Top Democrats won't attend anti-war rally in Washington

[sabra]

http://www.centredaily.com/mld/centredaily/news/politics/12715225.htm

Top Democrats won't attend anti-war rally in Washington

WASHINGTON - (KRT) - As the anti-war movement arrives in Washington this weekend, many top Democrats are leaving.

Nationally known Democratic war critics, including Howard Dean, the chairman of the Democratic National Committee, and Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, Russell Feingold of Wisconsin and John Kerry of Massachusetts, won't attend what sponsors say will be a big anti-war rally Saturday in Washington.

The only Democratic officeholders who plan to address the rally are Reps. Cynthia McKinney of Georgia and John Conyers of Michigan.

Today's leading Democrats head a party divided over the war, and many leaders are wary of standing with anti-war activists, who represent much of the party's base. The divide between anti-war activists and Democratic leaders underscores a challenge the party faces in the 2006 congressional elections and beyond. Some activists say that Democrats such as Clinton and Kerry who criticize the war but refuse to demand a timetable for withdrawal are effectively supporting the status quo - and may not merit future support.

[wakeme2008]

1. I would like to have seen Dean BUT Hillary and Kerry NO NO NO

They voted for this Invasion for Oil.

[leftchick]

33. Dean would have been great!

but the others? pfft... war enablers is all they are. Until they change their tune to bring them home they aren't welcome. No more of the "more troops" bullshit for God's sakes. That is not even working with repukes!

:(

[second edition]

102. Dean has said we shouldn't have a pull out time table! n/t

[the_spectator]

153. Using strategic thread response to jump to the head of the line and say...

POPCORN-O-RAMA!
:popcorn:

[ElectroPrincess]

171. Dean has been "assimilated" - He's gone! Give up on him. n/t.

[0007]

109. We want Democratic folks that want to bring the troops home

and work out problems of why the U.S. is being terrorized. Enough of that bullshit that terrorist hate us for our freedom.

[senaca]

117. my first thought is Wellstone would have been there. nt.

[noahmijo]

51. Rove thanks you for parroting a right wing talking point

Nothing grinds me more than seeing those on our side parrot this bullshit.

Read the IWR.

When they voted for was to as Bill Maher put it best, to give Bush a badge and gun they didn't say "go kill george!"

[OzarkDem]

53. Regardless

why can't they say that Bush abused their trust and they don't support what this war has become?

How will history treat Dem leaders inaction at this stage when its been shown that Bush fabricated the case for invading Iraq?

[noahmijo]

55. Well maybe if people state the truth about the IWR more instead of

accusing those Democrats who voted for it with same lense as the Republican Warmongors it could intead read "Democrats trusted the president to not abuse the authority given to him" or better as a metaphor "Democrats trusted the president by giving him the keys to the car-but they never told him to booze up, go for a joyride and then total it"

[6000eliot]

61. People are dying over there NOW!

Where the fuck are our leaders? I don't care how they vote in the past. Where are they RIGHT NOW?

[Name removed]

65. Deleted message

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

[Sterling]

128. Anyone who trusted Bush ever is a fucking idiot.

Sorry but the "Bush lead us astray" shit is too pathetic at this point.

[pokercat999]

130. Well OK, but why aren't they (hill, jfk, dean etc) saying it now?

Because they are still afraid of being tarred as "soft" by the GOP. Shit like this is exactly why I would love to believe in Karma, Christ and an afterlife. Just can't drink that kool-aide.

There just ain't no justice in this here world and with no "next" world I guess there just ain't no justice.

[High Plains]

178. Oh, give me a break

Any Democrat who says he or she voted for the resolution without knowing they were giving Bush a blank check to go to war is full of shit. You knew it when it happened, I knew it when it happened, our so-called representatives either knew it when it happened or were totally incompetent. No excuse in either case. Gutless wonders they were. I, for one, will not be an apologist for their craven caving-in.

[second edition]

104. Kerry has said similar words. The danger is leaving the country

at this point to be taken over by terrorists. It will very likely make the Middle East even more unstable and more dangerous.

[gulfcoastliberal]

119. Whew! Good thing it already hasn't been taken over by terrorists!

:sarcasm:

[Zhade]

64. Not according to Clinton's own aide.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/19/politics/19sheehan.html

"A spokesman for Senator Clinton, while not commenting about Ms. Sheehan's remarks, said that the senator, while voting to give President Bush the authority to go to war, has been very critical of the way he has chosen to use that authority."

Per someone who actually works for Clinton every day, the vote WAS a vote to authorize b*s* to go to war.

But who to believe, the aide who works with Clinton, or you?

I think the aide is closer to the truth.

[noahmijo]

73. The aide agrees with me

The aide essentially is using my point he is claiming that the president didn't do what was in the guidelines of the IWR vote. He didn't say that Hillary's vote was one for war, he is saying that the president took her vote and did not use it for what it was intended for just like he did to Kerry and other left of center Democrats who voted for the IWR.

As I said before if I give you the keys to my car am I telling you to go total it?

Exercepts from Kerry's floor statement on the IWR

Let me be clear: I am voting to give this authority to the President for one reason and one reason only: to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction if we cannot accomplish that objective through new tough weapons inspections. In giving the President this authority, I expect him to fulfill the commitments he has made to the American people in recent days - to work with the United Nations Security Council to adopt a new resolution setting out "tough, immediate" inspections requirements and to "act with our allies at our side" if we have to disarm Saddam Hussein by force.

And in voting to grant the President the authority to use force, I am not giving him carte blanche to run roughshod over every country that poses - or may pose - a potential threat to the United States. . .

What part of this says war at all costs? Not to mention the fact that Bush BROKE the vary provisions the IWR stated in which it defined that going to war ONLY AS A LAST RESORT AND A TRUE COALITION WOULD BE BUILT I.E. WE COULD HAVE BACK-UP NOT GO IN ALONE.

Let me put it to you this way since I put it simply, since you and this aide claim that this was a total just outright statement of war, let me ask you would you Gore or even Clinton with the powers to declare war as a last resort and if this nation was under attack and thus far details were sketchy as to who is doing what and where?

I would trust that virtually any prominent Democrat wouldn't have done what Bush did if given this sort of authorization and therein lies the only crime Kerry and others who voted in favor of the IWR committed:

They trusted Bush not to lie and take advantage of it. Now you can myopically say "oh well see that's where they are dumb cause even I knew not to trust Bush!!"

Yea well you're not an elected official when people you work with whether they are in your party or not are talking about terrorism and danger and people are looking to you to make the right decision you don't simply say "Well I don't trust Bush" and then shut your door, no you make a principled decision based on what is being given to you, and the fact of the matter is Bush completely lied and went over the heads of those who make up the Legislative Branch.

That's a crime on BUSH's side NOT Kerry's NOT Edwards. BUSH LIED BUSH CAUSED THIS MESS.


I thought this stupid argument was over during election time, and quite frankly I am tired of fighting it, I can think of a hundred things I'd rather go after the Democrats for, but to the happiness of Rove some people here still just can't resist bringing this up and choosing this particular instance to demonize the Democrats when the core blame should be aimed at the Bush administration.

Link to the IWR for your and Clinton's aide's reference ~~~>
http://www.yourcongress.com/ViewArticle.asp?article_id=2686

[silvermachine]

97. Nothing like trying to have it both ways....

...the kind of torturous prose that Kerry employed in his remarks above are exactly what served him so poorly on the campaign trail.

[silvermachine]

99. Nothing myopic about saying this...

<<<They trusted Bush not to lie and take advantage of it. Now you can myopically say "oh well see that's where they are dumb cause even I knew not to trust Bush!!">>>

It's the truth. Most people on this board knew it. After the stolen election in 2000, the "uniter not a divider" bullshit, the different tone in politics bullshit we are supposed to trust him? Wake up.

<<I thought this stupid argument was over during election time, and quite frankly I am tired of fighting it,>>>

Then shut up and disappear, please.

[Arkana]

103. Thank you!

For once someone just lays it out. Kerry voted to give Shithead* the keys. Shithead* crashed the car. Is it Kerry's fault?

[Amonester]

118. My answer is "no" because, IMHO:

WITHOUT THE KEYS: BUSH/CHENEY (+PNAC BIG OIL & WAR PROFITEERS) WOULD THEN HAVE STOLEN THE CAR AND CRASHED IT ANYWAY...

Period.

