Mr. Kucinich invited this . . .

[bigtree]

here's Rep. Kucinich: http://www.truthdig.com/interview/page2/20070324_kucinich_blasts_democrats/

"We have to take a new direction, and that’s what I stand for. I don’t like having to vote against a majority of the people I serve with in the Congress, but I have to tell you something: I couldn’t see any other place to be today. And you have to remember that I proposed an alternative which is still viable. And it’s HR 1234, and it’s the plan to end the Iraq war, and it’s more necessary now than ever. And when the president vetoes the bill, as he will, I’m going to go back to my colleagues and insist that this bill, HR 1234, is the only way to end the war. And maybe that will be the time that they see the necessity of standing for peace."
http://www.truthdig.com/interview/page2/20070324_kucinich_blasts_democrats/

The congressman and presidential candidate has decided that his proposal stands for peace and the majority of the other Democrats do not. He's convinced - and he wants to convince the rest of us - that the majority of the Democrats he serves with are bent on sending us to some "lower circle of Dante’s Inferno where we have nothing but destruction and where we have all hope lost" with their proposals to end the Iraq occupation. He hopes he can convince the other Democrats of how evil he feels they are and change their devilish ways.

And he's a sitting congressman. The rhetoric from others outside of the Congress has cast Democrats even lower.

There won't be any move by the Democratic majority toward folks who tear at the party like he's doing. And there won't be any Kucinich plan adopted in this Congress, because he's insisting on alienating everyone who he thinks isn't as 'peaceful' as he is. The best he can hope for is some effect from his longshot bid for president. He'll lead our troops out of Iraq in 2009, if he manages to convince voters of the validity and value of his moral superiority and happens to get elected president. Right now, anyone who tries to convince that he has a chance in hell of getting his proposal through this Congress is whistling in the wind.

January 2009. So, go ahead and tear down this agreement. Go ahead and tear down an eventual compromise (if it occurs through our pressure) with Bush and his republicans to begin to bring our troops home. But don't expect folks to believe that there's any chance at all of achieving an immediate withdrawal in this Congress.

Maybe in November 2008, we'll elect folks in both houses who'll vote for a Kucinich plan. November 2008; sworn in January 2009, deliberated and passed by late March; months and months AFTER the end date for the occupation mandated in the compromise bill.

[TahitiNut]

1. "November 2007; sworn in January 2008"??

In what alternative universe do US general elections occur in odd-numbered years?

:eyes:

[bigtree]

3. ooh, I get to project to 2009

nothing done until 2009. Thanks, I corrected it.

[mmonk]

2. Evil?

[bigtree]

7. He's cast our party as the obstacle to reform of this administration just when we're moving forward

all of the evils of the administration have been thrown into the lap of the Democratic majority by Mr. Kucinich, I presume, because they haven't adopted his proposals.

(btw, this is not one of my supremely logical and careful rants. I've got a major bug up my ass. I apologize)

[mmonk]

9. Ha!

"I've got a major bug up my ass."
:rofl:
Don't worry, I've had those occasionally myself. What I got out of what he said was the bill will be touted for its time line without awareness by people or mention of oil privatization, loopholes, and no restraint on bush's ability to do whatever he chooses concerning Iran.

[bigtree]

22. I don't think those issues will be effectively advanced in this effort

As you can tell, this is a political dance which will, hopefully, end with Bush turning down whatever gets to his desk as promised. He made these threats before we had even presented a plan, so this was contemplated in the crafting of the bill. When he does reject this legislation he will, then, be challenged to explain to the American people how he intends to continue his occupation without funds or support. Folks talk about courage . . . watch our Democrats hold fast in the face of that barrage. The American people should support us in this.

For all practical purposes, this bill was designed to make it out of the House. The Senate bill will be the same. It's less of an effort to legislate these issues as it is a measure of confrontation which will force an accounting from Bush for how he intends to continue his unsupported escalation without funding, while, at the same time, providing a reasonable amount of support to indicate our responsibleness toward our troops and the issues which would accompany the withdrawal we seek. All of the media static and the opponent's thrashing will not affect the underlying purpose of the legislation; to directly confront Bush with a rebuke of his Iraq occupation.

[mmonk]

26. Hope you're right.

If I had been a representative in all this, I would have voted no as long as it didn't kill the bill. Then after passage, I would immediately introduce legislation to address these very issues. We aren't dealing with a traditional or normal executive branch that feels any need to embrace any restraints on its designs for its policies or unrestricted dictates and movements. I truly believe this is an historic struggle with implications for the future.

[bigtree]

28. I'm waiting for efforts like those. In the past, we've been able to keep pressure on

by attaching proposals to other legislation in the Senate. I look forward to those efforts apart from the funding initiatives.

[dkofos]

4. I don't have a problem with what he said. He is right.

What the Dems passed was not nearly enough. And the repubes probably won't
let it come to a vote in the Senate. And if it does *ush will veto it.

If it were up to me the troops would be home yesterday!!

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

6. OK...

So we'll bring Kucinich's plan to a vote. It'll lose in the house, never even get to the senate, and never get to Bush because it does not have a snowball's change in hell of passing.

[BeFree]

10. Wonderful, yibbe

So you fully support having an up/down vote on Kucinich's motion? Cause that's all we are asking - give peace a chance.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

32. I'm all for it.

Though I see no particularly valid reason for Congress to entertain the machinations of the Kucinich '08 campaign. Little point in bring it to a vote, as the only people who'd even bother to vote are the Repubs, maybe some of the Blue Dogs, and Kucinich. I'm pretty sure the rest of the Democrats would find something more interesting to do on that particular afternoon.

