[Peace-discuss] [sf-core] Re: Local rep. right about war...

Thu Sep 29 13:40:24 CDT 2011

We don't know about the state of his soul, Mike - his sincerity or  
commitment - but we do know that for some time now he's said he was  
wrong to vote for the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, and - even  
more importantly - has consistently voted against more money for war  
in the Mideast. He even joined Reps. Kucinich & Paul et al. in a suit  
against the illegal attack on Libya.

Aren't we trying to get the members of this government, whatever their  
moral purity, to put an end to this criminal war? Vietnam ended, not  
because we elected angels, but because the same people who'd been  
there all along were forced to end it.

When I ran against Tim on the eve of the invasion of Iraq, I condemned  
his apparent willingness to support it.  During the campaign, I met  
privately with Tim & his people (at his invitation) to try to dissuade  
him from voting for the "Authorization for the Use of Military Force  
against Iraq."  But the administration apparently sold him the yellow- 
cake story ("secret information"), & he voted for the AUMF.

His subsequent declaration that he shouldn't have done so - and even  
more his consistent votes against the Bush/Obama war in the Mideast -  
shouldn't be set aside.  Are we going to vote for Democrats who  
"support the president" as he continues to expand the drone attacks,  
the "special operations," the killing across SW Asia and Africa?

Regards, CGE

On Sep 29, 2011, at 11:35 AM, Mike Lehman wrote:

> Carl,
> 35 years of experience with the duplicitous Tim - always railing  
> against things he's in fact supported at various more politically  
> convenient times -- doesn't convince me he has much sincerity or  
> commitment to his new, now seemingly dovish position.
> Mike Lehman
>
> On 9/29/2011 10:37 AM, C. G. ESTABROOK wrote:
>>
>> That's an astonishing statement, Mike.  Here we spend ten years  
>> trying to convince the government to cease its criminal wars, and  
>> when a congressman - no better than he should be - comes       
>> around to the correct point view, we dismiss it...?
>>
>>
>> On Sep 29, 2011, at 10:10 AM, Mike Lehman wrote:
>>
>>> A stopped clock is right twice a day. That hardly rates a headline  
>>> -- or a Subject line -- in my book.
>>> Mike Lehman
>>>
>>> On 9/29/2011 10:06 AM, C. G. ESTABROOK wrote:
>>>
>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> __._,_.___
>>> Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a  
>>> New Topic
>>> Messages in this topic (2)
>>> RECENT ACTIVITY:
>>> Visit Your Group
>>> MARKETPLACE
>>> Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're  
>>> on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.
>>> if(window.yzq_d==null)window.yzq_d=new Object();  
>>> window.yzq_d['3EMpAWKJiTs-']='&U=13cvnq2fb%2fN%3d3EMpAWKJiTs-%2fC 
>>> %3d493064.14543979.14562481.13298430%2fD%3dMKP1%2fB%3d6060255%2fV 
>>> %3d1';
>>> Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use
>>> .
>>>
>>> __,_._,___
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20110929/78e44214/attachment-0001.html>