Why are the People fighting for over this? They should all unite against these War Criminals who destroy the good U.S. of A. day after day for their own stupid, selfish enrichment at the expense of their grandchildren's tax dollars. Why, oh WHY?? :crazy:

[Sterling]

129. It would have been better to have them steal the car, don't you think?

When you give the drunk the keys to your car you are responsible for the damage he does.

[bvar22]

156. If you give the keys to a DRUNK,

and the drunk crashes the car, it IS YOUR FAULT!!!!!

[Zhade]

115. "I would trust that virtually any prominent Democrat..."

Then you're far too trusting - or did you forget the Democratic president LBJ's lie via the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution?

Now, why the heck you mention Kerry or Edwards is beyond me, unless it's a preemptive strike in the b*s* sense - in that there was no threat from me, and you just decided to jump the gun before I even THOUGHT about mentioning either one of them. Trigger-happy much?

Here's the thing: b*s* is an illegitimate president, and was so when he STOLE THE ELECTION. I know you realize this, because that's the very reason this website we're posting on was founded.

He's a liar and a cheat right from the start, there are non-liars in prominent positions warning that there was no reason to invade Iraq (like Ritter and Blix and even the CIA, which kept telling the WH there WAS no threat), and the Dems who voted for the Iraq WAR Resolution - not the "Let's Keep Looking For WMD Resolution" - are willing to trust the man, and this is acceptable?

We live in two very different worlds, you and I. In mine, when an aide of a pro-IWR senator says it's a vote for war, I believe that aide over your spin. That's just how it is. I think you're wrong, and desperate to explain away the vote.

Not going to happen. I admire your effort, though.

[anotherdrew]

122. exactly, any dem dumb enough to trust bush needs to be voted OUT OF OFFICE

they 'trusted' the man who just got done stealing the election with the lives of children in uniform, fuck clinton, fuck kerry, fuck the rest, they should have WALKED THE HELL OUT and broken quorum so NOTHING could have been voted on. Should have put this admin on notice right from the get go, maybe then we wouldn't have lost so many more seats... the voters are NEVER going to support a party that doesn't fight with everything it's got for what it believes in. NO one believed in bush.

[TankLV]

141. Thank you.

"exactly, any dem dumb enough to trust bush needs to be voted OUT OF OFFICE"

Period.

[anotherdrew]

146. what the grass-roots need - a candidate grooming and promotion system

it'll have to develop and there must be something along those lines growing.

[SOS]

176. Agree

But it was a political calculation rather than trust. None of them trusted Bush.
The Dems who had higher political goals (Biden, Hillary, Kerry, Edwards etc) voted for IWR. The old-timers like Kennedy and Byrd voted no.
The calculation was that if Hussein had WMD, their political careers would have ended with that no vote. Instead, these spineless pikers decided to play it safe for themselves and give Bush the authority.
In a final irony, by 2008, that yes vote will destroy them politically anyway.

[Zhade]

164. Yes.

Agreed.

[Sterling]

131. "I admire your effort, though."

I don't. This kind of shit is what allows shitty candidates to be rewarded for their shittiness.

[Zhade]

163. I'm trying to be gracious while being firm with my explanation.

But I pretty much agree with you.

[Gnostic]

184. "and the Dems who voted for the Iraq WAR Resolution"

That's exactly what's screwing the Democratic Party, why they are'nt trusted or even considered by many Americans who would otherwise do so. Too wishy washy. Too fence sitting. Too flip floppy. Too pandering to the Neocons. They are'nt Dems, they're imposters.

And if something does'nt radically change inside the party soon, the '06 AND '08 elections will go once again sadly to the repugs.

Dems have to stop pandering to the "support our troops" bullshit and stop molly-coddling this administration over ANYTHING to do with this farce. If they want to be a viable alternative to the thieves we have in now. Otherwise, I think it may be well past time to look for another party altogether, if the top Dems don't want to grow any balls and want to continue to screw their electorates

Could someone kindly explain to me why anyone would consider voting for one of these "Dems" who are obviously as pro-war as the asshats we have in now? What exactly would be the difference?

[mitchtv]

74. I translate that vote to, like, a strike vote

you don't want to, but the union is authorized to do so 'if necessary'. Some people understand it better that way.

[karynnj]

88. Really nice analogy

especially as in both cases the vote is requested to put bargaining power behind the union (or the US in the UN). In areas with strong union presence this might translate something complicated to something known.

[bunkerbuster1]

98. If only we lived in a country where candidate Kerry could make an analogy

like that and not have to fend off "YOONYUN GOOON" catcalls from the right.

It's a relatively minor thing, but most Americans simply don't / didn't get that legislators have to weild their votes as tools; a vote doesn't mean you approve of everything in the package, nor that you approve of whatever might result of inforcement of the law you've just voted on.

[karynnj]

139. I agree there - also the era of strong large unions is gone

At one time, Ohio would have been a state with heavy union presence. I thought his analogy was perfect in the way in which the votes were used - but there would be extremely few places where it could be used and even there it would be better explained by someone other than Kerry for exactly the reason given.

I think that's why it's hard for Legislators. Kerry genuinely has one of the more consistent records over a very long time. His statements on Iraq were really pretty consistent and the passion with which he talked about it made it easy for me to believe him as to his reasoning.

[silvermachine]

96. Bullshit...

...especially in Hillary's case. They both knew the score. What did they think Bush was going to do? Just sit there? Everyone knew this was a bogus war from the beginning, including Kerry and Clinton. I voted for Kerry and would do it again if he were the nominee (though I pray he won't be). Same for Hillary. But I'm not giving them a pass on this one, sorry.

Edited for sp.

[confludemocrat]

113. Other Dems such as Byrd called it a blank check he and others knew it, so

drop the transparent BS about the true import of the resolution. They voted for war. They still support it. And this stuff about terrorists taking over is more like parroting Rove than anything else said here. The war is illegal, criminal, a disaster, a failure and 60% of the people want us out. We have only done damage--only damage. And you think Hillary or Kerry can do better? He couldn't even run a decent campaign, so much less is the chance he will be given an opportunity to "complete the mission" in his words.

[kath]

162. Yep. I always refer to it as The Blank Check Resolution.

[Sterling]

127. Whatever.

The vote speaks for itself. Plenty of blood on Dem hands here.

[rhett o rick]

135. Also they didn't say "Don't go kill, George". If they trusted him, shame

on them. If it were me and he betrayed my trust and went to frigging war, resulting in thousands of deaths and a debt this Country may never get out from under, I wouldn't sleep untill

[rhett o rick]

137. computer went down. As i was saying, If GWB abused my trust

i wouldn't sleep until everyone knew I was scammed and work to rectify the wrong.

[TankLV]

142. When you give a knife to Hannibal Lector, don't be shocked when he uses

it on you" is a more apt analogy.

These dems who voted for it "so they couldn't be accused of looking weak or unpartiotic" - because that is the ONLY reasons these wimps voted for it - not because of any great noble "concern"!

I am so sick of apologists for the unforgivable.

You don't give keys to a drunk even if he promises to use the car only when sober. It just doesn't cut it.

Bush has always been a liar. They had eyes. They saw what he did during the 2000 selections. If they didn't, then they sure as hell don't deserve our continued support!

[rhett o rick]

166. These dems who voted for it (IWAR) "so they couldn't be accused

of looking weak or unpatriotic". You said it so well i just had to repeat it. my feelings exactly. This is one reason Demo Politicians are not supporting the anti-war movement. Also, they want to keep their slice of the pie (or pork).

[astroBspacedog]

188. George should not be allowed to have a badge and gun,

or even a bicycle for that matter.

[second edition]

101. I don't know about Hillary, but John Kerry's vote wasn't for war

it was to allow Bush the right to exercise good judgement and do what was necessary to protect this country. So you fault him because he was doing what he thought was best for us and this country?

[confludemocrat]

114. He supports the war he won't concede it's a criminal enterprise, messed up

beyond salvation. Short of that most important of concessions, he is not needed or wanted at the anti-war march.

[rhett o rick]

167. If Kerry put his trust in Bush's judgment, shame on him. If he didn't

want war, why doesn't he say so now? Why doesn't he support the anti-war movement? He voted for the "Blank Check" resolution because it was politically expedient.

[saigon68]

174. THEY ARE DINOS

They love to play with other peoples lives.