[dkofos]

12. In a real democracy it would stand a chance.

If the Dems are going to continue to buy votes (like the repubes do) they are not much better.

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

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

[bigtree]

8. That's not the position of the Democratic leadership

"I am impelled, not to squeak like a grateful and apologetic mouse, but to roar like a lion . . ."

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

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

[bigtree]

14. I want action, not words.

. . . not an endless argument, but a proposal which has a chance of reaching Bush's desk. That's the only thing he'll respond to. If he vetoes legislation, as expected, he'll then be challenged to explain how he's going to continue the occupation without the funds or support from Congress.

And, the crap about republican talking points is a lame defense.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

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

[bigtree]

17. oh, no. that may be the perspective from Whoville

but this Democrat is not given to despair or self-pity. Nor am I given to fold when I perceive my partner has an empty hand.

I expect to achieve the possible, and I strive for as much as I can obtain. That's reflected in the efforts of our new Democratic majority.

[BeFree]

13. Ummmm,

Mr. Kucinich's position is the ultimately correct position: Out Now.

This present position, this Politically Possible Position, or PPP, is all this corrupt and warmongeringly complacent congress is gonna come up with, at this time, eh?

Fine. But we are still in the hole. The hellhole of Iraq. I am not happy. You want me to be happy, right? Kucinich's motion would help to make me happy, but this PPP just makes me sad.

[bigtree]

15. great, but he can't effect that as he claims

he wants us to rail against the Democratic majority for a bill he admits will be vetoed. He says it gives Bush money, but admits Bush won't accept it.

Without legislation which advances to Bush's desk, Congress, in effect, has asked Bush to do NOTHING. They will have neglected to challenge him at all. Kucinich's proposal is not going to be adopted by this Congress. He's willing to wait it out until he can achieve his perfect bill, but he accuses others of prolonging the killing and mayhem in Iraq with their withdrawal plan that's moving forward.

He'll end up with NOTHING, but presents that as an ace in the hole.

[BeFree]

18. Up or down vote

Lets have us a vote in our congress that is for Out Now. Ya know: Give Peace a Chance.

The very fact that such a vote hasn't yet, and maybe never will be voted on, is the disgrace that most displeases me. Let's have such a vote and see who's who, then we can get to this PPP business.

All we are asking is Give Peace a Chance.

[bigtree]

19. It can't even get out of committee

that's really a misrepresentation of the lack of support for his initiatives in our own party which almost everyone acknowledges.

I believe the Democratic compromise legislation which passed the House "gives peace a chance."

[BeFree]

20. Yes: Lack of Support

And that's the bummer. It's been 4 years, and the warmongers are still in charge. And yes, this bill is as close as we are gonna get to giving Peace a Chance, but don't expect me to be happy, K?

[bigtree]

24. The alternative to moving a bill through this Congress is doing nothing

that is not an option I support. I'm happy with the progress, so far. If this reaches Bush's desk in some form, he'll likely reject it and be charged with explaining how he's going to continue without the funds and congressional support he needs. He's in the beginning stages of that now. Congress has offered 'funds' but for a withdrawal. The hat is on Bush to explain why those funds weren't good enough as he presses forward against the will of Congress and the American people. This is a political process, and we should take full advantage of the opportunity to challenge Bush politically in a manner which is more effective than just sitting on our hands, voting no.

Also, I don't view those who rejected the more strident approach in favor of the compromise effort as warmongers. They are as concerned with getting our soldiers out of Iraq as we are. I reserve my displeasure for the republican obstructionists.

[BeFree]

27. Point well taken

It is not the left leaning politicians who have killed the up or down vote on Give Peace a Chance, it is the warmongering and obstructionist republicans and Dems who are killing us.

Eliminate those warmongers and we'd be swilling in Peace - happy as pigs in you know what.

But there they sit, dishing their warmongering upon the heads of the innocents and powerless, and for once I'd like to see them vote to keep war alive. And see who is really for Peace, and who isn't.

But for now: PPP.

[Tellurian]

29. You are absolutely correct, bigtree..

you are doing Kucinich supporters a service by educating them to the Legislative process. God knows, if they did the research themselves they'd know; Kucinich's lambasting of Democrats is nothing more than grandstanding on his part.

[bigtree]

30. I have great respect and admiration for Dennis Kucinich.

I've obviously come to the limit of all of that. But, I won't characterize why he's posturing against his own party. I just think it's unfair and wrongheaded.

[lonestarnot]

21. Oh that's right, castigate the Peacemonger! Good job.

[bigtree]

25. he's definitely more 'peaceful' than the rest of us who supported the compromise bill

I'll just let him school me without reacting.

[TreasonousBastard]

23. As much as I admire principle, this asshole...

actually seems to believe that he, and he alone, sees the truth and after over 200 years of Congress working in its ponderous way it will somehow instantaneously and miraculously see the light and rise as one body to Do The Right Thing.

Ah, yes, the absolutely, positively, only way to end this mess is just to order everyone back home and everything will be just fine and dandy and we can all go back to our lives. All those Iraqis can leave Jordan and Syria and go back home to the paradise we created for them.

No problem at all with that. None. Can't imagine why everyone on the planet can't see it.

Can't imagine why we don't have a President Kucinich right now, either.

[lonestarnot]

31. I'm not having this repuke conversation with you!