You are herecontent / Congress Licks Bush's Shoes

Congress Licks Bush's Shoes

By David Swanson

Here's how I started out thinking this morning, before the House voted: As illustrated in this graphic by Chris Jeffries, the Dems have surrendered. They've surrendered to Bush and Cheney and abandoned our troops to remaining in Iraq to kill, die, and suffer for - let's be exact here - eternity. There is no hint of an end date in this latest bill.

The votes this week are only happening because the Democratic leadership has chosen to make them happen. If members of the Democratic leadership vote No, that is only because they are hypocrits. They are only voting No because they know there are enough Yes votes for passage - with most of those Yes votes coming from Republicans. Pelosi not only takes her talking points from the RNC ("Impeachment is off the table," "We will never fail to fund the troops"), but also facilitates votes for Republicans. Senators abandoned by their "leadership" should not simply vote No; they should filibuster.

If we can get enough Democrats to vote No (or filibuster), it could wreck the whole pretense. And at least we're going to have an honest vote for the first time, where everyone admits that a Yes vote is to fund the war and a No vote is to not fund the war... Unless, the Democrats make the only vote a vote on a Rule, to try to hide the war vote (this is what David Sirota claims will happen). If the Republicans vote No because they want an open debate, all of the Democrats except for the handful of them with some integrity, will have been lined up to vote Yes. Then that Yes vote will have to be depicted as (somehow) a vote to end the war by funding it. It appears more likely that, even with the vote on a rule, the Republicans will vote Yes to fund the war, and Democrats who join them will be clearly on record funding the war too.

Here's how things got underway this morning in the House:

10:30 a.m. They do appear to be debating and then voting on a rule. Congresswoman Louise Slaughter actually just claimed on the floor of the House that if Congress does not fund the war, Bush will continue the war but lack money for things the troops need. She promised to always fund the war. And she bragged about the (waiverable) "benchmarks," the minimum wage, etc., etc. What a disgrace! The troops can be left in Iraq or be brought safely home. They aren't going to be left in Iraq without food or supplies. A President who continues a war that Congress ends must be impeached, not obeyed.

10:40 Rep. David Dreier is speaking, apparently in opposition to the rule. The rule dumps more money into the war than Bush asked for. Bush should not be given any check, even with notes scrawled all over both sides of it, but this check is indeed blank. Dreier is not upset about that. He is upset about the maneuverings of the Democrats in Congress and the early morning Rules Committee meeting today.

10:44 Dreier is now speaking in support of continuing the war. Does this mean the Republicans will vote Yes? Will lots of Democrats (though not enough) vote No?

10:50 Rep. David Obey is talking now, blaming the White House for the late timing. "I hate this agreement. I'm going to vote against the major portion of this agreement even though I negotiated it." Wow. Obey should run for President. He's the sort of clear and consistent guy the Democrats like to run.

10:54 Obey is now blaming Bush's veto for preventing money from getting to the troops. As long as Obey is maintaining the pretense that the money is for the troops, and is planning to vote No on it, it is clear that he knows there are enough Yes votes for it to pass and that he wants it to pass.

11:03 Rep. Jim McGovern is blaming Bush for the occupation and blaming the Senate for being "too timid". He's a No vote. No votes are being given time to speak by Slaughter - at least if they're high ranking on Rules Committee.

11:08 Rep. Dan Lungren is speaking. He's a Yes vote, supporting Bush and the war and its escalation, attacking "the enemy."

11:14 Rep. Greg Walden, another Republican, is speaking on a side issue.

11:21 Rep. Jay Inslee is speaking against giving Bush "a blank check" - he's said the phrase about 4 times. Sounds like a No vote. How giving Bush ANY KIND of check could be justified is beyond me.

11:29: Dreier is still upset about the rushed process and advocates voting No on Rule. But if rule succeeds, he says, "I thank God that we are going to pass this measure."

11:36 They're voting.

11:37 Apparently they're going to wait to vote on this together with other vote(s) later tonight. It appears there will be further debate and vote in House tonight, and a Senate vote tonight or tomorrow.

1:23 p.m. Here's the vote on the rule to have the debate and vote, H Res 438 providing for the consideration of the Senate amendment to H.R. 2206, making emergency supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2007. Only seven Democrats voted No: CLAY, HARMAN, KUCINICH, MCNERNEY (finally), MOORE, STARK, WATERS. Harman nearly lost a primary to peace candidate Marcy Winograd. Where are our other usually reliable members? The vote was 218-201. They could have voted No and still achieved passage. 8 Dems and 5 Repubs didn't vote at all (see above link). Here's what the AP says:

"The House voted 218-201 to advance the measure, paving the way for a final vote later that day. Democrats, who said they were disappointed with the White House deal, agreed not to block debate so long as the House would vote later this year on a separate proposal to bring troops come home before July 2008."

This little crumb (from AP) might be closest thing to silver lining on this one:

"The bill also for the first time explicitly states that the U.S. would leave Iraq if asked by the Baghdad government."

Unbeknownst to Congress, it already has been.

5:15 Debate is underway and David Obey is saying yet again that the bill before us is the best we can do given the votes we've got. (As if he and Pelosi have badgered the hell out of people to try to get peace votes the way they've done for war votes. As if they've worked for peace for 5 months the way they've worked for war. As if Iraq was even mentioned in Pelosi's 100-hour plan. As if Pelosi never said cutting off funding was off the table. As if Obey himself didn't just say as I was writing this that cutting off the funding was off the table.

