[Peace-discuss] [Discuss] [sf-core] Re: [CentralILJwJ] Fw: [OccupyCU] Fwd: [cchcc-l] Gov. Quinn Announces State-Federal Partnership Health Exchange
E. Wayne Johnson
ewj at pigsqq.org
Tue Jul 31 15:04:28 UTC 2012
Political, it would seem. Bipartisan, I can imagine.
*
Our loyal Democrat friends remind me very little of W.C. Fields (Foe-rever)
and rather much of Jonah's disappointment at the repentance of Nineveh.
They only repented because they feared the wrath to come,
thus it was a low grade sort of, if not totally ersatz, self-serving
repentance.
After all, if Tim Johnson was a real convert, he most certainly would
have found some way
to go back in time and reverse those votes he claims to regret.
What a counterfeit!
Those who don't learn to rewrite history are bound to repeal it.
*
One of my friends is addicted to placebos.
He'd give them up,
but it wouldn't make any difference.
On 7/31/2012 8:17 PM, Paul Mueth wrote:
> Anyone hear what the blackmailer had on Timmie and whether the animus
> was personal or political?
>
> Sent from my iPhone 3GS, It doesn't chat!
>
> On Jul 31, 2012, at 12:26 AM, "John W." <jbw292002 at gmail.com
> <mailto:jbw292002 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>> Hasn't Tim Johnson announced that he's not running for office again?
>> Who is Gill's Republican opponent this time around? Seems to be we
>> should be more concerned about the current race than about the
>> actions and motivations of a lame duck Representative.
>>
>> John Wason
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 7:43 PM, C. G. Estabrook <cge at shout.net
>> <mailto:cge at shout.net>> wrote:
>>
>> Ricky--
>>
>> As was true in Vietnam and Nicaragua, when we're trying to
>> marshall votes against a criminal war, it's a bit ridiculous not
>> to accept them if we can't convince ourselves that they're
>> *really sincere*...
>>
>> In fact, Tim Johnson has said that he was wrong to vote for war
>> in Afghanistan and in Iraq, and since then he has been a
>> consistent vote against any more money for war in the Mideast -
>> one of the few in the House, where 2/3-3/4 continue to support
>> the war. (And remember there is just one war from Central Asia to
>> Central Africa, in several "theaters," as Obama says.)
>>
>> David Gill on the other hand, even though he now seems to have
>> said quietly (only on Facebook comments, so far as I know!) that
>> he would vote as Tim does, has never admitted that he's changed
>> his position, even though he originally trumpeted his agreement
>> with Conservative British MP Rory Stewart about how the
>> occupation of Afghanistan should proceed.
>>
>> Obama mendaciously asserts that he's 'winding down' the war(s),
>> when in fact he's substantially widening and intensifying them -
>> more brutally and efficiently than Bush did. (I had a piece in
>> last Sunday's News-Gazette about his real war policy.) Hypocrisy
>> being the tribute vice pays to virtue, Obama misleads a public,
>> 2/3-3/4 of which think US troops should be withdrawn.
>>
>> My fear is that David will fall into the administration's arms on
>> this point (see picture) and say he supports Obama's
>> 'withdrawal.' Johnson's forthright opposition (whatever his
>> secret heart) to voting for any more money for war in the Mideast
>> will be lost.
>>
>> So I hope, if David becomes the Congress member for IL-13, he'll
>> vote on the war as Tim did, but I'm not convinced he will. To
>> summarize:
>>
>> ~ Why hasn't he publicly pledged (as Johnson did) to vote against
>> funds for war in the Middle East?
>> ~ Why hasn't he admitted (as Johnson did) that he's changed his
>> position on the war (if he has), since he once espoused Rory
>> Stewart's views?
>> ~ Why hasn't he publicly praised the bipartisan suit by members
>> of Congress (including Rep. Johnson) against Obama's obvious
>> violation of the War Powers Act in Libya (an impeachable offense)?
>> ~ Why hasn't he publicly condemned Obama's murders of US citizens
>> and children (an impeachable offense)?
>> ~ Why hasn't he publicly condemned Obama's illegal drone wars in
>> six countries (an impeachable offense)?
>>
>> Obviously the most important thing the federal government does is
>> kill people. Many Americans have worked for years to convince
>> their elected representatives to prevent the mass murder carried
>> out by the Bush & Obama administrations on the excuse of 9/11.
>> I'd be sorry to replace one of the few members of Congress who
>> has voted consistently against it with someone whose position is
>> not so clear.
>>
>> Regards, Carl
>>
>> PS - I think I can shed some light on the "secret information ...
>> which justified ... support for [the invasion of Iraq]" in 2003.
>>
>> As the Green party candidate, I ran against Tim for Congress in
>> 2002. I told him at the time, quite publicly, that he shouldn't
>> vote for the invasion of Iraq - but he refused to take a position
>> on the matter. I met with him and his people just after the
>> election (which I lost) and told them in even more detail why the
>> the invasion was both a crime and a blunder.
>>
>> A short time later, the White House invited in a number of
>> members of Congress, including Tim, to give them "secret
>> information" that the WH said sealed the case for war. They told
>> them (I think but cannot prove) the Niger yellow-cake story, the
>> made-up CIA yarn about how Saddam Hussein was seeking materials
>> for a nuclear bomb from Africa. That was the story that
>> eventually led to Amb. Joseph Wilson's revelation of its falsity,
>> CIA agent Valerie Plame's outing, and the conviction of Cheney's
>> chief of staff Scooter Libby. But it served its purpose with a
>> number of wavering Congressmembers, and we were able to go back
>> the traditional American pastime of slaughtering Iraqi men women,
>> and children. (Remember Clinton was responsible for a death of
>> about a million of them.)
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20120731/c5aaeeb4/attachment.html>
More information about the Peace-discuss
mailing list