots of other DUers may want the war to end now, I haven't seen much to convince me that the statement that "Americans want the war to end now" represents the views of a majority of the country. THey are getting there,and I think a majority does want us to start withdrawing troops as soon as possible, but I don't think a majority supports immediate, total withdrawal yet. Pushing for change in those places that elect repugs is the way to get that result, imho.

onenote

[hiley]

36. The Dems have a HUGE problem, have you not heard?

Notice ELITE, most Americans are completely fed up with our Politicians.
Especially the ELITE of the Parties.

Democrats Find Iraq Alternative Is Elusive
Party's Elite Differ on How to Shift U.S. Policy

By Robin Wright
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, December 5, 2005; A01

Around the country, many grass-roots Democrats are clamoring for a quick withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq. On Capitol Hill, Democratic politicians have grown newly aggressive in denouncing the Bush administration's war strategy and outlining other options.

But among the Democratic foreign-policy elite, dominated by people who previously served in the top ranks of government, there are stark differences -- and significant vagueness -- about a viable alternative.

In interviews, veteran policymakers offered no end of criticism about how President Bush maneuvered the United States into its present predicament, but only one had a clear vision of what he would do if the Iraq problem were handed over to a Democratic administration tomorrow. Several accept Bush's premise that a rapid withdrawal anytime soon would leave Iraq unstable and risk a strategic disaster in the broader Middle East.

<clip>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/04/AR2005120400965_2.html?referrer=email

It would be wise to support candidates who want out of Iraq.

[Cascadian]

80. If Hillary wants to save face, she needs to change direction.

She MUST stop pretending to be Joe Lieberman and start standing up to the Bushites and their agenda. If she doesn't, I would hate for her to become the presidential nominee in '08. I would not be able to support her campaign. She better look at the polls and fess up to the fact that supporting the war was a mistake and keeping our men and women in Iraq is a fiasco. They must be brought home. Stop playing like a Republican and start being a Democrat again!

John

[pberq]

28. Go Tasini!! Kick! - Recommended

The DLC must be challenged!!

[LeftNYC]

34. Where do I sign? nt

[Zhade]

37. K/R

NT!

[Cults4Bush]

42. I'll be backing this guy with every ounce I can muster, and if Hil still

makes a presidential run I will fight her tooth and nail there as well.

I'll take a Boxer or Jackson-Lee way long before I back another dynasty driven family.

[madfloridian]

51. Saracat, Mr. Benchley, Onenote....hell must have frozen over.

I agree completely with all of you. It is a waste of resources that we can not afford right now. I am not especially fond of Hillary, but I would rather see her win than give the seat away.

I am pretty passionate about certain things, and I get called a Dean worshipper a lot (which is silly...my grandkids laugh at that)..but I think we are in dangerous territory here.

I am pretty much a combination of idealist and realist, believe it or not. I am equally disliked here by both the uncompromisingly left and the uncompromising right.

But the people who are campaigning for this guy are into this sort of thing.

David Swanson's articles about Howard Dean

Is Dean Drunk?
http://www.democrats.com/node/6284
Here Swanson is making fun of Howard's nice blog about his meeting with Cindy Sheehan.

The Problem with Howard Dean
http://www.democrats.com/node/5709

That is not going to play well on the national scene, not with Hillary. There are many more articles, but these will suffice. These are not nice tactics, and they are continuing.

Hillary is very respected in our area here in Florida. She can win this area, conservative, hands down. I don't like her very much, but I will support and vote for her.

It is not time for 3rd party. Here at DU now there is as much attacking the Democrats as the Republicans. There is a danger in that.

People like me who not extreme either way will turn to the party candidate if pushed too hard by progressive groups who are going off in all directions. There are a lot here who don't speak up, but sooner or later they will get their courage back.

[onenote]

54. thanks..

Someone actually agreeing with me! Well, now I gotta watch for flying pigs on my way home!!

onenote

[hiley]

57. David Swanson

not the one running so why is he the subject of your criticism?

Tasini is running on the Democratic Party not a Third Party.

http://www.tasinifornewyork.org/
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat?pid=41233
personal swipe on the op
:hurts:

[madfloridian]

58. Hey, don't take it personally.

Just expressing how I feel. Frankly I don't know the person running. Nowhere was I critical of him.

But when tactics go overboard it hurts everyone.

[hiley]

60. I am not taking it personally

I don't know David Swanson except his work at
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/
Most everything in your post was slapping the writer of the OP, why?
The Original post subject is about Jonathan Tasini a Dem running against Hillary.

[madfloridian]

61. Read my post again. With an open mind.

It is about tactics.

[madfloridian]

59. Actually if you want to discuss this, read my whole post with open mind.

:hi:

[hiley]

68. not really

:hi:

[goodhue]

53. Thanks for posting this David Swanson

And welcome to DU! :toast:

[hiley]

55. Check out the Nation blog

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat?pid=41233

[iconoclastNYC]

56. She just lost my vote.

The fact that she can't stand up to Republican wedge politics and voted against the Freedom of speech is all I need to know about her.

I will not vote someone who does not support my core values.

[Cascadian]

81. I am with you.

If Hillary gets the nomination for the Democrats in 2008, and she does not move away from the right, I will not throw support to her. She would ultimately lose. Being a NY voter, I hope you will consider supporting Tasini. I am not here to tell you or any New Yorker to vote. Not my place, but that being said, I cannot express how much of a disappointment she has become. Her and Dianne Feinstein.

It's time people voted their conscience and principles. Democracy becomes a joke when people simply vote for petty symbols and personality. A "D" is only as good as the person who has that name before that letter.


John

[althecat]

62. Hi David... Welcome to DU....

Tis a hangout for lots of great folks. Althecat = Alastair of Scoop.co.nz you may have noticed we regularly publish your stuff...

:hi:

[mzmolly]

63. David welcome to DU! HC has two Democratic/progressive challengers

now. Wow, our Democracy sure is looking Democratic.

Best of wishes to you in your endeavor! :hi:

[Disturbed]

71. If I were registered in NY my vote would definetely be for...

Jonathan Tasin.

[stillrockin]

72. Yes!

We need Dems that reflect our values. Hillary walks around with her finger in the wind. I am sick of Repubs posing as Dems. Live the values you preach.

[Freddie Stubbs]

73. Can't the far left come up with a stronger challenger than this guy?

Hillary will destroy this guy reinforcing the view that Hillary's DLC brand of centrism is a winning political strategy.

[jonnyblitz]

75. one doesn't have to be "far left" to be left of Hillary these days. nt

[Senator]

76. Sadly, the "war issue" just isn't gonna do it...

...for challenging DLCers like Hillary and (if only someone would take him on) Lieberman.

What Tasini has to do is run on a pledge to Impeach and Remove Bush/Cheney in 2007. Talk about Stolen Elections.

Challenge Hillary on her failure to stand up on January 6th (2001 and 2005).

That's where the energy is in the Dem base. That's where he can tap into a national stream of support (yes, I mean money).

Who knows, the effort itself might push the DINOs among the DC/Euphemedia Analstocracy to "see the wisdom" of an opposition party campaigning with a national strategy of like, say, opposing torture, election theft, treasury looting, etc, etc...?

---

www.january6th.org

[Name removed]

77. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[OKthatsIT]

87. Where do I send the check?

I'm finished with Democrats like Clinton.

[goodhue]

88. link

https://secure.actblue.com/contribute/direct/9135?successuri=http://www.tasinifornewyork.org/thankyou