[tanyev]

2. Fine. They're not leading, so they might as well start following

or at least get out of the way.

[bahrbearian]

12. They are not Leading ,, they had better leave.

[stepnw1f]

3. And That's Why They Will Have Short Careers

I hope these folks realise they are politically damaging themselves. NOBODY is going to see this as a positive.

[saskatoon]

9. short careers

Ah, but much more than that, they will have "to themselves be true"

[karynnj]

20. Short Career?

I don't know what you deem a short political career to be, but none of these three can possibly end up with short careers.

Kerry was a LT Gov for 2 years and by 2008 will be finishing his 4th term as Senator - a total of 26 years. Not a short career and he would be favored for a 5th term if he opted to go for that instead of second run for the Presidency, he would very likely have an easy time.

Hillary, if you count her role as first lady had many years as Arkansas's first lady, 8 years as First Lady and 6 years as Senator. She will be elected for 6 more years as Senator in 2006. No a short career.

Dean was a Governor for 12 years and is now head of the DNC - if it stopped now, this is at last a moderately long career.

Each of these people may well have other commitments. I think the Kerrys are doing a fundraiser for Casey in PA.

[OzarkDem]

44. Things are changing

Dems in DC are no longer in control of this party. The grassroots are.

[karynnj]

57. I don't know where you are (Missouri, Arkansas?)

but in NJ, one person who succeeded in helping get out volunteers was Kerry. While ignoring the net roots would be foolish, look at the primaries last year - they weren't won by Dean who dominated the internet roots. Both Kerry and Dean are busy, in different, complimentary ways building real (not virtual) grassroots, which the Democratic party let weaken since about the 80s. (Many volunteers were active for the first time last year and Kerry's pleas to stay involved and not give in were partially responsible.)

Because NJ has an important 2005 Governor race, I think some of their ideas are being tested. The local assembly candidates have DFA support. Kerry used his email list to solicit volunteers for Corzine and the local Democrats and made 5 appearances in the state where he was enthusiastically welcomed. These are very serious real investments in making a stronger party.

The majority of people are not as far to the left as you think.

[blm]

92. Yeah...you claim to know more about governance than everyone else and

then turnaround and try to get rid of the one lawmaker who has investigated and exposed more government corruption than any lawmaker in modern history. And was instrumental in bringing THREE wars to an end.

But, then YOU are the great one who knows all while you post repeatedly how worthless Kerry is to this country.

Man, you must have some record of service if you can repeatedly decree that Kerry needs to go.

So share with the class.

[OzarkDem]

144. You must have mistaken me

with someone else.

My message is that most Dem leaders in Washington DC are not leading very well these days. They're clinging to old ways, dependent on corporate money and ignoring grassroots Dems until its time to run for office.

That's bad management by anyone's standard. There's a great deal at risk in our country, and our Dem leaders need to supply some action with their talk. The future of our party is at stake. If they can't be leaders they'll have to leave because our party will have lost the confidence of American voters.

[blm]

189. You always specify Kerry, completely oblivious to the fact that he never

accepted corporate pac money throughout his Senate races starting in 84, advocated for public financing of elections since 85 and wrote the Clean Elections bill he submitted with Wellstone, and helped craft the Kyoto protocol for 10 years with other world leaders - something corporate America was dead set against.

[Kolesar]

4. Not shoulder-to-shoulder with InternationalANSWER?

Not comrades or blood brothers? Imagine that.

[karynnj]

27. IF ANSWER is behind it, they would have to be crazy to go

In jan 2003, my daughters and I went to the anti-war rally in DC. One problem we had was that rather than having just a crystal clear plea for no war, every fringe left wing cause was represented. Any politician on a stage with some of these activists would regret it.

In the 1970s, the reason Kerry got so many Congress people there is that he fought to keep the Jane Fondas and others out of Dewey Canyon II. The congressmen felt comfortable with joining veterans led by an articulate, non-radical leader demanding the end of the war.

The parallel this year, would be if Sheehan was leading a rally of soldiers and their families. That I could see Senators and Congressmen speaking to the people - even if they don't favor an immediate pull out.

[Kolesar]

41. Yes, of course

I should have lit the :sarcasm: lamp in my previous post.

[karynnj]

59. I was agreeing with you

I reread my post and realize that that is not obvious, so I humbly apologize. Sorry - I was trying to back you up.

[Kolesar]

84. I knew what you meant originally

So no need to apologize. Sometimes dry humor is hard to express on the internet without the meaning getting lost. To their credit, InternationalANSWER did a much better job with January's inaugural/coronation protest. I will be watching tomorrow.

[FyurFly]

76. You are correct

If ANSWER is there, that is political career suicide. Any time some rethuglican calls a sensible democrat a commie and they attend an ANSWER event, they give credence to what the rethug is saying. I realize that some of you support ANSWER, but that being said, being involved with those folks is most assuredly political suicide.

[Sterling]

132. What is really sad is ANSWER is doing it and the Dems are not.

Why the fuck is ANSWER all we got? Because the Dems are a fake opposition party paid to sit down and shut up while the wealthy run the show.

[Overseas]

175. The Republican party wins if Democrats avoid the protest

because those mean right wingies might call them names in the media... And for heaven's sake, they called pure-message Cindy and Gold Star Families for Peace lots of cruel names... And did I miss Hillary's visit to Camp Casey with Russ Feingold?
>>>Just because three out of the 65 banners at the protest may be causes I don't support doesn't mean I shouldn't protest... I just try not to march directly behind the banners of causes I don't support...
>>>I realized I was handing the Right a victory by buying into that splintering technique. Republicans are not all anti-abortion or pro-theocracy, but they now vote in blocks and just did so for a theocratic, anti-choice Supreme Court nominee because he didn't come right out and say so. Our leaders couldn't even vote as a block against a nominee who did not even show the respect for our government to answer questions clearly and who was a leader in a right wing fringe group, The Federalist Society... Our lovely fair-weather liberal Democratic leaders don't have the courage to oppose that kind of smiling right-wing radicalism, yet they feel free to withohold support for the diverse radicalism of public dissent by not sharing a march to end a destructive war that may include some groups they do not support because gee golly that could be used against them...
>>>It is more about who owns the media. We have photographs of Rummy and Sadaam. We have copies of US invoices selling Iraq chemical weapons int he 80's. We have Dick Cheney's private energy meeting oil maps. But the Bush administration is still in power. We have Tom Delay and Bill Frist and GWB's own arrest record. So it sure isn't about having photographic evidence. Look at how long those Republicans have stormed forward-- years of high crimes and misdemeanors now-- and only now are the cracks in their cruel edifice becoming apparent to the majority of US citizens... BUT LUCKILY FOR THE REPUBLICANS IN CHARGE, DEMOCRATS ARE STILL SPLINTERED-- they still don't realize they should block together in opposition so they can sweep in as a true alternative in 2006. LUCKY LUCKY REPUBLICAN PARTY... If Republicans can just play up the need for Democrats to remain more conservative than the majority of their voters, the Democrats will continue to lose... so comfy and convenient for those in power...

[maxsolomon]

5. not one senator? pitiful.

they're such... POLITICIANS.

you'd think that at least Patty "Osama builds schools" Murray would be dumb enough to provide hate radio with a new whipping boy.

[saskatoon]

6. Mckinney and conyers?

God bless them, the only Dems that have any guts.

[mbperrin]

86. Yes, indeed! For some reason, guts

are in short supply - and McKinney especially, literally returned from the dead. I promise I'd trade the entire delegation from west Texas for these two!

[BlueJac]

7. They have been running away from her all along.......

They won't get caught dead there......Why not when the tide is turning so much against the war?

[RagingInMiami]

8. They still don't get it

[TankLV]

143. Too true. They. Still. Don't. Get. It.

[TankLV]

181. I change my mind.

After hearing how ANSWER wants to rally - because they just like to rally - about EVERY FUCKING LITTLE FRINGE GROUP - I can now understand why they didn't want to show up.

I forgive and understand them.

Who wants to FOCUS on just our main GOAL anyway!

[Voltaire99]

10. To hell with these weasels.

I will not support these cowardly warmongers.

If you stand with Bush on this war, you stand against peace and you stand against America.

Forget my vote.

[ninkasi]

11. It's been a long, long day, and we can't get out of Spring, Tx

So we're stuck here when Rita blows in. But...could somebody explain how this makes sense?

