[Peace-discuss] More on Durbin

[John W.]

At 09:18 PM 7/18/2007, illyes at uiuc.edu wrote:

>I had to rush off before commenting properly on Durbin. I'd like to add a 
>bit to what Bob said, which I find accurate and well put.
>
>Durbin argued that impeachment was not a good idea because it would be too 
>time-consuming and that we needed to get out of Iraq "now", but at least 
>with a timetable. He believes that a number of Republicans who are up for 
>reelection are going to come on board after looking closely at public 
>opinion. He pointed out that his amendment is not dead, and will be 
>brought up for another vote later, and that it will get the votes it 
>needs. I agree that this is likely.
>
>With regard to impeachment, he pointed out that regular hearings were now 
>being held with regard to the sort of things that would justify 
>impeachment, i.e., that the issues needed to be explored even though 
>getting out of Iraq was more urgent than impeachment.
>
>I had a brief conversation with my janitor tonight, who informed me that 
>we had to defeat al Qaeda in Iraq or they would "follow us home." 
>Something familiar about this language..... I think that Randall is right 
>in suggesting that one of the most important messages is that we are 
>CAUSING al Qaeda in Iraq. Durbin replied to Randall's suggestion by saying 
>that the Democrats were getting that message out all the time. This 
>certainly isn't getting to Illinois very well. I guess we have have to 
>keep pounding away at communicating it.

This is what we're up against, though....the ignorance of your janitor - 
his flawed critical thinking and lack of historical perspective - is 
rampant at the highest levels of the federal government, in both the 
executive and legislative branches.