The House Democrats are about to re-authorize Iraq war funding

[undeterred]

Give In or Dig In? Put Congress on Alert
Tim Carpenter
May 6, 2008

PDA has been a consistent voice against war. We supported HR 4232, The End the War in Iraq Act, and now HR 746, The Safe and Orderly Withdrawal Act. We have protested, lobbied, made phone calls and written letters. We've fought against the war since our birth in 2004, and we helped elect the Democratic Congress in 2006 to end the occupation of Iraq. It still rages on. Do we continue the fight or do we give up?

In a game of political one-upmanship, the Democratic House will vote this Thursday to authorize more money to fund the violent occupation of Iraq. Do we give up the fight, or do we dig in? Democrats want to tarnish Republicans by forcing them to vote against veteran’s benefits and unemployment insurance extensions in an election year, a strategy developed by Democratic leadership.

Democrats want to tarnish Republicans by forcing them to vote against veteran’s benefits and unemployment insurance extensions in an election year, a strategy developed by Democratic leadership. It appears they have given up on ending the occupation of Iraq now—in favor of more violence, bloodshed, and lost treasure—so they can end it after the election.

Do we give up the fight, or do we dig in? I say we dig in, roll up our sleeves, and take it to the streets! We elected this Congress to clean up this mess. Now, we’re going to clean up Congress by electing progressive candidates who support "Healthcare NOT Warfare."

On Saturday May 17 and May 24, PDAers will be joining with our endorsed candidates in the Healthcare NOT Warfare canvass. We’ll be helping out the campaigns by hitting high Democratic-propensity precincts, knocking on doors, and distributing flyers. To help out, contact [e-mail].

If you don’t live near an endorsed candidate, you can still canvass your neighborhood! Tell your neighbors about Healthcare NOT Warfare--ask them to sign the online petition and to only support candidates who will vote for Healthcare NOT Warfare. Order your neighborhood canvass kit, here.

We’re putting Congress on alert! Please send an email to your member of Congress—tell them you’ll be voting only for anti-war, pro-single payer healthcare candidates, and you’ll be canvassing your neighbors to convince them to do the same.

Dig in and keep fighting--Healthcare NOT Warfare!--sign the petition!

https://www.thedatabank.com/dpg/309/personal2.asp?formid=healthpet

Sign the petition and get involved in Progressive Democrats of America- its a terrific progressive organization that is fighting for sane national policy every day of the year!

https://www.thedatabank.com/dpg/309/personal2.asp?formid=signup

[Benhurst]

1. Thank God we've got Nancy Pelosi and a Democratically controlled

House of Representatives.

What a difference they are making!

This really makes me want to go door to door in the Fall.

And our front-runner has come to the realization we need to spend more on the military. I knew something was wrong; but I just couldn't put my finger on it. Who needs a decent infrastructure or universal national health when you are The World's Only Superpower?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/27/AR2007042702027.html

If we're really lucky and the rumors are true, we may even get Sam Nunn as our vice presidential candidate.

Go, Team America! Bombs Away!

[undeterred]

2. I hope Pelosi's district votes her out.

Talk about a disappointment.

[Auggie]

7. San Francisco? Don't bet on it.

[OneBlueSky]

3. no amount of petitioning or e-mailing is going to change Democratic votes . . .

on funding the war . . . they're as much a part of the problem as George Bush and Dick Cheney . . .

[undeterred]

4. So your answer is to give up.

I'm going to dig in my heels and keep trying.

[OneBlueSky]

10. no, I still sign petitions and send e-mails . . . it's just that I know that . . .

I'm pissing into the wind . . . I might get wet and smelly, but I keep on tryin' . . .

[undeterred]

11. Hope is a choice.

And if we want to change things, its the only choice that makes any sense.

[Fireweed247]

6. I agree petitions don't work. They delete all the emails.

But threatening their jobs might!
(that and fighting for clean elections at the same time)

[Fireweed247]

5. I'm not sure they will even end it after the election

Then they will pretend to worry about 2010.

We need a new Congress
www.peacecandidates.com

[Bluenorthwest]

8. Opposition to the war is a losing political stance

Of course the Congress will fund more war. They like having jobs. Our candidates who voted against funding were rejected in favor of those who voted for funding. We promoted the funders and rejected the peace candidates and the Constitution candidates, so why on Earth would those in Congress now take an anti-funding stand? So they can get 2% like Kucinich? No they are voting like the two remaining candidates because that is what the voters have asked them to do by promoting war funders and rejecting those who oppose the war.
If those who vote no funding are sent packing and those who fund by request are promoted to the highest office, then frankly those in Congress would have to be nuts to vote against funding. The voice of the people says fund the war. Like Obama and Clinton.
Writing to Congress is a waste of time in the middle of a Primary that tells Congress clearly that funding is a way to win elections and votes. One can fund and still claim to oppose, so why not fund and be Obama, why take a stand and be a garden gnome from Ohio?

[undeterred]

9. Because its the right thing to do and it distinguishes us from those

who truly don't give a damn.

[Bluenorthwest]

12. Yeah, of course

But doing the right thing did not help those who did it. The ones who did and continue to do the wrong thing get the spoils. My point is that we have elections for a reason, and that by supporting and madly upholding the funders of the war as the only possible Presidents, and rejecting those who did distinguish themselves from the rest, we are in fact voting for the continued funding ourselves in a very direct way.
I constantly urge those who back a candidate with passion to temper the praise with calls to end the war, make non profit health care, stop using Blackwarter Mercenaries and such. But instead, they now say non profit is impossible, and that Obama and Clinton's war funding is a needed way to 'support the troops'.
There is a great value in giving a candidate qualified support, rather than pep rally style glorification. ie- I want to vote for you, but I oppose the war funding you do, so I may switch to another if you don't get right. Giving up principles and issues because the candidate does not support them is a way to lose out on all principles and issues.
Right now, no matter which of the three Senators we vote for, we will be voting for a war funder, a Patriot Act supporter. All three voted for the Patriot Act and for all war funding. Not just McLame, but ours too.
Had we promoted better candidates, we could end the war. Now the war is a non issue. In fact, opposition means losing with a single digit support level, funding means you get to be President.
Reality.

[undeterred]

14. My first choice was Dennis Kucinich

and Russ Feingold is my US Senator. I feel like we owe it to these two to keep trying, because they stand up for whats right and they so often stand alone.

[Bluenorthwest]

18. Yes and I agree with you

We owe it to the volunteer troops to keep trying as well and to our nation. Part of how I keep trying is by holding the candidates feet to the fire instead of joining the choirs each has up and running. Many Democrats I know who were vocal against the occupation, the Patriot Act, and such are now not vocal, as they support a candidate who voted for these things. Instead of saying, I support Obama in spite of his Patriot Act yes vote, they say 'if he voted for it, then it must be ok' and that goes for the funding too. These voters are in fact voting for funding and all the rest by giving unqualified support to these candidates.

[notfullofit]

13. I can think of only ONE politician

who votes his conscience 'because it is the right thing to do' and his first name is Dennis.

As for all the rest, well they are just politicians.

[undeterred]

15. You forgot Russ Feingold.

He is farther away from Clinton and Obama than McCain is, but in the right direction.

[notfullofit]

16. My bad, thank you. nt

[Hubert Flottz]

17. Peace is off the table...

And it makes me wonder, who, is getting what, UNDER THE TABLE?