[Peace-discuss] [Peace] Voting anti-war in tomorrow's primary (2)

Thu Mar 22 13:09:39 UTC 2018

Quite so, David. At  least Londrigan will be better on domestic
issues, shows a willingness to listen and get informed on other points
of view, and engages the voters more directly than Davis ever has. Let
us not forget that before Davis was a Congressman he was staffer and
lapdog for John Shimkus--about whom I have nothing good to say.

Davis is a lost cause. Londrigan will be a step in the right (left?)
direction, and as they say, every journey begins with a single step
(just couldn't help myself on that one).

Deb

On 3/22/18, David Johnson <davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net> wrote:
> " Rodney may be shamed/pressured into emulating him. “NEVER” is a long
> time."
>
> That will be a cold day in hell Carl.
>
> It will never happen because Davis is bought and paid for.
>
> David J.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: C G Estabrook [mailto:cgestabrook at gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2018 7:45 AM
> To: David Johnson; Peace
> Cc: Debra Schrishuhn; Karen Aram; peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Voting anti-war in tomorrow's primary
> (2)
>
> David’s quite right about Tim (who’s even recently asked me to lecture to
> his UI classes - along with Rodney, I admit…)
>
> Rodney may be shamed/pressured into emulating him. “NEVER” is a long time.
>
> But the war-mongering Democrats are today excoriating Trump for
> congratulating Putin on his election, and talking peace with Eurasia!
>
> Idiots.
>
>
>> On Mar 22, 2018, at 7:23 AM, David Johnson via Peace-discuss
>> <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
>>
>> Indeed Deb,
>>
>> Tim Johnson was a Champaign county Republican who interacted with his
>> constituents and even helped registered Democrats with problems. He also
>> had  libertarian political tendencies in regards to civil liberties and
>> had one of the most favorable voting records in support of Unions . He
>> changed his support of the war in Iraq to opposition while Bush and the
>> Republicans still controlled the Presidency and Congress because he was
>> responding to citizens in his district. Not that he didn't have his
>> faults.
>> Rodney Davis on the other hand is a corporate republican who is a solely
>> owned subsidiary of the Koch brothers et al and doesn’t care what his
>> constituents think. Davis will NEVER bite the hand of his corporate
>> masters.
>>
>> David J.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of
>> Debra Schrishuhn via Peace
>> Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2018 5:26 AM
>> To: Karen Aram
>> Cc: peace
>> Subject: Re: [Peace] Voting anti-war in tomorrow's primary (2)
>>
>> What comes to mind is a paraphrase of one of the best debate lines
>> ever: I knew Tim Johnson, worked with Tim Johnson, and Rodney Davis, you
>> are not Tim Johnson!
>>
>> Deb
>>
>>
>>
>> On 3/20/18, Karen Aram via Peace <peace at lists.chambana.net> wrote:
>>> Sorry, I don’t buy it, give me a reason why Davis might change his
>>> mind as did Tim Johnson, other than a miracle. I would prefer a
>>> Democrat we can pressure, with our votes. Davis has already had the
>>> opportunity to change his mind on many things due to constituency
>>> pressure, please name one.
>>>
>>> And, lets be clear the Democrat Party maybe pushing Russiagate, and
>>> war against China, but to assume the Republicans are not, is sheer
>>> nonsense.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mar 20, 2018, at 06:39, C G Estabrook
>>> <cgestabrook at gmail.com<mailto:cgestabrook at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> No, it’s a recognition that any Democratic candidate in this
>>> Congressional district (except Gill) will be a war supporter.
>>>
>>> Republican Tim Johnson, Davis’ predecessor, was, too - and changed in
>>> office.
>>>
>>> Unlikely as it may be, we can hope for the same from Davis - while
>>> the Democratic party pushes Russiagate and war provocations against
>>> Russia and China.
>>>
>>> —CGE
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mar 20, 2018, at 8:30 AM, Karen Aram
