[Peace-discuss] War party?

[C. G. Estabrook]

It means that, in a markedly undemocratic polity, where two-thirds of an 
unrepresentative Congress supports shameful foreign wars - while two-thirds of 
the populace oppose them - we'd be equally wrong to think of Democrats as 
friends as to think of Republicans as enemies.

In the House of Representatives, one of the few principled opponents of those 
wars is a favorite of the teapartiers.

(And did you notice that Rep. Tim Johnson [R-IL15] spoke for and voted in favor 
of Kucinich's resolution?)


On 6/3/11 8:25 PM, Corey Mattson wrote:
> And this means what? That we should vote for the "lesser-evil Republicans"? Or 
> that we have two war parties and should build a movement independent of them both?
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 8:13 PM, C. G. Estabrook <galliher at illinois.edu 
> <mailto:galliher at illinois.edu>> wrote:
>
>     More Republicans (87) than Democrats (61) voted for Kucinich's withdrawal
>     resolution in the House.
>
>     http://news.antiwar.com/2011/06/03/house-votes-on-libya-boehners-resolution-passes-kucinichs-fails/
>     _______________________________________________
>     Peace-discuss mailing list
>     Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net <mailto:Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
>     http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20110603/e4eddf03/attachment-0001.html>