"Today's leading Democrats head a party divided over the war, and many leaders are wary of standing with anti-war activists, who represent much of the party's base."

Why are so many wary of standing with their base? I wish they were all like McKinney and Conyers, who don't ever let us down.

[HereSince1628]

13. Why? Because the elite hate standing with the common

We give them the heebee geebees.

[Dancer]

16. McKinney and Conyers

are real, and as such they lead in ways that the others are as yet unable to comprehend.

[Dave Reynolds]

18. It really shows who their base is,

the corporations and money people.

I may get smacked down for dissing the DLC, but they do not stand with us "normal" folks.

[ninkasi]

22. I'll never smack you down for saying that

It's the simple truth. What does that say, though, for so-called "leaders" who won't stand with their base? Why should we let them lead anymore? I'm ready to get new ones, and Conyers and McKinney are the role models.

[Dave Reynolds]

29. We need some new ones, for sure.

What sticks with me right now is an e-mail I got from my Senator Stabenow (a DLC person) which parroted the republican talking points on the bankruptcy bill.

I myself am for personal responsibility, but people out there needed her protection, and she sold them out for corporate interest.

[niallmac]

52. Dems voting for the bankruptcy bill has been HUGH in my

re assessment of what power money has on this nations politics. Shame is the only word for these non Dem's. They are so removed from the struggling working tax paying american it is shameful.

[JohnyCanuck]

14. Want to know why?

Too many Dems like helping themselves to the gravy from the gravy train too.

See my post in GD.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4852351

[Orsino]

31. 'Cause most of them voted to authorize this damned war? n/t

Punks. Whores.

[shance]

15. Disappointing.

They're in DC, why not pop over to show some support?

Leaders cannot address elitism if they're controlled by it.

[karynnj]

35. Many go to their states on the weekend

Others are working on 2005 or 2006. I would assume that Corzine will be in NJ because he's in a race to be Governor. As a NJ resident, I would prefer he be campaigning in NJ, rather than possibly being photographed with someone on the fringes (I don't mean Sheehan, but some of ANSWER's fringe isues people.)

[shance]

80. Dear friend, we're all going to be "fringe people" if we don't get rid

of the crooks and the cowards in office.

Its time we stop the exclusive, "we are different from them" and come together despite economic and social differences. By that im not talking about befriending crooked Republicans or Democrats because that's enabling thats not uniting.

Our nation and our future depends on breaking the classist barriers down that do nothing but divide, disconnect, breed racism and classism. We need to learn how to see everyone as our brother and sister.

May sound organic, but I think we need to get back to the earth anyway.

:)

[karynnj]

90. Which is more likely tokeep Democrats in office?

- Campaigning in your state and doing what's needed to build and energize grassroots

OR

- Appearing at an antiwar rally where some of the people there will cause you to be demonized by association. I think it would be nice if some of the Senators met with some of the anti-war people in their offices (as congressmen and Senators did in the 1970s). It would be good for the withdraw now people and the here's an exit strategy people to have an honest exchange.

The example I gave is Jon Corzine - who voted against the IWR and has proudly mentioned that in the NJ debates. From his record in the Senate and his plan in the Governor race, I think he is better than the opponent the owner of a drug benefit card company that received no-bid contracts from the government (NJ).

[shance]

112. Are the really building grassroots, or are some Congressional leaders

headed to a high dollar fundraiser, which is more often where they go?

Hopefully its the latter, and it's not to say it's wrong for Congressional leaders to do both. I do hope at some point there will be less high dollar fundraisers and more fundraisers that don't separate and divide individuals into categories as much. Being someone who has been involved in fundraising and in politics for some time, I have not seen much 'grassrooting' from the Congressional leaders, minus a small few. I think its a systemic problem that has ensnared most of our leaders because they have to raise money, however it creates a wall that blocks our leaders from connecting to the individuals that need to hear them the most.

I hope that will change, because it must change, if we are concerned about saving our country from becoming solely a one party system, which is what we presently have. We need to break down the walls of economic class that are separating Americans and ironically enough, Democrats.

And with regards to the 'either/or' of the question, why can't it be both?
I think the problem lies again in our duality thinking which we all are accustomed to doing. I would think there could be no greater way to build grassroots support than to go to the most significant Washington rally perhaps in history (remains to be seen) or to attend one of the rallies taking place in various states.

In order to do that, one would have to place a high value in grassroots efforts, not to mention an end to war profiteering and needless killing continuing to take place in Iraq and Afghanistan (and other places) in order to see the importance in attending events like the ones that are taking place nationally this weekend. Who knows? I would imagine and hope some of the Congressional leaders will be attending some of the events in their home states. That would be great if they are.

[karynnj]

158. The grass roots building I was talking about

was the effort that Corzine has been doing in NJ. What I mean is getting more people to volunteer or at least be involved to the extent of knowing the issues.

Kerry made 5 appearances here - at least 3, probably 4 were free and open to the public (at Morristown - the responce after I send in the RSVP, just suggested bringing a case of bottled water that the NJ Democrats wer collecting.) In addition to endorsing Corzine, Kerry did ask that everyone take as their job countering by finding the facts and disputing any lies thrown at Corzine. (saying they expect it will happen). (Would that some Democrats have done this for Kerry last year.)

In Morristown, 460 people were willing to give email, phone numbers etc. Giving the local Democrats a new group of potential volunteers. If the the other 3 big events were similar - this is help. The event in Edison was with a mainly Indian American (as in India) group - getting this community, which is growing in NJ, involved will be helpful.

[grytpype]

17. Good.

Americans don't want their leaders to be anti-war. Even when they themselves are anti-war. Being anti-war is seen as weak, and leaders are supposed to project strength. That is the lesson of McGovern.

[leesa]

23. Well, perhaps it's time Americans correct this fucked up perception

[grytpype]

30. OK, let's all get behind Kucinich.

If we can't find someone wimpier.

[eridani]

69. Those who won't oppose the war are the wimps

Kucinich opposed it from the start.

[ElectroPrincess]

173. Perhaps, sadly 58,000+ MORE Americans will sacrifice their lives

in Iraq and Afghanistan before The People demand that their leaders pull out?!?

*The American Sheeple* is apt ... and so damn sad. :cry:

[NewInNewJ.]

36. You always come across so Reasonable!

I just get emotional and can't reason. How do you do it?

[grytpype]

54. How I do it...

I just get emotional and can't reason. How do you do it?

Well, I hate to admit this, but I'm a lawyer.

[TankLV]

145. Figures.

[Shakespeare]

19. Shame. On. Them.

Prevaricating cowards. How about actually SUPPORTING YOUR CONSTITUENTS?

[chiffon]

21. Well, I guess they are not in disagreement with the current administration

Therefore, they have nothing TO protest.


Sorry pieces of shit!

[central scrutinizer]

24. they are wary of the press coverage

Remember the WTO protests in Seattle in 1999? There were tens of thousands of peaceful, ordinary Americans there - union members, families, all ages, races, etc. Who made the news? Who got their pictures in the paper or on the TV? The tiny handful who trashed the Starbucks or burned a flag. This is common media practice. Even if the protest is entirely peaceful, the photographers will find the people with the most tattoos, the most piercings, the longest dreadlocks, or the Wiccan drum circle, or anything to marginalize and trivialize the protest. Would you want to risk having your photo appear next to one showing someone wearing a bandanna mask, burning a flag?

[longship]

25. This will be the last one that no Dem Senators show up.

There should be Congresspersons from the lower house, though.

I thought I heard that Charles Rangel was going to show up. Probably also many other CBC reps: Conyers, Waters, Jackson-Lee, etc.

Why, oh why does the Congressional Black Caucus have to carry the water for the entire Democratic Party?

They are all true patriots who richly deserve the highest accolades.

[blm]

26. NEWSFLASH on Steve Thomma...he's the Bushist at Knight-Ridder.

He's spinning the antiwar rally as a Democratic dividing issue because that's the only way they can try to neutralize the story.

The problems with the antiwar rally are the peripheral acts that insist on sharing the forum.....

Sorry, but no national figure is going to be present at any event with the peripheral groups.

Vietnam Vets against the War was all about ending the war. As much as I support the rally and Cindy, and all of you attending, none of us, except possibly Cindy, will have zt least 10 million dollars spent linking us to the destruction of Israel, and other groups that are so far left they have a meeting point with the far right.