5:20 Rep. Jerry Lewis is accusing Obey of favoring pork (true enough) and not "supporting the troops" (keeping them in Iraq to be shot at). (Obey plans to vote No on his own bill.)

5:27 Steny Hoyer is going on and on about how bad the war is. But how will he vote? He says he'll vote Yes. He loves the (waiverable) "benchmarks".

5:34 Barbara Lee says don't give Bush any more money. "How many will have to die before this Congress stops writing blank checks? ...I urge my colleagues to vote against this bill.".

5:38 Lynn Woolsey: The voters who gave us a majority trusted us.

5:42 John Murtha says we have to "fund the troops" and "they'll run out in a few weeks." Murtha is considered a good Democrat. Yet he keeps up the pretense that wars are fought for the benefit of the young men and women sent to fight and be killed. What part of BRING THEM HOME can you not understand? "By September we'll be able to judge," he says. Then he goes on to say that he already knows what will happen. So what is he waiting for? He's waiting for Bush and Cheney to change their minds[!!]. He ought to be sent out of Washington for mental health therapy.

5:51 Chris Shays says that Iraqis are children, they're like children at a 6th grade dance, the Sunnis, Shias, Kurds aren't talking to each other.

5:52 Murtha is screaming that he's trying to win the war. He's really not stable.

5:54 Roy Blunt likes the bill and especially the "benchmarks."

5:56 David Obey once again accuses Bush of abandoning the troops by vetoing the last bill.

I'll say this again: I object to the idea that the Dems should accuse Bush of "abandoning the troops." If we don't FOR CHRISSAKE STOP ONCE AND FOR ALL PRETENDING THAT WARS ARE FUNDED FOR THE TROOPS, WE WILL NEVER EVER END ANY WARS. Sorry for the caps, but I don't know how many times this has to be said or how to make it any clearer.

Pelosi promised the media repeatedly in recent days and over the past year that "Our troops will be funded." This is UNADULTERATED FATALLY SELF DEFEATING BULLSHIT. Nobody is ever going to abandon the troops. They are either going to be left to kill and die and be wounded and traumatized in Iraq OR they are going to be brought safely home. There is no third possibility called "abandoning" or "not supporting" or "not funding" them.

If the peace movement keeps talking about "funding the troops" there will never be peace. Believe it or not - and I know this seems insane - there are some things we should NOT accuse Bush of.

6:02 John Boehner just claimed Hussein had been a threat to Iraq's neighbors, and that he had WDMs but shipped them somewhere when the US invaded. Unbelievable! Then Boehner said that once you send troops somewhere you cannot question whether or not you should have. So presumably he's continuing to believe the lies as a matter of principle.

6:12 Pelosi is talking at length. She opposes her own bill because the "benchmarks" are waiverable. She says there will be a vote on repealing Bush's authority to use force in Iraq (as if he were ever authorized to launch an aggressive war based on lies and occupy Iraq with massive toops presence for five years; as if he'll end the occupation because it's deauthorized but funded). Pelosi just quoted Hannah Arendt. Has she ever read her?

6:18 They've just begun a 15-minute vote. I'm watching to C-Span, and most of the callers are furious at the Democrats' spinelessness and want the war ended immediately. One caller pointed out that Republicans keep saying that not "supporting the troops" lowers their morale but that it's Republicans who keep saying over and over again that Congress has not been "supporting the troops" whereas Democrats keep swearing they do "support the troops," so perhaps the Republicans are willing to hurt morale to score political points.

6:46 The war half of the bill (which was split into two parts) passed 280-142. Of the 142 No votes, 140 were Democrats. SOME Congress Members are listening. Some just voted No on the war because the people made them. But it's not nearly enough, and the leadership is not with us. They brought this bill up for a vote and allowed it to pass. And had the vote been close, some of those voting No would have flipped and voted Yes.

Here's the roll call. These Democrats voted YES for eternal occupation: Altmire, Andrews, Baca, Baird, Barrow, Bean, Berkley, Berry, Bishop (GA), Boren, Boswell, Boucher, Boyd (FL), Boyda (KS), Butterfield, Cardoza, Carney, Chandler, Clyburn, Cooper, Costa, Cramer, Cuellar, Davis (CA), Davis, Lincoln, Dicks, Dingell, Donnelly, Edwards, Ellsworth, Emanuel, Etheridge, Giffords, Gillibrand, Gonzalez, Gordon, Green, Gene, Herseth Sandlin, Hill, Hinojosa, Holden, Hoyer, Kagen, Kanjorski, Kildee, Kind, Lampson, Larsen (WA), Levin, Lipinski, Mahoney (FL), Marshall, Matheson, McIntyre, Meek (FL), Melancon, Mitchell, Mollohan, Moore (KS), Murtha, Ortiz, Peterson (MN), Pomeroy, Rahall, Reyes, Rodriguez, Ross, Ruppersberger, Salazar, Schwartz, Scott (GA), Sestak, Shuler, Skelton, Snyder, Space, Spratt, Stupak, Tanner, Taylor, Thompson (MS), Udall (CO), Visclosky, Walz (MN), Wasserman Schultz, Wilson (OH).

