[Peace-discuss] Local rep. right about war...

[C. G. ESTABROOK]

Apparently similar in this regard to his potential Democratic  
opponents (whom he also resembles in talking nonsense about the  
deficit).


On Sep 29, 2011, at 8:56 AM, David Green wrote:

> And also unwilling to consider the implications re Israel/Palestine.
>
> From: C. G. ESTABROOK <cge at shout.net>
> To: peace-discuss at anti-war.net
> Cc: sf-core <sf-core at yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2011 8:51 AM
> Subject: [Peace-discuss] Local rep. right about war...
>
> [...but wrong about Social Security, Medicare, and the deficit...  -- 
> CGE]
>
> Johnson stance on war draws support
> Wed, 09/28/2011 - 9:03pm | Tom Kacich
> DECATUR -- About two years after he first called for the withdrawal  
> of U.S. troops from Iraq and Afghanistan, U.S. Rep. Tim Johnson, R- 
> Urbana, now appears to be gaining the support of his constituents.
> Speaking to about 100 people -- nearly all white and conservative --  
> at the Decatur Public Library, Johnson received a burst of applause  
> Wednesday evening when he again called for an end to U.S. military  
> involvement in the Middle East.
> Johnson also suggested gradually raising the retirement age to  
> strengthen Social Security and Medicare, and said he was willing to  
> look at revenue measures, not just budget cuts, to reduce the  
> federal deficit.
> The six-term congressman criticized Democrats for not being willing  
> to make cuts in federal spending and hit Republicans for supporting  
> only "cuts in non-defense discretionary spending."
> "That is not acceptable, ladies and gentlemen," said Johnson. "I  
> understand there are people in here who are going to vehemently  
> disagree with me and who believe that every war is a good war. The  
> reality is that by the time we will have completed our quote-unquote  
> mission -- and I don't know what the mission is, ladies and  
> gentlemen -- we will have spent close to 4 trillion dollars in those  
> wars.
> "We cannot exclude defense from the cuts in dealing with our  
> national debt."
> Johnson said he doesn't believe his constituents "are one iota safer  
> because we're losing thousands of American men and women, and  
> hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians in Afghanistan and Libya  
> and Iraq."
> "I have consistently voted in appropriation after appropriation and  
> bill after bill to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan and Libya," he  
> said. It was at that point and during other statements about defense  
> spending that Johnson received his only sustained applause during  
> the meeting.
> "We can't afford it in our men and women's lives, we can't afford it  
> in our infrastructure, and we can't afford it fiscally," he said of  
> the wars.
> Following the meeting, Johnson said he was surprised by the response.
> "But generally in the public and even among the conservative base,  
> people are starting to say, why are we here? Why are we spending the  
> money? Why are we allowing men and women to be killed for a mission  
> we cannot define? I think it's critical to our economic and moral  
> future that we get out tomorrow, and that we don't engage in some  
> new stupid war the next time. I'm just quoting the president."
> On other issues, Johnson said:
> -- He thinks Social Security and Medicare can be strengthened by  
> gradually raising the retirement age.
> "To prevent the system from going bankrupt, there have to be modest  
> changes for new workers in the system," he said. "For people who are  
> entering the system tweaking the age of retirement, when it has  
> stayed the same for decades, makes economic sense. Relatively small  
> changes in the retirement age have a dramatic effect on the fiscal  
> soundness of Social Security. I'm not suggesting we move the age to  
> 75, but moving it to 67 1/2 over a phased-in period makes economic  
> sense and moral sense."
> He also said he wouldn't rule out the need for higher contributions  
> into the system.
> "I'm not ruling anything out but what I'm ruling in is the fact that  
> we have to make common-sense, fair changes to preserve the safety  
> net," he said. "If we don't do that there's going to be no Social  
> Security, no Medicare for the future."
> -- He is not ruling out the need for revenue measures to cut into  
> the federal budget deficit.
> "The revenue side of the equation has to be examined. There are a  
> number of tax loopholes that exist now, some tax breaks that are  
> being phased out that I support phasing out and others that I don't.  
> I think we need to look at the whole picture. I don't think you can  
> responsibly look at the debt crisis we face without looking at every  
> aspect of ways to solve it."
> http://www.news-gazette.com/news/politics-and-government/2011-09-28/johnson-stance-war-draws-support.html
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> 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/20110929/8fa666dc/attachment.html>