[The_Casual_Observer]

28. No surprise, they didn't attend Vietnam war demonstrations either

We had to be driven out of Vietnam by the Vietnamese, as we eventually will by the Iraqis.

[6000eliot]

62. Quite the opposite

when you consider Chicago in 1968.

[karynnj]

91. Watch Going Upriver

There were many congressmen (Bella Abzug, Pete McCloskey - off the top of my head) and Senators, notably Ted Kennedy who came down to join the vets at the end of the workday.

The difference was that this was an anti-war rally that was concerned only with ending the war and providing more help for the veterans.

[rodeodance]

32. seems demonstrating publicly has a bad name/connotation!

[Catchawave]

34. This doesn't surprise me....

Professional pols need to protect their jobs. Sad, isn't it :(

[Mairead]

83. Agree on the 'sad'. But they don't *need* to, they *choose* to.

They sell us out every time to keep their job. Make you wonder, doesn't it?

[loudsue]

37. We need to elect Dems who aren't afraid of the unwashed masses

You know...some REAL PEOPLE, instead of the corporate robots who currently have a "D" after their names.

I'm sick of the entire Federal government. We need to clean the whole place out, and start over.

:kick::kick::kick:

[AbbyR]

111. Real people can't afford to run

I would love to run for office, but I know that I do not and probably could not raise the funds to do so. I'm also far too liberal for my area (Southeast Arkansas).

[Dr Fate]

38. I cant blame them- they need to focus on the hurricane(s) for now.

n/t

[Arkana]

58. Exactly. Allow this march to be for the PEOPLE, not the pols.

It's good that Conyers and McKinney are going, but I didn't assume that Kerry, or Clinton, or any high-level Democrats would go. Ted Kennedy's not going--does that make him a DINO?

[ladjf]

39. Very sad state of affairs but true. I don't think we should vote

for any Dems that voted for the Iraq invasion.

[OzarkDem]

45. Nor donate to DNC

or the DSCC or the DCCC.

[ladjf]

49. Right. We don't want any Pubs in Dem suits. Guys like Lieberman

and Bayh aren't helping us kick out the crooks.

[Maggie_May]

40. Hillary and Kerry

they think if they don't stand on the issue they will get that middle of the row vote. But guess what they are not getting mine. They need to stand up for us and if they won't I will vote for who ever will. What cowards anything for a vote and not what they should truly stand for. :mad:

[u2spirit]

42. Democrats are toeing the line for Turd Blossom

Remember earlier in the week when he said Sheehan was a clown and no mainstream Democrat wanted anything to do with the anti war crowd.He appears to be right. I guess he realizes our party "leaders" are as worthless as we do. Kerry, Clinton, Reid, Obama or somebody for God's sake needs to be there and demand a troop pullout. It's enough to make me ill. Having said that, I usually don't let corporate news stories sway my opinions.

[OzarkDem]

43. Wow. Just, wow is all I can say

I'm what many would call a moderate or conservative Dem and even I can see we need to have a national dialogue on the Iraq debacle.

Our problems with the Vichy Dems in Washington DC is much more serious than I thought.

What possible reason do they have for not attending?

[karynnj]

93. I think a national dialogue on Iraq is overdue - but I don't think

a rally (especially with groups like ANSWER) is the right forum. Also, with a second major hurricane hitting, the Democrats would look horrible protesting now. If some of the Republicans (like Hagel) are shifting on this, maybe hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

[howmad1]

46. C'mom. I heard the same damn excuses for dems ......

....not showing up at Camp Casey. Truth of the matter is these dems who won't show up have figured out what the rethuglicans have known for years; crime pays. If they give the appearance that they oppose the war, there go corporate donations. I'm getting a very uncomfortable feeling that the last thing dems want is to win an election. Just think, they'd have to work for all that the rethuglicans have gotten for them.

[sweetladybug]

47. I would like to see Al Gore or Tipper or one of their children at

the rally on Saturday. That would help energize the Democratic base

[melody]

48. we haven't heard anything yet about where Al is going to be :-)

[spooked911]

186. yes, Gore SHOULD be there

[vernon_nackulus]

50. It's time to turn against them

the same way we did against LBJ. You can't be neutral on this.

[HuffleClaw]

56. and THIS is, in a nutshell the major problem with the democrats

they seem to not be capable of collectively taking a stand on ANYTHING. unlike the lockstep republicans. what the hell are they afraid of, its like they don't recall that quote, 'if we don't hang together, we shall surely hang seperately' (or something like that). its becoming a sad sad joke to watch 'em all dive for cover whenever a contentious issue arises. its things like this that add to voter apathy.

[MrSlayer]

60. Gutless, as usual.

I'm not even surprised.

[Generator]

63. This is why Conyers is my top Dem

"Some activists say that Democrats such as Clinton and Kerry who criticize the war but refuse to demand a timetable for withdrawal are effectively supporting the status quo - and may not merit future support."

Exactly.

And of course, it's not just the war-it's the frigging inablity to admit they WERE WRONG. The war is based on falsehoods and the swindling of the American public. They were swindled too? Boo hoo. Admit it and come clean. That is the only way home. Because Bush has committed treason against this country and unless they clean away this festering puss pocket, the disease will spread. They are never going to be president any damn way!! They are in DENIAL. As if the Republicons would let them win another election anyway-they already WON the last two but look who's President! And it remained basically uncontested-yes this is another issue-but I know from the remarks by Theresa Kerry that THEY know it was bogus.

So denial on. Don't force the Bushman out. Beleive you can win 2008. It's a fantasy unless they bring Bush down. If not now, when? The DSM was the golden ticket, Sheehan is another golden ticket, the hurricane mess is another golden ticket. And all wasted because they are afraid of risking some power they don't even have unless they risk the little power they do have.

[tainowarrior]

66. TOP Democrats won't get my vote

Spineless bastards. Get with the program...60% of the American people is against this war.

[eridani]

67. Kucinich to speak at the Green Festival in DC on the 24th

Saturday, September 24th:
11:00am-11:45am: The Green Festival

Congressman Kucinich will speak about the Department of Peace and Non-violence

Convention Center
801 Mt. Vernon Place
Washington, DC

Congressman Kucinich will speak about the Department of Peace and Non-violence

For more information go to www.greenfestivals.com

Then he takes off for Maine--

Saturday, September 24th

5:00pm-8:00pm:
The Harry S. Truman Dinner
Portland Democratic City Committee

Riverton School Cafeteria
1600 Forest Avenue
Portland, Me 04103

Congressman Kucinich will speak about civil rights


Sunday, September 25th:

11:00am-12:00pm:
Maine Organic Farmers and Gardeners Association
Common Ground Country Fair
294 Crosby Brook Road
Unity, Me 04988

Congressman Kucinich is scheduled to give the Keynote address on topics including Sustainable living, benefits of local and organic food sources and the "greening of Maine Homes and Businesses"


6:00pm-6:45pm:
Meet and Greet at the Cumberland County Democratic Committee Booth

Cumberland County Fair
Cumberland County Fairgrounds
196 Blanchard Road
Cumberland, Me 04021

[DemoTex]

68. Hymn, hymn ...

FUCK hymn ..

[hollowdweller]

70. Think how them coming would help the anti war movement.

It is so sad to see my party be so concerned with being attacked that they can't stand for what is right. Think if Dean, or some other democrat who was against the war got up there and made a barn burner speech. It would show character and strength and set the movement on fire, bringing in more people.

However they are so afraid of the Republicans turning it against them they abandon the Truth, and sell out the righteous in the name of politics. So they end up playing to the stereotype that Democrats are wafflers and want to have it both ways.

[bklyncowgirl]

71. The Democrats couldn't agree on lunch much less Iraq.

They are all over the map on Iraq.

We need to set a timetable to get out. We need to have goals and objectives listed before we can get out. It was a mistake to go in there but we need to win now that we're stuck there.

And those were the Democrats who were against the war.

The rest won't even admit that it was a mistake and even if they think Bush made a mistake by going in there they are unwilling to admit that they made a mistake in giving the President what amounted to a blank check.

It's frustrating as hell. There is no viable third party and the "opposition" party refuses to oppose.

[adigal]

72. I have liked and supported some of these

people with my money and time, and you know what: NO MORE!!! When Kerry and Hillary come sniffing around for their next donation, I will say NO and I will tell them why.