These Democrats did not vote Yes or No: Berman, DeGette, Engel, Jones (OH), Lewis (GA), Oberstar.

These Democrats made this happen: Pelosi, Hoyer, Murtha, Obey.

This goes to the Senate TONIGHT. The debate is underway. Go get some popcorn. Maybe a few rotten tomatoes.

8:30 p.m. The Senate is voting. It looks like a handful of Senators are voting NO to eternal war, including: Boxer, Burr, Dodd, Feingold, Leahy, Sanders, Whitehouse, Wyden.

9:00 p.m. It was 80-14 for eternal war. Clinton and Obama joined those voting NO.
Boxer (D-CA), Burr (R-NC), Clinton (D-NY), Coburn (R-OK), Dodd (D-CT), Enzi (R-WY), Feingold (D-WI), Kennedy (D-MA), Kerry (D-MA), Leahy (D-VT), Obama (D-IL), Sanders (I-VT), Whitehouse (D-RI), Wyden (D-OR)

Here's a list of 86 House and 37 Senate Democrats Who Voted for More American Troops to Die for Nothing.


Here's what activists recorded about their work in the hours leading up to the vote:


Nancy Pelosi - will vote No according to American Progress Action Fund
Jerrold Nadler - will vote No according to constituent Rusti Eisenberg, leans No according to The Hill, will vote No according to Courtney Lee Adams
Lynn Woolsey - will vote No according to The Hill
Raul Grijalva - will vote No - has released statement
Dennis Kucinich - will vote No - has released statement
Jan Schakowsky - will vote No according to a constituent
Ed Markey - will vote No according to constituent Susan Lees
Anna Eshoo - will vote No according to Lenny Siegel who found it on her website
Welch - will vote NO -- from a constituent in anonymous comment below
Barbara Lee - wil vote No according to anonymous comment below
Carolyn Maloney - will vote No according to constituent Frances Anderson
Yvette Clark - undecided according to Rusti Eisenberg, will vote no according to Sam Koprak
Lois Capps - will vote No according to constituent Dinah Mason who got that from Danielle in her DC office
Diane Watson - will vote No according to Tim Carpenter who got an Email from Jim Clarke in her office who said they'd received 300 calls about it today
Mike Capuano - will vote NO according to constituent Vicky Steinitz
Pallone of NJ 6th - will most likely vote NO on supplemental according to an anonymous comment below citing a staffer.
Tammy Baldwin - will vote No according to Joy First of Madison, WI, who writes: "I called Tammy Baldwin's (Wisconsin House) staff in DC and they told me she will vote no. We brought flowers to her Madison office where it was confirmed by them also."
Olver - will vote No according to an Email from his staff sent to Tim Carpenter.
Keith Ellison - will vote No (finally) according to Michael Perkins
Kennedy - will vote No according to Providence Journal
Langevin - will vote No according to Providence Journal
Sam Farr - will vote no according to Medea Benjamin
Massachusetts Reps - "Re our reps, we seem to have all NO votes here in MA, except perhaps Lynch." - Susan Lees
Jim Moran - will vote No according to constituent Peter Rush: "This is Peter Rush, in Virginia, and I just called Jim Moran’s office (VA-8) about 9:30 Thursday, and they told me Moran is voting against the bill. If true, this would mean that he has changed his mind, in the right direction, since yesterday. I also called the offices of the other Democrats from Virginia, Bobby Scott from Richmond (VA-3) and Rick Boucher (VA-9), but their staffs say they don’t know how he will vote, and Sen. Jim Webb, whose staffer also said he didn’t know how Webb was going to vote. Webb gave a pretty strong speech April 26 justifying his vote for the previous bill, and it would be a betrayal of what he said if he turns around and supports this one, so we’ll see."
Carol Shea-Porter 1st District NH - will vote NO according to Beth, an office staffer, according to constituent Barbara Hilton. And she just said so on the floor.
Yarmuth (D-KY) voting NO, according to Kevin Martin
McNulty (D-NY) voting NO according to Kevin Martin
Carson (D-IN) voting NO according to Kevin Martin
Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) NO according to Kelly Campbell
Rep Fatah - will vote No, David Gibson reports: "OK. Just spoke with Nuku Ofori, Fatah's LD on Iraq. He told me that Fatah was not taking a position until the actual language of the Bill was released, which it was today, and that he was to brief the Congressman on the bill. He also told me that we can expect a "No" vote if there is no exit language in it, which seems to be the case."
Pete Stark (CA) will vote NO according to a constituent call, reported via email
Henry Waxman (CA) will vote NO according to a constituent call, reported via email
Jerry Mcnerney (CA) will vote NO according to his website, via comment below
Julia Carson (IN) will vote NO according to comment below
Lois Capps (CA) will vote NO according email

David Wu (D-OR) leaning NO according to Kelly Campbell
Nydia Velasquez - is leaning NO according to Eisenberg
Edolphus Towns (NY) leaning NO, according to anonymous commenter below, Rusti Eisenberg reports: "Cong Towns (D-Brooklyn) is leaning towards a "No" but is not decided. Its pretty dismaying that "antiwar" Congressional reps can't make up their mind on this "no-brainer.""

