[OccupyCU] Gill finks on the war again. Vote Independent? No thanks.

Tue Nov 6 14:50:06 UTC 2012

Well, you will certainly get the opportunity to exercise your right to vote and vote however you feel is right, Stan.  After you've done so, have no fears that I'll question who you voted for or your motives behind doing so.  Neither will I try to make you complicit or hold you responsible for whatever happens in this world following your vote. In the meantime, Little Joe Six Pack over here will also be voting today. I will be making my vote based on free will and it hasn't been decided for me by other people or a feeling of fear. 
Enjoy your day. 
Chris Goodrow

(217) 898-5039

Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2012 05:45:20 -0800
From: swag901 at ymail.com
Subject: Re: [OccupyCU] Gill finks on the war again. Vote Independent? No thanks.
To: c_goodrow at hotmail.com; rbaldwin at seiu73.org; carl at newsfromneptune.com
CC: coreymattson at gmail.com; aware at anti-war.net; occupycu at lists.chambana.net

In a perfect world everyone would agree with me too.  However, we do not live in a perfect world.  We live in a country controlled by the conservatives for the most part.  Media makes literally billions of dollars from the current system.  Little Joe Six Pack in Champaign IL, can not change the country by voting his conscience.  Little Joe, can however make it easier for the conservatives to take more from the middle class by dividing our efforts to take back our country among a dozen wanna-be candidates, none of which are perfect, while the conservatives coalesce their forces behind one candidate, with one goal: Redistribute more wealth to the 1%ers.  I still say, Take Back The Democratic Party. Stan
        From: Chris Goodrow <c_goodrow at hotmail.com>
 To: Stan Waggoner <swag901 at ymail.com>; Ricky Baldwin <rbaldwin at seiu73.org>; C. G. Estabrook <carl at newsfromneptune.com> 
Cc: Corey Mattson <coreymattson at gmail.com>;
 "aware at anti-war.net" <aware at anti-war.net>; ocCUpy <occupycu at lists.chambana.net> 
 Sent: Monday, November 5, 2012 3:14 PM
 Subject: RE: [OccupyCU] Gill finks on the war again. Vote Independent? No thanks.

I suppose we could also say that if everyone were willing to vote for the person they feel would be the best man/woman for the job, we might one day get away from this one party system. So many people that I've talked to would love to vote for anyone other than Obama or Romney, but prefer to take the strategic route.  So, rather than placing blame on the people who vote for their convictions and with their heart, maybe you ought to turn it around on the people who are voting solely on fear. Because in my mind, that's not a vote. That's more like extorting a vote from you.

Chris Goodrow

(217) 898-5039

Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2012 10:45:44 -0800
From: swag901 at ymail.com
To: rbaldwin at seiu73.org; carl at newsfromneptune.com
CC: coreymattson at gmail.com; aware at anti-war.net; occupyCU at lists.chambana.net
Subject: Re: [OccupyCU] Gill finks on the war again. Vote Independent? No	thanks.

Good points Ricky, Gill may not be the perfect candidate for all, but a vote for anyone else is a vote for Davis. What we need to do, rather than trying to re-invent
 the wheel, is to take back the Democratic Party.  We need to get active in the Democratic Party, put up our guys as candidates on the Democratic slate, and go. All the elections seem very close this year, and at any level we do not need to have a replay of Florida in 2000.  If Nader had not been in the race, I believe we would have not had the Afghanistan War, no Iraq War, and the national debt would be at least $2 Trillion lower.  Keep voting for third
 party guys and we will see our country further lost to the likes of Bush 43 and the Republicans Reasonable Man StanWEFT
        From: Ricky Baldwin <rbaldwin at seiu73.org>
 To: C. G. Estabrook <carl at newsfromneptune.com> 
Cc: Corey Mattson <coreymattson at gmail.com>; "aware at anti-war.net" <aware at anti-war.net>;
 occupycu <occupyCU at lists.chambana.net> 
 Sent: Saturday, November 3, 2012 11:59 AM
 Subject: Re: [OccupyCU] Gill finks on the war again. Vote Independent?

Throwing the baby out with the bath water.

It took us years to get Johnson to that position.  He is not running.  Gill is a very good candidate who is anti-war and for Medicare-for-all.  He also took exactly the right stance on the regressive gasoline tax, which disproportionately impacts lower income groups, while Hartman has taken the simplistic position that taxing users will take oil companies down a notch.

Gill's statement on Iran is wrong.  But in reality we are unlikely to find positions as a whole from any candidate with a chance to win.  This vote is not symbolic.  A few votes may decide who goes to Congress.

Gill is not the perfect, but neither was Carl when he ran against Johnson.  The rational vote was for Carl then, and it's for Gill now.

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID

"C. G. Estabrook" <carl at newsfromneptune.com> wrote:

Corey Mattson of Bloomington-Normal Coalition for Peace and Justice writes, "...no one in this congressional district race represents our view of no military intervention, no sanctions against Iran ...Shows work needs to be done! ...Peace movement work, that is...":

"13th district congressional candidates agree on Iran" <http://wglt.org/wireready/news/2012/11/08145_13thDebate2_061447.shtml>.

Democrat David Gill shows once again that if he is sent to Congress from our district, he will fail to uphold incumbent Tim Johnson's opposition to the ongoing Mideast war.

Although
 Johnson is a Republican, he voted for the impeachment of President Bush for launching the Iraq war; joined other House members (including Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul) in
 suing President Obama for violating the War Powers Act; and voted consistently against more money for war in the Mideast, after publicly regretting his votes in 2001 and 2002 in favor of the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. (He had been urged to change his position by the local antiwar movement, the Green party, etc.)

Gill on the other hand has consistently avoided promising that he would vote as Johnson has on the war, saying only that he was "against the war." Now he does say clearly that he backs the administration's war policy on Iran - which we recently heard enunciated by Senator Durbin in Champaign, namely that Iran is building a nuclear weapon and must be stopped, by military means if necessary. (Obama has been quite consistent on the matter: when he was running for the Senate in 2004, the Chicago Tribune wrote, "…the United States should not rule
 out military strikes to destroy nuclear production sites in Iran, Obama said …
 ‘having a radical Muslim theocracy in possession of nuclear weapons is worse [than] us launching some missile strikes into Iran…’ he said.")

In our Congressional district, Independent candidate John Hartman "says even if Iran has the ability to launch a nuclear weapon, he believes it would be a mistake to move forward at any time with military action: 'I think that even bombing their nuclear capabilities would be counterproductive. I think it would rile them against us, as well as the Arab world against us.'

This latest indication of Gill's unsoundness on the war - despite his apparent support for Medicare for all - has led several of my acquaintances to say that they will vote for Hartman, the independent, in protest of the 'bipartisan' war policy. See Glenn Greenwald, "Obama moves to make the War on Terror permanent" <http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/24/obama-terrorism-kill-list>.

--CGE

_______________________________________________
OccupyCU mailing list
OccupyCU at lists.chambana.net
http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/occupycu

_______________________________________________
OccupyCU mailing list
OccupyCU at lists.chambana.net
http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/occupycu 		 	   		  

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/occupycu/attachments/20121106/e89b3f60/attachment.html>