What a bunch of wusses. Even Dean. I am disappointed in him. Grow some cojones, people, no wonder you don't want people like me running for Congress. Some honest indignation might make you look foolish.

[Mind_your_head]

75. They really can't attend.....

They have already "sold their souls", so they really can't in good conscience, stand with the rest of the folks who are "speaking their conscience" this weekend.

They are telling us something by their absence....which doesn't mean that they aren't giving us the "go ahead w/o them"....they are to 'entangled' - new leaders must emerge!

[Virginian]

196. Really, they can't

If the speakers stayed on topic, maybe there would be some elected officials in attendance, but, they just can't risk being associated with some off-the-wall fringe group. I am not saying there were any at the rally, but without better control of who gets the stage, and what issues are being discussed, they could have been photographed standing next to the Grand Wizard of the KKK. Wouldn't that picture look good in their next campaign.

With all the different issues discussed, I am surprised there weren't some in conflict with each other.

If this was just about the Iraq war, that would have been one thing, but it was also about Palestine and the security wall in Israel and the West Bank and Apartheid in South Africa and so many other issues that I tuned out. Maybe the congressman opposes Bush's war, but doesn't want to take a stand on the Wall in Israel right now. Democrats don't walk in lock-step like the Republicans do.

[burrowowl]

77. I think Dennis

K. will be there.

[goodhue]

148. I'd be surprised if he wasn't

[bbgrunt]

78. we have no leaders--that's why people haven't been in the

streets before now. Kerry totally caved in nov. Dean was marginalized by the dnc. Besides Conyers, I don't see ANY one of them standing up. Farewell, pres. hopes mr. feingold. You have been "quirky" one too many times for me!!!

[tomg]

79. Well, I just wrote a letter to my

Congressman cordially inviting him to the gathering, and explaining how quite a number of his constituents will be here and we hope to see him. Got to admit, though, that he is great and has been absolutely outspoken in his opposition to the war.

[ladylibertee]

81. I am surprised that Dean is not going , but I understand why Hill and Kerr

wont

[bklyncowgirl]

85. Howard Dean as a politican could go. Howard Dean as DNC Chair can't

As DNC chairman Dean's job is to get Democrats elected--pro-war Democrats as well as anti-war Democrats.

The fact is that the Democratic Party is all over the freakin, map on Iraq. They can't even come to a consensus on whether is was a mistake to invade in the first place much less on what should we do now. It's a disgrace but it's reality.

Can you imagine the reaction from pro war Democrats if he were to speak at the rally? Can you hear the howls from Biden and the rest of the "the war was not a mistake, Bush screwed it up" crowd.

I'd love to see the Democrats take a strong, principled position. If they don't, I'd love to see a truly viable third pary option with candidates that I not only agree with but in whom I could feel confident that they have the experience and knowledge to do the job.

Sadly neither is likely to happen but maybe, with enough pressure from us the Democrats might gain a little microscopic backbone.







I'd love to see him there.

[karynnj]

95. Also, his position is that we can't just pull out

[EFerrari]

82. Shame on them all. They are running away from a mess

they enabled.

[Vinca]

87. Sometimes I feel as if we have zero representation.

I really don't get it. Not a week goes by that I don't get phone calls and/or mail soliciting funds for assorted Democrats or the DNC. If I'm good enough to be used as an ATM, I should also be good enough to represent.

[midnight armadillo]

89. Your headline is wrong

It should read: "Democratic leadership shows its true stripes: they're a bunch of FUCKING COWARDS".

[Le Taz Hot]

94. As a long-time Dean supporter

I have to say I am VERY disappointed with Dean on this. Kerry, Clinton? I'm not surprised, but Dean should be there.

[rayofreason]

100. Dean is not stupid

He knows full well that ANSWER is the organizer

http://www.answercoalition.org/

He also knows that ANSWER is a front for the unreconstructed stalinist World Workers Party, which supports Kim Jong Il, and that it was pro-Saddam and pro-Milosevic (not just anti-war in both cases). Appearing at anything with these nutcases is the kiss of death. Kudos to Dean for not being reflexively "I and with anyone who is against the war." Who here thinks Dean should attend a "NAMBLA against the war" rally, or express solidarity with "JewHaters against the war" (a close parallel to ANSWER)?

And regarding Sheehan, I think that a lot of the top Dems starting looking twice when she posted that essay on M. Moore's website in which she wrote that US troops should get out of "occupied New Orleans." Sounds a bit unhinged to me, and such a statement is radioactive to any politician who wants to get elected. But then some people don't care about that - they would prefer to rant, oppose anyone who does not agree 100% with them, and then wonder why they have no power to influence the course of events.

If you want the Dems to be a permanent minority party, then by all means encourge more of them to show up at ANSWER events.

[karynnj]

159. Great Post

I , for one didn't know most of this information, but found the fringe groups beyond reason,

[Old sixties guy]

194. Fringe groups like ANSWER

give me the creeps at times also but look who led the most powerful and effective anti-war demos in the Sixties-
SDS-full of radicals,socialists and Marxists
SMC-pretty much a front for the Trotskyite Socialist Labor Party
Black Student Union and SNCC-many Black Power militants who advocated actions"by any means necessary"
PLP-hard core Maoists who organized and led one of the most effective anti-war struggles of the time-the effort to remove ROTC from campus at UC Berkeley in 1970.
I was in many of those demos altho I didn't"feel"lots of these groups ideologies or necesarily thought that highly of much of their leadership.
Yet our paramount concern was getting the US out of Vietnam.So I overlooked these groups defeciencies and joined them in common cause.

[IndianaGreen]

185. Blah, blah, blah, blah... the usual tired tirade against A.N.S.W.E.R.

They oppose the war in Iraq, and that makes them our allies. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, as George H. W. Bush used to say.

[RSchewe]

105. Waste of a thread. Why is this an issue at all? This is no secret. n/t

[Freddie Stubbs]

106. They are wise to stay away

If this rally is like past ANSWER rallies, it will be have plenty of anti-Isreal and 'free Mumia' signs.

[donco6]

123. When there's no control over the messages,

why would any politician come? They'd be crazy. Do they even know who's going to get podium time?

It's one thing to have a great big rally against the war, which I wholeheartedly support, but being upset because elected Dems can't be there is being shortsighted.

[Sterling]

133. Dems should be having their own rally's. Instead they make ANSWER

The only option people have, therefore they are giant fucking Douchebags and don't deserve anyones support other than Republicans who love who easy Dems are to control.

[ElectroPrincess]

180. They may be wise ... but only for themselves and their rich ...

investor class peers. What the hell is wrong with a diversely representative group like ANSWER? You sound like Rush limbaugh or someone from AEI, "Boo Boo, ANSWER is too liberal! Bugga bugga Boo!" And you buy it?

What has Dean done to help get the troops home? Hell, what has he attempted to EVEN help make their situation better?

Dean is with all the other national democratic leaders who wouldn't DARE irritate their corporate masters or ultra-SPECIAL (rich) interest groups that support the Jewish Theocracy we know as Israel.

Nope, Dean is now a mouthpiece for the investor class. "Keep the sheeple believing that they actually give a damn about our (working and middle class) quality of life.

[Peace Patriot]

107. This is the same Democratic Party leadership that failed to warn us about

Bushite corporations (Diebold and ES&S) gaining control over the tabulation of our votes with SECRET, PROPRIETARY programming code in the new electronic voting systems, and failed to object to it, and failed to prevent it.

It's my guess that Diebold and ES&S intend to install a War Democrat in 2008, in order to get a military Draft (which Bush cannot do), to run a more efficient war in the Middle East, to run the bread lines at home and put down the 'riots', and to start taking the rap for the horrendous disasters of the Bush junta, so as to install Jeb in '12--which will end our democracy once and for all.

Secret, proprietary programming code in electronic voting machines means that our elections are non-transparent and unverifiable. And until we restore transparency and verifiability, there is NOTHING we can do about ANY issue. Our vote--the power granted to us by the Founders of our Republic--is the only means we have of changing the course of government. We have lost that power! And we MUST get it back!

This is still doable at the state/local level, where the power over election systems still resides, and where ordinary people still have some influence. The widespread, bipartisan corruption wrought by the $4 billion electronic voting machine boondoggle is a formidable obstacle, but the corruption is much worse at the federal level (involving war profiteering) where election reform is not possible. It was Bush's "pod people" in Congress who created this non-transparent election system, deliberately, with the collusion of the War Democrats.