Rahm Emmanuel -- undecided according to constituent call, quotes in news suggest he's voting YES
Chris Van Hollen - undecided according to constituent Sue Udry
Maurice Hinchey - undecided according to The Hill
Ed Perlmutter - undecided according to the Hill
Charles Rangel - undecided, likely No, according to constituent Nancy Kricorian
Bobby Scott - "Undecided! Richmond office suggested he would vote no since he voted against war to begin with but suggested I call DC office. Did so and was told he was undecided, but the person that answered was unaware that the debate would be taking place today (maybe it is not?). Call his DC office at 202-225-8351 if he is your rep. Thanks, Rain"
Bob filner - undecided according to constituent Barbara Cummings who writes: "I just called again and his DC office said he has not made up his mind and is taking calls today. So I'm notifying everyone I know in this district to call now. 202 225 8045 Please ask everyone to call. They did ask for my address so don't cheat."

Mark Udall - is leaning Yes according to constituent Stephanie Westbrook, who writes: "Staff at Mark Udall's office (CO 2) haven't had a chance to talk with him about this (!) but think he will vote YES, in order to support the troops. I asked where in the supplemental there is anything about supporting the troops. No answer. I was reminded, as I am every time I call, that he voted against the war. I replied that it is much more acceptable to me someone who voted for the war back in 2002 and votes to end it now than vice-versa. I also told them that I read the statement on his web site saying he will introduce new legislation after memorial day which "implements the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group and provides a foundation for the phased withdrawal of American troops out of Iraq beginning in March of next year" and instead urge him to take action NOW by voting NO on the supplemental. If there are any other people out there from CO-2, please call Udall's office!"

Joe Sestak - will vote Yes according to The Hill -- Rep Sestak - undecided and leaning Yes, David Gibson reports: "According to his Washington DC office, Joe Sestak is leaning yes, but still on the fence. Call right away and tell him not to betray his pledge to vote for a date certain and vote "No" on this supplemental unless an exit timeline to fund a withdrawl by the end of this year is reinserted. We want a 'No" vote. Here is his office number:
1-202-225-2011 Cranston Grey is the Legislative Aide on Iraq. Please call right away!"
Dutch Ruppersberger - will vote Yes according to The Hill
Larsen (D-WA)- will vote Yes according to anonymous comment below
Danny Davis - will likely vote Yes: "I spoke with him myself after hearing it from the receptionist. He needs a SWARM!" - Robin, Maywood, IL
Louise Slaughter - will vote yes: she actually claimed on the floor of the House on Thursday morning that if Congress does not fund the war, Bush will continue the war but lack money for things the troops need. She promised to always fund the war. And she bragged about the (waiverable) "benchmarks," the minimum wage, etc., etc. What a disgrace!
Brown (SC) voting YES according to Kevin Martin
Mark Kirk - will vote Yes according to an Email from David _____.


Chris Dodd - will vote No and said so on CNN according to Rusti Eisenberg
Russ Feingold - will vote No - has released statement
Kerry and Kennedy - "Yesterday we heard 'undecided' from both Kerry and Kennedy offices.. Today's Boston Globe article now reports Kerry as a NO, and Kennedy undecided." - Susan Lees
Pat Leahy (VT) will vote NO, according to press release

Dick Durbin - undecided according to anonymous comment below
Clinton - undecided according to Courtney Lee Adams
Schumer - undecided according to Courtney Lee Adams
NJ Senators - undecided: From Susan: "Sen. Menendez's office didn't know how he plans to vote. I couldn't get through to Sen. Lautenberg's office. Will try again later."

Barbara Mikulski - will vote Yes
Reed - will vote Yes according to Providence Journal
Whitehouse - will vote Yes according to Providence Journal: Anonymous comment: "Today's Providence Journal actually said, 'Sheldon Whitehouse said he MAY also support the war funds bill.' That means UNDECIDED, or leaning, not a firm YES as your list indicates. C'mon, my fellow Rhode Islanders, call him NOW."
Biden - will vote Yes according to USA Today
Bunning - YES according to Kevin Martin
McConnell - YES according to Kevin Martin
Graham - YES according to Kevin Martin
DeMint - YES according to Kevin Martin
Sen Ken Salazar (D-CO) to vote Yes, by stephaniewestbrook, "But! plans to introduce legislation after the break calling for phased withdrawal. Ugh. Can't vote against the supplemental because then the troops wouldn't get the armor they need to defend themselves. Double ugh. Colorado voters - call his office! May take you a while to get through."
Senator Casey - will vote Yes, David Gibson reports: "I just Spoke a Legislative Correspondent for Sen. Casey. They tell me that Casey plans to vote for the Supp. But will vote for a new bill, Salazar - ? I didn't get the other name on the bill, that they tell me will implement the Iraq study group recommendations. I have not heard of this bill till now. They did tell me, after I lobbied them to tell the Sen. how disappointed we were in that position and in his vote against Fiengold, that they cannot say for sure and doesn't want to quote him. They seemed to indicate that it was possible that Casey could still change his vote, but it sounded like a heavy lift to me. They went on to say how the Sen. agrees with us in principal. I told them that he should vote his principals and put them into practice then. They thanked me and told me to call them anytime. Here's their number. Send to your networks. 202-224-6324"


It's very helpful if you log in and then post comments - that way they show up immediately and we don't have to approve them.


