Log in

View Full Version : Shame: The AntiWar Democrats Who Sold Out



maat
06-17-2009, 04:58 AM
Jeremy Scahill, of Rebel Reports, has a great piece here (first paragraph here)(I didn't post the whole thing, emphasizing certain parts, but perhaps someone else might want to):

=====================================================================================
In a vote that should go down in recent histories as a day of shame for the Democrats, on Tuesday the House voted to approve another $106 billion dollars for the bloody wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (and increasingly Pakistan). To put a fine point on the interconnection of the iron fist of U.S. militarism and the hidden hand of free market neoliberal economics, the bill included a massive initiative to give the International Monetary Fund billions more in U.S. taxpayer funds.

http://www.alternet.org/world/140715/shame:_the_'anti-war'_democrats_who_sold_out_/?page=1
=====================================================================================




THESE parts are particularly disgusting (the bolded parts):
=======================================================================================
In other words, Obama took a position that amounted to providing political cover to Democrats to support the war funding, while pledging to implement, through other means, the very policy they supposedly found objectionable.

From the jump, the White House and Democratic Leadership had the gloves off in the fight. Consider this report from last week:

Rep. Lynn Woolsey of California, a leader of the antiwar Democrats, said the White House is threatening to withdraw support from freshmen who oppose the bill, saying “you’ll never hear from us again.”

She said the House leadership also is targeting the freshmen.

It’s really hard for the freshmen,” she said. “Nancy’s pretty powerful.”
Jane Hamsher, meanwhile, reported on Monday that it appeared Emanuel was "cutting deals with Republicans to go easy on them in the 2010 elections in exchange for votes." In the end, the White House got five Republicans to vote for the funding, including New York Republican John McHugh, the man President Obama nominated two weeks ago to be Army secretary. A "senior Republican source" according to FOX News "suggested McHugh could be creating a conflict of interest by voting on military-related legislation while his Army secretary nomination is pending before the Senate."
=======================================================================================

=======================================================================================
And, finally, my favorite part - those reps who have some spine:

Below are the Democrats who stood against Obama's expanding war the day their votes mattered (See where your Representative stood here):

Tammy Baldwin, Michael Capuano, John Conyers, Lloyd Doggett, Donna Edwards, Keith Ellison, Sam Farr, Bob Filner, Alan Grayson, Raul Grijalva, Michael Honda, Marcy Kaptur, Dennis Kucinich, Barbara Lee, Zoe Lofgren, Eric Massa, Jim McGovern, Michael Michaud, Donald Payne, Chellie Pingree, Jared Polis, Jose Serrano, Carol Shea-Porter, Jackie Speier, John Tierney, Nikki Tsongas, Maxine Waters, Diane Watson, Peter Welch, and Lynn Woolsey.

=======================================================================================

I highlight Bob Filner, because he represents part of San Diego, and always votes the way a progressive would want him to vote. I'm only about an hour north of San Diego, and have gotten to hear him speak a few times. He's just inspiring. He's a co-sponsor of H.R. 676, the bill that is the TRUE public healthcare option IF Medicare is anything more than a hollowed-out shell shortly.

Rahm E. is SUCH a despicable creep.

leftchick
06-17-2009, 06:05 AM
the minute I heard Obama appoint rahm the Arab Hater.

:(

Montag
06-17-2009, 08:33 AM
This is one of the most thorough condemnations of the Democratic party I've seen on Alternet (or a similar website), it doesn't seem liberal support for Obama can continue much longer. :applause:

soryang
06-17-2009, 09:31 AM
Looting the American people, planning to conquer Asia and the rest of the world, how can these people deny their fascism?

maat
06-17-2009, 09:56 AM
I will never forget the ache in my stomach; I remember saying to myself, "Here we go ..."

maat
06-17-2009, 09:57 AM
He seems to be one of the few who is willing to stick with telling the truth.

:hi:

maat
06-17-2009, 09:59 AM
I call what they are implementing, worldwide, "neofeudalism."

Montag
06-17-2009, 10:13 AM
I noticed that, he wrote something that he would be same journalist after Obama was elected as prior to that. This reminds of the time Bill Clinton accidentally called Democracy Now (I think he thought he was calling a friendly program, you know, all 'liberals' think alike).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuaM6rBIl7M

maat
06-17-2009, 10:37 AM
I remember that episode. If I were Amy, I'd have been sitting there rolling my eyes saying to myself, "Dude seriously needs his mood meds adjusted."

soryang
06-17-2009, 11:08 AM
it has a mystic appeal for totalitarian fascists. The notion of the all powerful lords and the desperate peasants. The only hope for a peasant family with no means is to become a warrior in the hope of receiving a few crumbs.

The constitutional remnants or figments residual to the former republic fool most people into thinking that this can't be a totalitarian movement ruling our nation. What they don't realize is that a movement is not a government but a malicious cult that occupies an impotent and dessicated government. Venal officials always capitulate.