In Venezuela, they have electronic voting with OPEN SOURCE CODE (meaning that anyone can review how the votes are tabulated), and look at the result!

Open source code = good president.

Secret, proprietary source code = bad president.

It's that simple!

DEMAND TRANSPARENT ELECTIONS! THROW DIEBOLD AND ES&S ELECTION THEFT MACHINES INTO 'BOSTON HARBOR' NOW!

------

Note to RayofReason: There was as time when blacks citizens demanding civil rights were radioactive. I remember it, and I joined them in their struggle BECAUSE they were radioactive. There was a time when WW I vets demanding fairness were radioactive. I don't remember that but I've read about them being shot. There was a time when Vietnam antiwar protesters were radioactive. I remember it. I was one of the radioactive. There was a time when women demanding the right to vote were radioactive. I don't remember that, but I've studied how they were jailed and tortured with force feeding. There was a time when Jews and Catholics were radioactive. I remember it, but was too young to understand it or do anything about it. ANSWER is a big tent for the voices that are never heard, which is what America should be. We should be open to discussion of any issue, and should especially listen to those who are the most marginalized and the least powerful.

You seem to be living in a public relations world, which is controlled by our war profiteering corporate news monopolies, and in which FEAR rules: fear of merely being seen with a person who has purple hair and pierced orifices. Fear of that photo. Fear of listening. Fear of open discussion. Fear of mingling. Fear of everything and everyone.

Let the fear end! Let the politicians BE SEEN listening to all, of whatever views. Let the politicians COMPETE on that platform, of all Americans, especially the marginalized and the unpowerful. Let them show courage and tell the truth about how THEY are bullied and made fearful by the warmongers and the super-rich.

We are all sick unto death of this represssive atmosphere. Let it end!

[rayofreason]

125. reply to note

No fear, just reason.

To say that "US troops out of occupied New Orleans" has any parallel to saying "No religious bigotry" or "Constitutional rights for all" is sophistry to the extreme. Democratic politicians can and do appear in public with ordinary citizens who oppose the war. They are wise to avoid appearances with those who say things like "9/11 was a Jewish plot" (and there will be plenty of those at an ANSWER event), or even "US troops out of occupied New Orleans" (which, while being a much less objectionable thing to say, is still just nuts).

But perhaps there are those here at the DU who agree with the ANSWER/WWP agenda. Those folks will be the death of a Democratic party that has a chance of winning elections.

[Zodiak]

150. YES, yes

and Yes!!!

Fear works on both sides of the aisle. Piss on the right wing, the media, and today's judgmental, bullshit mentality!

If the "free Mumia" crowd wants to walk during the protest, let them. I'll bet you they are far outnumbered by hundreds of thousands of others, more "normal" people with squeaky-clean hairdos (if that is your preference), and together all will be a greater voice.

And who among us is surprised that our Democratic leaders are a bunch of pussies when it comes to the anti-war crowd that make up the bulk of their constituency, now? Their discomfort with being associated with their own people speaks volumes for those of us who envision a better, stronger, more unified Democratic party.

Even the pukes stand with their own freaks. Look at Bill Frist...he's the frigging Senate Majority Leader and he stood with his freakazoid Shaivo miracle-workers. The President himself stood by them. What the the equivalent of Shaivo people on the left? The Black Panther Party? Damn, Falwell speaks for these jesus freaks and social nazis and is seen often with bigwig Republican leaders. Try getting Reid to schmooze with Farrakhan...or Chomsky for that matter.

We have a unity problem and an elitist representation problem.

I have also noticed another disturbing phonomenon....the bloggers are now smarter and have more information than their representatives, and the representatives aren;t listening to good advice. I think that their advisors do not serve them well at all. Too often, I hear politicians from our side saying "I didn't know Blackwater was in New Orleans" or "I didn't hear that the voting machines has huge security holes".

Sorry for the rant....just how I see things. We NEED a stronger, more unified party. The grassroots should lead the way because that is where the bulk of party votes and ideas come from.

[AzDar]

108. ..Which is why they shouldn't BE "Top Democrats"!!!! n/t

[AzDar]

110. self-delete (Dupe)

[npincus]

116. wothless bunch of seat-warmers.

[bushwackedtwice]

120. I WILL BE THERE

I will be there!!!!!!!!!!

[anotherdrew]

121. top democrats cowards! fuck them, they need to lead not follow

[against all enemies]

124. That's why we suck. The pukes are right, we don't stand for anything.

[ElectroPrincess]

170. No "we" little people CAN DEMAND that our smarmy representatives

PUT UP. I kid you not, if there is not a change, they will lose so big. What's sad is that they've (the democratic national leadership) has strayed SO RIGHT OF CENTER - I don't give a shit at this point if they get devastated in 2006.

No amount of "get in line" will make me compromise my principles again.

May God Bless both Representatives Cynthia McKinney and John Conyers. I will NOT vote for anyone who puts CORPORATIONS FIRST before the public good.

To hell with the DINOS and their DLC mentors! And that goes double for HiTlery KKKlinton. I used to hate the freepers for applying THIS nickname - but ya know, at this point - those bastards just might be on to something = Hillary Clinton is trying to "out Right" the Right Wing. :puke:

[Puglover]

177. Spot on Princess...

I read somewhere on the board that Hillary had said in response to Cindy wanting to know what noble cause Casey had died for..."I think freedom is a noble cause to die for."
And THAT was it for Hillary and me.

[Sterling]

126. Top Democrats are a bad joke.

Real Democrats need to leave these douchebags in the dust and either form a third party or purge the party of these officials who have been compromised by greed.

[Busshianic]

134. McKinney is a true top Democrat (nt)

[Sterling]

136. True Dem but far from the top unfortunately.

The Party elite hate her.

[robbedvoter]

138. ANSWER circus is the wrong forum.

I loathe the war and stay away from IAC too.

[TankLV]

140. Gee - & they & many here expect us to blindly support them, no questions

asked.

NO FUCKING WAY!

They can't even make a token appearance.

And they think I'll just roll over and vote for them next time around?

NO FUCKING WAY!

Give us SOMETHING, just ONE thing. But they won't on this very important issue.

Well - FUCK THEM, TOO!

[all.of.me]

147. define 'top'

and whose definition is it?!

[Colonel Bat Guano]

149. When will they speak up?

This is wrong. This was wrong when it first came up and they did nothing. Now that it's really, really, REALLY proven wrong (all the reasons for invasion are bullshit), they can't come out?

Bush's approval rating is in the 30s, mostly because of Iraq, and the Democrats won't come out for this?

Expletives fail me.

The next president will be whoever leads this movement and suggests a way out of Iraq and all the other holes that have been dug in the last five years.

Politicians trying to play it "both ways" by meeting with "both sides" will lose.

[all.of.me]

152. when they feel they have nothing to lose

sad, so sad. who are they working for?!

"The next president will be whoever leads this movement..." i love that.

[sjdnb]

151. That's why the GOP can mobilize their base

And, the DEMS can't! No balls.

[burrowowl]

154. Chicken livers

are good sauteed with butter, tarragon and lime juice, use white pepper.

[raysr]

155. I always thought

Richardson, Gov NM, was an ok guy until I saw Amy Goodman interveiw him last nite on Dem Now. Against pulling out of Iraq, king-pin in the "Wen Ho Lee" scandal. Said he didn't agree with the judge who spanked the gov't for charging Lee. I think ALL OUR elected leaders are PUSSIES and scared shitless of the pukes.

[the_spectator]

157. No wonder this thread is so rich and full -

Howard Dean, the anti-war hope of a new generation - the gallant orange-hatted collegiates: Mr. "Yeaaaaghhhh" (as unfair as that was) -

Russ Feingold, the supposedly anti-war but cooly Midwestern and possibly PRESIDENTIAL hope of the primary-minded,

John Kerry, the latest "Bonne Prince Charlie" of the blue-state Jacobites, the "King Over The Water," the rightful heir to the throne, who always disappoints, but who knows how to "circulate a letter" with the best of them,

and even Hillary, dear Hillary, who once, not so long ago, figured in our dreams as the first, and world-shaking, Woman President, long before Geena Davis did TV -

all of them, ALL OF THEM, refuse to stand with the "Anti-War Movement", with Cindy Sheehan, et al.