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I am a Canadian neigbour who live just across the river from Detroit. I so much want to like America again. When are you going to stop this madness? Does it really take so much courage to cut off the money for this cruel and malignant war?

Rick Taves

Rick many of us hear you on this side of the border. We too want to see the madness end, now!

All i can say is that our basic constitutional institutions have been compromised by big money and the joke of "privatization". When you have such obvious conflicts of interest as the Halliburton/Cheney connection and there is no governmental or media "check" or investigation on this matter, it is easy to see that America has lost it's path and place as a world leader. America has become the world's "bully" and I for one despise those who have brought this country to this point. I mean both the policy makers and the enablers who voted for them. They are nothing more than neo-fascists.

Rick, please keep your mind and heart open to the possibility that your neighbours to the south may yet again regain you and your nation's respect and admiration. Who knows maybe we'll even find a solution to one of our terrible exports to you, acid rain.

Rick, We'll need to impeach them, and have them tried at the Hague, I'm afraid.

I thought that Miss Nancy gets to decide if this supplemental would come up for a vote. I thought that the Republicans stopped votes from happening all the time when they were in power. Now I hear that Miss Nancy will vote no for the supplemental but will not stop it cold. Is that what you call having your cake and eating it too?

If she doesn't want to give Bush the money to kill more of our soldiers, she doesn't have to do it, does she?

it's all about show - she wants the war still going in Nov 2008

The recall of Nancy Pelosi by the good people of her Congressional district in the San Francisco area would show the rest of the Democrats in DC that WE THE PEOPLE mean business. I'm to the point that the Democratic Party can go the way of the Whigs of the 19th century.

Is it at all possible to recall Nancy Pelosi? Does anyone know if that's possible? California residents were able to recall their governor Gray Davis in the middle of his term of office a few years back and removed him from office. By taking Impeachment "off the table" and doing everything in her power to get Congress to approve additional funding for the Occupation of Iraq to not only continue, but actually escalate into the 2008 elections, I would think that it is imperative that we first remove Pelosi before we can get to removing Bush and Cheney from office and removing our troops from the illegal bloodbath in Iraq. If removing Pelosi before her term is up is a possiblity, then there is certainly no shortage of pissed-off, fed-up, outraged Americans ready and willing to head off to San Francisco and get to work on helping with the recall. I could have a carload from Florida ready to go in days. David S., please comment on this. Thank you.

At the very least, she has violated her oath to defend the Constitution. She shouldn't be the only one, but a good place to start.

Because you can count me in, buddy - just say the word!

Semper Fi,

(In Florida, where a vote for a Democrat doesn't count - apparently even when they get elected!)

Yes, David, of course she wants the war still going. It serves as rationalization for voting for the Democrats.

And most people are effectively indoctrinated into accepting that voting is about choosing between the Dems and the Reps, rather than expressing their conscience, aren't they?

But there's no viable alternative within the controling elite of the "two" parties, is there?

Now, having observed what has transpired this week, will you reconsider this remark?

As to recall, unfortunately:

Recall of Legislators and the
Removal of Members of Congress from Office
Updated March 20, 2003
Jack Maskell
Legislative Attorney
American Law Division

"For a recall provision to be enforceable against a Member of Congress, it would
appear that a constitutional amendment would need to be adopted by the requisite
number of States authorizing such procedure in the United States Constitution..."

[stated in the vain of a conclusion drawn, page 13 of 13]

Alternatively, I would suggest circulating a petition amoungst her constituents, demanding her resignation.

They had the opportunity in November to elect candidates that truly represented them , as I admonished them to do.

Instead of just knee-jerk-reflex voting for the Democrat.

Perhaps they would reconsider...

---The Bikemessenger

Pelosi is going to stretch this thin...until November 2008. Kinda makes me sick to my stomach that a woman would use other mothers' kids this way.


...all right, and if she'd put half the energy she used ramming it down other people's throats instead of eating off the one she was given in November, Bush and Cheney would be fighting for their political lives right now, maybe even their literal ones, and we might be seeing a light at the end of this bloody tunnel.

It'd be pretty safe to bet she's got the yes votes she wants to drag this thing into '08, though, but I wouldn't want to put any money on her bigger gamble--getting one of the front-running Democrats into the White House. I wouldn't want to put any money on it, but she'll probably win that one, too, and we can all look forward to eight more years of this same shit, only wearing a different dress.

That's the way the political cake seems to be crumbling these days.

R Ap

I am starting a campaign of sending blank checks made out to George Bush signed by congress and stained with blood,they will go to all who vote yes to more money for war & death in Iraq. As soon as I can get them made up I will post them for anyone who wants them. If anyone one else can do it first go for it.

(no text)

What is up with this Democratic House and Senate? Do they not realize we can make a change again, if they back down from the promises they made while campaigning. Kudos to Congressman Bobby Scott on his questioning of Monica Goodling, but he did imply he would back impeachment in campaigning, and now won't give an answer one way or the other. His assistants want more information, but I believe he has the information. He needs simply to read Kucinich's bill HR333.

