Private anti-war phone call released --- Woolsey + Moran

[defendandprotect]

Will this wake up Democrats -- ???

QUOTE:
Benjamin: Well, we’re trying Lynn. We can’t even get Nancy Pelosi to meet with her own peace constituents. I would like to know: doesn’t she have the power to put a bill on the floor and not put it on? Can’t she decide that we’re not going to keep funding this war?

Well, it has to be a funding bill, and the supplemental is our next chance. It’s going to be soon.

Lerner: Pelosi could simply not bring up any funding bill for the military. She could not bring it up, and then say: “We’re only going to bring it up if you agree to end the war.”

Woolsey: That we’re only going to be spending our money to bring the troops home. And that’s what we’re going to be pushing for, I promise.

Lerner: Instead of bringing it to the floor where she knows she’ll lose the vote, she’ll refuse to bring it to the floor.

Woolsey: Well, she could do that, but it’s going to cost money to bring the troops home. The Democrats are more afraid of being labeled as abandoning, and if we fund the safe, orderly redeployment, then indeed folks will start phrasing it that way, including our own leadership, and then we can abandon the mindset that we’re not abandoning our own troops. The Republicans will say it, but Democrats have to quit saying it.

Benjamin: Lynn, if there’s no change of heart from the leadership of the Democratic Party now, is the most likely scenario that Bush will get his now 200 Billion dollars for the war with no timeline?

Woolsey: Well, it could be, yeah.

Benjamin: Is that the most likely scenario now?

Woolsey: Well, we had fifty-some members sign a letter saying no more money except to bring the troops home.

Carpenter: We’re at 70 now, Lynn.

Woolsey: Ok, 70 now, thank you.

Benjamin: But if Pelosi doesn’t take that one seriously, things will play out the way it did with the last 95 billion.

Woolsey: It could. Of course, that’s my greatest fear.

Lerner: The only thing she could do is to not bring that bill to the floor. She knows that on the floor, she would lose the vote.

Woolsey: Yeah, she might not. She could put the same amount of energy into the Blue Dogs as she puts into the progressives to be key members. UNQUOTE

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0907/5723.html

[defendandprotect]

1. By the way HERE IS THE TRANSCRIPT OF THE CALL: + LINK

By the way HERE IS THE TRANSCRIPT OF THE CALL:

http://www.spiritualprogressives.org/article.php?story=20070907191110516

[sandnsea]

2. We could target the damn Blue Dogs

and the people in their districts. Maybe if somebody were in those districts telling the truth, they would pressure their Reps themselves.

But no, we'll just scream at Nancy Pelosi instead.

[librechik]

3. fuck "politico"

that virtual rag is there to destroy us.

[Ian David]

4. SPAY OR NEUTER YOUR BLUE DOGS! N/T

[nadinbrzezinski]

5. Lerner gets it

... But I don’t know if it would be that profitable to have a conversation with people who have this need to protect Nancy.”

We also see this here... and it is to the point where it is just spinning our wheels when it comes to any of this

Some folks have the insane need to defend them regardless, and I've got the sneaky suspicion that this lack of political courage will cost the democrats in '08... and it will shock and surprise THEM, but not me

[defendandprotect]

6. Right!!! But, obviously a lot of Democrats don' t want to hear it -- !!!

Democrats here would be wise to pay attention to this transcript --

It's hurtful and, perhaps, even harmful in some ways --

But, knowing what's going on -- having the truth -- is better than struggling in the dark; confused -- and here it is -- being said very clearly.

It should lead to constructive action if it's understood.