And instead we get John Conyers and Cynthia McKinney, lowly one-out-of-435 Representatives who will never be anything else: locked into their modest stations by racial bias in the electorate; but also (at least with Conyers) CERTIAN of his constant re-election, as he represents a virtually all-black, all-Democrat constituency (in Detroit)-- nothing to lose and nothing at stake -- a small-time player, who can stroke the left in safety, likely with the tacit relief of the Democratic leadership, because the Anti-War Movement is a force, no doubt. A force that Democrats must reckon with. But a minor force, a force to be assuaged by statements ... made by aides. By letters circulated for signatures. By email appeals to mailing lists; by any kind of communication which will STROKE THE ACTIVISTS, while flying under the radar of the MSM or the public at large.

But the big guns can't appear on the 24th, when the anti-war forces gather en masse -- what if someone notices? It's sad. But it does happen on both sides of the aisle. When the anti-abortion, bloody-fetus-waving "pro-life" public shows up in its greatest numbers once a year in Washington, Reagan never showed up, neither did Bush. They might phone in some verbal support. Or send a pre-recorded video. Might a Democratic big-wig do the same here tomorrow? Only if no one will notice!

[upi402]

160. The force of BushCo's 35% poll ratings should force DINO's out

Force the D.I.N.O.s out of the marble and brass caverns and into the streets with us commoners, the fodder, easy to fool masses.
If not now, they are never to be with us. Guess I gotta face it.

[ElectroPrincess]

172. Oh, worry not and wait for it ... they'll notice when we stay at home ...

on Election Day. PT Barnum couldn't pull the DINOs a**es out of the fire. At this point, NO, a republican would be better than a *$%* backstabbing republocrat.

Let things get "really bad"? Only then will "us little folks" be successful at washing out the DLC and other low-life DINOs. Then perhaps, just perhaps, THE PEOPLE can once again determine the priorities of the Democratic Party?

No, I will NOT vote for the gutless bastards again. Not ever! :(

[melody]

161. If they did attend, the press would say Cindy is a political tool

You know the Rove talking points would be pounding that hard.

However, I have heard on the grapevine someone is going to be there who isn't expected. :-)

[ikojo]

165. This should not surprise anyone....they voted for the war

and like W are loathe to admit they were wrong on that vote. That might mean actually STANDING UP for something!

Tell me again, why we should work to elect Dems in 2006 and 2008 when they don't have the cajones to show up at an anti war march?

[rhett o rick]

168. Because they don't oppose the WAR. They didn't when they voted for

it and they don't now.

[ElectroPrincess]

169. Now don't tell me *all* the rest of these are not DINOs - owned by ...

both multi-national corporations and BIG MONEY special interests groups.

With a few beautiful, but *rare* democratic humanitarians, WE HAVE NO, NO National Democratic Representatives who put THE PEOPLE FIRST!?!

How long will it take the rest of us *little people* - those who are not heavily invested in the stock market OR who do not hold wealth above $500,000 - to collectively pull our heads out of our a**es and DEMAND that either these DINOs begin to serve the people, OR, what the hell - Let's stay at home come election day?

We might as well because there's not a damn bit of difference between the TRUE LOYALTY of both parties - GOD ALMIGHTY MULTINATIONAL CORPORATIONS!

Damn these selfish assholes! Kerry INCLUDED. John F. Kerry was a true hero for his bravery as a junior officer in Vietnam, too bad that politics has turned him into a smarmy "go along to get along" Republocrat.

BTW where the hell is Ted Kennedy? If one "gets off of the boat" they best be prepared to go "all the way?" Airborne! Perhaps he's getting on in years but it would have been wonderful to have him there.

F**k the DINOS! I despise them even more than the Republicans because they can't stab us in the back. :puke:

Our best hope for President in 2008 is Al Gore. If (that is IF) he maintains his more left leaning "populist" philosophy. I'd love to see Gore JUSTLY become president in 2008.

[karynnj]

183. Read Kerry's Brown Speech before you give up on him

He is speaking out. As always, it's an elegant thoughtful speech.
it's on: www.johnkerry.com . Gore has never been to the left of Kerry and Kennedy.

Neither he, Gore or Kennedy are likely to ever show up at an ANSWER rally - because of ANSWER's agenda, which is NOT either of the Senators' or Gore's. Earlier this year, Kennedy very fondly remembered leaving the Capitol building and walking over to join protesters on the mall. The difference was that that protest had an agenda of ending the war and getting better support for veterans who needed it. No extraneous causes, no celebrities - just veterans. It was 1971. I could see Kennedy, Gore and Kerry joining a protest like that - but not one sponsored by ANSWER.

[toymachines]

179. fuck this. I give up on the dem leaders.

The people have to lead themselves I guess. Two reps, are they the only leaders we have supporting the 600,000 who made it to the march and the millions who stand behind them? National Disgrace.

[NVMojo]

182. Maxine Waters is there! And she kicked ASS!!!

[Sgent]

187. Just a thought

but maybe they didn't care to associate themselves with avowed communists (see ANSWER). Maybe Hillary doesn't particularly think her constiutents would support her attending a rally against Isreal.

[ElectroPrincess]

190. It's not "labeled" as such - commies only?!? Israel IS a theocracy ...

Now how 'bout we consider another word - Hypocrisy?

That is, ANSWER is, in some areas, a little out there even for a flaming liberal like me. However, because our democratic leaders are GUTLESS, we are fortunate to have a, albeit small, venue among their other initiatives.

Hey! I'm not a free Mumia kind of gal, but *we're lucky* that ANSWER allows us to hitch to their wagon.

Therefore, even though much of their philosophy is fringe left, I am NOT ASHAMED to be part of that *large rally.*

You've mistakenly drank the Right Wing talking points KOOLAID?

[nothometoday]

191. Rats on a sinking ship.....

Everyone in washington is afraid right now. Thats a GOOD thing....It means an "uncomfortable" situation is afoot. The movers and shakers are...shaking..
POWER to the people!

[brentspeak]

192. Dems smart not to associate themselves w/the "Free Mumia" extremist types

Even if a Democrat is anti-Iraq War, it would be foolish in the extreme for them to be linked in any way to all the left wing bizarros, each one touting their own radical pet cause.

[goforit]

193. Do we really need a leader to guide us at this point????

We're on our own folks!!!

Even more of a reason to stand tall for once!!!

[olddad56]

195. with a few exceptions, the demos are whores also. We are fucked.

[Carolab]

197. Was JC there? I didn't see him on TV at the rally. n/t

[myahquote]

198. conyers didn't show up, AIPAC! will they target McKinney?

I'm going to post this in a new thread, but putting this here also. Has anyone seen this? Do we know why Conyers didn't make it?

What do people think AIPAC will try this time against McKinney?

We need to be proactive - frustrating this news never gets out.

http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/


September 24, 2005 -- Anti-war protest in Washington, DC today. Very few Democratic members of Congress to appear. Reason: The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), according to Democratic insiders on Capitol Hill, put out the word that any member of Congress who appeared at the protest, where some speakers were to represent pro-Palestinian views, would face the political wrath of AIPAC. According to Democratic sources on the Hill, Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts was the chief conveyor of the AIPAC warning to his colleagues. At the time of this report, three members of Congress were to address the anti-war protestors: Reps. Cynthia McKinney (D-GA), John Conyers (D-MI), and Lynn Woolsey (D-CA). The word is that AIPAC will direct its massive campaign support to Woolsey's neo-con and pro-Iraq war primary challenger, California State Assemblyman Joe Nation, who has strong connections to the Rand Corporation, one of the Pentagon's chief war-making think tanks. Woolsey represents California's Marin and Sonoma counties.

September 26, 2005 Update -- In the end, the antiwar rally apparently drew only one member of Congress as speaker: Georgia Democratic Representative Cynthia McKinney.

[redqueen]

199. Bush will appear at anti-choice rallies... why won't Dems stand up for us?

This is getting all too tiring.

[ElectroPrincess]

200. Because WAR is good for business ...

and business is for the *Investor classes* representative of both Republicans and Democrats.

It don't matter what the tone or color of you skin ... the only color that matters is that MEAN GREEN. :puke:

[redqueen]

201. Yeah... maybe that's it... we need to take control of this party again.

All hope for the repukes is lost... Rangel, Kucinich, etc. give me hope for this one.

[WhiteTara]

202. Barbara Lee spoke at the concert

after the rally, but I never saw Cynthia or John.