You can watch him speaking to impeachment January 2006 here:

We need to force them, apparently, to do what they were sent to do, and I'm completely baffled that they appear to have forgotten what they promised. What is WRONG with these people??? Except Kucinich, of course.

Alma Kesling

I was not suprised when his office told me this morning he would be opposing the supplemental. He has one of the best voting records in Congress.

per announcement on his website

Julia Carson's staffer said "Ms. Carson is dedicated to binding benchmarks and time-lines. This bill has no accountability; therefore the Representative will be voting in opposition to it."

Staffer said that D-Sen Evan Bayh has not announced his position on the Supplemental. I questioned him further and he said, "The Senator may have made up his mind on how he will vote, but he has not yet announced an official position." I suggest phone calls from Hoosiers. And then, more phone calls from Hoosiers. Senator Bayh likes to say he's a Democrat. His constituents need to tell him to act like it. He has co-written a bill with Olympia Snowe (R-ME) "To provide for an assessment of the achievement by the Government of Iraq of benchmarks for political settlement and national reconciliation in Iraq. (Introduced in Senate) [S.1336.IS]"
Also from the bill:
"Sense of Congress- It is the sense of Congress that Congress should not take any action, including the elimination or reduction of funds, that will impair the mission of the United States military forces in the field, undermine their safety or harm their effectiveness in pursuing their assigned missions."

From that I gather that he will be voting in favor of the bill.
Hoosiers---STAND UP! CALL Bayh!!!

Hello Senator Bayh,
I was a volunteer for your first Senate Campaign when I lived in Indianapolis in 1997-98.
I was there studying Art at Herron. I am an Indiana Veteran, was Born in Clay County (Brazil) and my father Harold Clossin,( deceased), has known your father for many years.
I am from a family of 6, and out of that 6, 4 of us are Veterans. My oldest sister Phyllis is a Vietnam-Era Veteran, like I brother Gary is a Veteran of the Indiana National Guard, and my father was a 1st Lieutenant in the Army Air Corps in WWII... My grandmother, Edith Deming Clinch lived in Montana and was a charter member of the Daughters of the American Revolution, and worked for Jeannette Rankin in her first term in the US House of Representatives (Ms. Rankin was the first woman ever elected to Congress) I joined the DAR in 2001 and have been an active member, serving as delegate the past three years to the annual convention, Continental Congress in Washington DC, and last year I was elected Chaplain of my home chapter, Mission Canyon.
I also joined the American Legion when I lived in Indiana, and continue as a member here in Santa Barbara. I also attend All Saints by the Sea Episcopal Church in Montecito, and recently found out about the Episcopal Peace Fellowship. I read a booklet that is published by the Fellowship: Cross before Flag. You can read it on their website:
Reading that booklet has completely changed my attitude toward war. The statement in that booklet that has really affected me is the statement confirmed since the Civil War by the Lambeth Conference (Episcopal House of Bishops) "War is incompatible with the teachings of our Lord Jesus Christ" I feel as a Christian I need to do everything I can to convince our elected officials that this war in Iraq is an Unjust and Illegal War, and urge you to do whatever you have to do to bring this to an end. You need to stand up to President Bush and REFUSE to give him any more money for his war of choice. After doing research on the US Constitution, I am convinced that this President, Vice President Cheney have committed High Crimes and Misdemeanors and need to be Impeached immediately. I admire Nancy Pelosi, but she has no right to take impeachment off the table, it is an important and integral part of the constitution and it needs to be implemented as soon as possible. When we begin our DAR meetings we recite the America's Creed, which says we support the US Constitution, that means the Constitution "AS IS" Impeachment is a remedy that is afforded us in the Constitution, it is our obligation to honor the constitution.
My daughter, Erika served 4 1/2 years in the Army as a Specialist, she was honorably discharged in January but remains on Inactive Ready Reserve. If she is called back to active duty it will be over my "dead body". Her husband Marco re-enlisted last fall, on his second deployment he was on his first mission driving an Humvee near Fallujah, on April 14th was hit by an IED and is severely wounded. He received a purple heart this week, and was promised US Citizenship when he enlisted...his attitude about this war has changed to the point of not being sure he wants to be a US citizen. That is SO SAD.
I have been very active as a Peace Activist since before this war began. I had so much hope last November after the midterm election, thinking that the democratic Congress would turn things around...well, I am really disappointed!
In doing genealogy research as a hobby I found out that I am related to Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Winston Churchill (all descendants of Arthur Howland) My favorite Churchill quote is: "Success is moving from failure to failure without losing your enthusiasm"
I am very disappointed with the democrats constantly caving into pressure from the neo-cons. Please do whatever you can to get our country back on track...
Thank you so much for your service to this country, I am looking forward to hearing from you soon.
Dinah Mason
PS I am married to John Scott Mason, nephew of Nina Mason Pulliam

"I will not vote for or support any candidate for Congress or President who does not make a speedy end to the war in Iraq, and preventing any future war of aggression, a public position in his or her campaign."

My Congressman is Chris Murphy (who replaced 24 year incumbent Nancy Johnson in November 2006 - 33 years of age - says there's not enough time to impeach - too many "vital issues the new Congress must immediately address").

My Senators are Chris Dodd (who NEVER responds to anything, even now when he is supposedly running for president - way to earn those votes Chris!) and Joe Lieberman (insert your own Joe Bash here).

This is the message I sent to all of them yesterday, complete with the same bold face emphasis:

The American people issued a crystal clear, unequivocal mandate to our Congress on Election Day 2006: END THE ILLEGAL U.S. OCCUPATION OF IRAQ AND HOLD ITS INSTIGATORS RESPONSIBLE.

We don't want an endless spew of disingenuous lip service while you try to position yourselves for the 2008 election. We want an IMMEDIATE END to the illegal, immoral, unnecessary occupation of Iraq, that is accomplishing NOTHING except the needless deaths of thousands of our soldiers, HUNDREDS of thousands of innocent Iraqis (see 2006 Johns Hopkins Iraq mortality study, as reported in British medical journal The Lancet), and the buildup of needless debt that Americans will be dealing with for generations to come.

Our own State Department issued a report two weeks ago revealing that terrorism worldwide was up 25 percent from 2005 to 2006, and worldwide civilian deaths as a result of terrorism were up 40 percent over the same period.






Now Playing: "A Call to Action - The Iraq Vote Pledge"

Sen. Bayh needs to hear things like this over and over. We, as Hoosiers, need to flood his offices (D.C. and IN) with phone calls and faxes demanding that he represent us. Indiana was key in winning back a democratic majority in the House. Voters from Indiana were clear in November...end the war, find a new direction. To that end three seats in a previously solid red state went blue. The heartland has spoken. Now the Heartland must stomp and shout!
Peace and Respect, Dinah!
Lori Perdue

i just called honda's office in dc and was informed that honda would vote no if no clear deadlines are in the bill

Steve Kagen (WI-8) - got a lot of support because "this war has got to end" - Has not declared, acc to receptionist

Gabrielle Giffords (AZ-8) - ditto for this former Republican

I just got back from the local courthouse, where I did the only thing I feel has any chance of being an effective way to protest Democrats in positions of power, who were voted in to bring change ... but turned their backs on those who put them into power (or returned them there); and in only six months time.

I resigned (in protest) from the Democratic Party.

I am now a legally registered Independent.

(I had three sub-choices: I chose the party that came closest to being "no party" at all, in my state.)

I gave up the right to pick one Democrat among many, in the Primary Elections.

In return for giving that up, I regained my conscience.

F**k them all, if they can't do better than they've done to date. It disgusts me that they are even holding a discussion on the continued bloodshed and rape and theft and torture and ... well, I want no part of their twisted excuses for morals and values. Shame on the Democrats! I urge other Democrats of conscience to also resign in protest.

For the last six years,it has been ANTICS WITH SEMANTICS from the Republicans. Now with the Democrats,it is more of the same!

In regards to the Iraq war, you know what you have to do – but you can’t or you won’t.

The American people have spoken – no more funding, no more war, bring the troops home now! We don’t give a damn how this will affect President Bush’s dismal presidency or how it will affect the Democrats’ chances in the next election.

No more clever ploys, no more excuses, no more false and misleading hopes, we want you to rage against this illegal and immoral war. We want you to work to ensure that no more American and Iraqi lives are wasted and no more American and Iraqi families have to needlessly suffer.

If you are unwilling to do this, if you are incapable of doing this, if this is beyond your ability to do this – do America a favor and resign, letting someone take your place who is capable and willing to represent the will of the American people.

I’m sorry it has come to this, but responsible and REPRESENTATIVE leaders must LEAD and not just dispense repackaged excuses or specious reasons. In your current stance, you are worthless to the decent, moral, and thoughtful American citizens who want this illegal war to end.

Anyone know?

Congress did not listen. I spoke to Jim Moran's little helper before the first supplemental vote and told him to vote no. Little helper said he had to vote for it to end the war (I am not kidding). Now it appears he does not have to vote for it to end the war (could it be because he knew that it would pass while he took a propaganda pass).

I told Jim's little helper that if he could not vote against funding the war, what he must do is introduce articles of impeachment against Bush et al. That was before Kucinich introduced articles against Cheney, which I agree is the right approach. We do not want to have a real Cheney presendency.

Rep. Moran has refused to defend the Constitution and the people of the United States. He must be replaced.

As for Miss Nancy, the people of San Francisco are not so stupid as she thinks. They must get rid of that woman. Obviously, it is a great shame that the first woman speaker of the house is such a terrible person.

Great, sad image. thanks. Rain

Have you ever seen such a total act of cowardice ? A few weeks ago they talked as if they really would stand up the the adminstration.
It is stunning how quickly they caved.

The weight of evidence regarding the duplicity of events that has led us into Iraq is enough to put a common man away for life.

Senator Reed. Congresswomen Pelosi. They have failed to lead and are so week that Rove must be dancing joyfully into the night at the ease of their total submission.

If they were sincerely interested in the troops they would have stood their ground and offered a valid opposition to the failed policy that is Iraq. Is not that what the opposition party is supposed to do ?

Fear. The democrats caved in fear.

I am done as a Democrat. Enough is enough.

I will wait for a credible Independent.

Can't hack it anymore. Too much corruption and co-option. We've got to make a new party.

On quitting the Democratic Party ... do NOT do it in spirit; please! Do it in writing, and do it officially at your local courthouse, or wherever your local area keeps such records.

Change parties!

Legally register as some sort of "none of the above" Independent!

These people fear one thing, and one thing only: loss of their power.

A mass exodus from the Democratic Party, all over the country, is the ONLY thing that will get their attention: locally or nationally.

And believe me, you WILL get someone's attention ... because the people you will be talking to, to de-register as a Democrat, are almost guaranteed to be from one of the two major political parties.

Your changing parties will be an almost direct "you -- Mr. or Mrs. person in charge of voting records in this area -- will NOT be getting my votes, ever again."

Believe me, if the locals see their party de-registering, they will fear it. And they'll complain to their higher-ups ... those in Washington, or at the state level, or wherever ... that what the people in Washington are (or are not) doing has hurt THEIR chances, locally; and that they blame those in Washington for that fact.

De-register from the Democratic Party, as soon as possible! Please!

Dear Jack,
I could not be more disappointed. I worked very hard to help get you reelected, because I believed you would never kiss up to the likes of bush and his cronies. You made promises Jack, all you’ve said since November is "The people have spoken" So it’s obvious, you heard us.

We believed in you, Jack and you stabbed us in the back.
I see now, we might as well have kept Melissa Hart. Your lack of honesty and conviction will certainly cost you another term. You’ve lost the vote of everyone I know.
In our eyes you are a traitor to all of us who voted for you.
There is no excuse for what you have done and you need to be ashamed of yourself.
You talk of loving the troops yet you'll let those brave souls continue to die everyday, die, because of phonies like you.

Vote For Murtha?
Never again.

James Covey
New Kensington, PA

Though probably most of you know this already, it is possible to change your voter registration to a party affiliation of "decline to state," which means no party. It can send a message. Also, you may vote in any primary (one party's only).

You support the deaths of our troops with your vote of this bill. Shamefully, you do not listen to the pulse of your state. If you did, you would not turn a tin, deaf, ear to their cries.

With a majority of people that want an end to this war, and a majority of people want it ended through a time line, you've instead chosen to damn our troops to many, many more months of living on the edge of life and death, fighting a cause that was based on a lie. Your vote for more money is a vote for certainty that many more of our troops are sure to die.

Such a show of arrogant ignorance toward the people's will does not make for good re-election material. The people do not forget easily. When it comes time that you ask for my vote, I shall ask, "Why should I give it to you?"

these Washingtoon piles of scum masquerading as real human beings will never be ousted, too many morons in Seattle proper think they're SWELL and will vote them in over and over again.

besides, dey is WIMMEN, dey can't be all baaahhhhhdddd, can dey???

yep, they can! they're fucking mass murderers by proxy, far worse than any pond scum you'd find, or toilet ring in anyone's shitter..

Congress backs Iraq funding bill

The new budget does not set a timetable for US troop withdrawal
Both houses of the US Congress have passed a bill allocating $100bn of new funding for the Iraq war.

Download a copy of Henry David Thoreau's famous essay on "Civil Disobedience".

Fine reading, for over the Memorial Day holiday.

Then gave him $120 billion of taxpayer dollars. At least Monica didn't pay.

My name is Nancy Pelosi the "War Whore" and I approve this war!

But "Sucks Chevron's dipstick" - and all the while giving America The Finger!

You see, Nancy Pelosi hails from California - erstwhile home of UNOCAL, the Union Oil Company of California, which is now wholly-owned by Chevron, Inc..

And, just as Pelosi continues to give her constitutents - and indeed, 75% of all American voters - The Finger, so UNOCAL has long been known for arrogant disregard of the public and of California state and federal laws regarding environmental protection as well as human rights abuses by its east- and central Asian consorts, including the Afghan Taliban.

With whom failure to reach an agreement to develop the Gwadar oil and gas pipeline was the proximal, real reason for the Afghanistan War, whose only achievement was to overthrow the Taliban, and of the 9/11 WTC terror attacks used to justify it.

And this California oil company, UNOCAL - i.e., now a part of Chevron - is also the third largest partner in the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline, protection of which is a major reason for establishing permanent regional military bases; i.e., major contributing motivation for the invasions of Iraq (mission accomplished) and Iran (mission anticipated).

Oh and BTW also Chevron's opportunity to steal outright a large chunk of Iraq's oil and gas; through this reprehensible "benchmark" for Iraqi "recovery", fully supported by the Democratic Leadership: the so-called "Hydrocarbon Law".

Made in California. Arrogantly unresponsive to the American People. Profoundly unconcerned with Iraqi human rights - all the while supporting 100% the InfiniWar - in Iraq, and beyond. In a word: dishonest.

Is the above describing Chevron/UNOCAL - or Representative Nancy Pelosi?

Is there really a difference?

Semper Fi,

-Matty in Florida

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.


Support This Site


Get free books and gear when you become a supporter.



Speaking Truth to Empire


Families United


Ray McGovern


Julie Varughese


Financial supporters of this site can choose to be listed here.



Ca-Dress Long Prom Dresses Canada
Ca Dress Long Prom Dresses on

Buy Books

Get Gear

The log-in box below is only for bloggers. Nobody else will be able to log in because we have not figured out how to stop voluminous spam ruining the site. If you would like us to have the resources to figure that out please donate. If you would like to receive occasional emails please sign up. If you would like to be a blogger here please send your resume.
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Enter the characters shown in the image.