>>> <karenaram at hotmail.com<mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Carl
>>>
>>> I agree David Gill is the only viable candidate to be supported.
>>> However, Rodney Davis? Are you showing your true Republican colors,
>>> or is this a strategy to “bring it on,” the revolution, which we surely
>>> need.
>>>
>>> Just as Trump is responsible for waking up the American people to
>>> “politics do matter,” after sleeping for eight years, I suppose you
>>> think Rodney’s re-election might have the same affect.
>>>
>>> Good strategy, but I doubt it will work, the people will just wait
>>> for another chance to elect a Democrat. Pressure on some of our
>>> Democrat Representatives does have an impact, as we are now told
>>> Tammy Duckworth will support the Lee Sanders Bill, given her support
>>> for militarism, that is quite an achievement though we must be
>>> vigilant and keep in mind the Lee Sanders Bill is flawed.
>>>
>>>  I too like Niloofar am surprised and disappointed that Bob would
>>> support
>>> Betsy, when we have a candidate, David          Gill who is anti-war as
>>> well
>>> as single payer supporter.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mar 19, 2018, at 20:58, C G Estabrook
>>> <cgestabrook at gmail.com<mailto:cgestabrook at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> David Gill seems to be the only anti-war candidate for Congress in
>>> IL-13.
>>> He’s the only Democrat who said in answer to direct questions that US
>>> troops (and weapons) should be withdrawn from the Mideast and N. Africa.
>>>
>>> The other Democrats - Londrigan, Jones, and Ebel - all support US
>>> war-making. Londrigan seems uninformed, as Bob suggests, but Ebel is
>>> even worse: he seems to be one of the "extraordinary number of former
>>> intelligence and military operatives from the CIA, Pentagon, National
>>> Security Council and State Department [who] are seeking nomination as
>>> Democratic candidates for Congress in the 2018 midterm elections. The
>>> potential influx of military-intelligence personnel into the
>>> legislature has no precedent in US political history”
>>> [https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/03/07/dems-m07.html].
>>>
>>> Given what the national Democratic party has done to drive Trump back
>>> into the belligerence and war-provocations of the Obama
>>> administration
>>> - ‘Russiagate', notably - I can’t see voting for any Democrats for
>>> Congress.
>>> If Gill is not nominated, I’ll vote for incumbent Rodney Davis - a
>>> war-supporter, yes, but one who might follow the example of his
>>> predecessor, former Rep. Tim Johnson (a Republican), and turn against
>>> the administration’s wars. —CGE
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mar 19, 2018, at 9:34 PM, Niloofar Shambayati via Peace
>>> <peace at lists.chambana.net<mailto:peace at lists.chambana.net>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Robert,
>>>
>>> I'm surprised by your endorsement. She's totally an establishment
>>> candidate.
>>> She has a big smile and no real agenda, except the generic "caring
>>> for families". Like her mentor, Durbin, she doesn't even support a
>>> national health care system (improved medicare for all). I hope to
>>> hear stronger arguments in her favor. Thanks!
>>>
>>> Niloofar
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 7:57 PM, Robert Naiman via Peace
>>> <peace at lists.chambana.net<mailto:peace at lists.chambana.net>> wrote:
>>> https://www.facebook.com/robert.naiman/posts/10157099169132656
>>>
>>> I endorse Betsy Dirksen Londrigan for Congress in IL-13.
>>> I like all four serious candidates. I met with all of them. I went to
>>> every forum I could. They're all thoughtful, knowledgeable, and
>>> progressive, their intentions are pure, and they're in it to win it.
>>> I will vigorously support whoever wins the primary, in order to defeat
>>> Rodney Davis in November.
>>> But in the primary, I have to choose one. I choose Betsy Dirksen
>>> Londrigan.
>>> First: I engaged the four candidates about our campaign to end
>>> unauthorized U.S. participation in the catastrophic Saudi war in
>>> Yemen. Of the four candidates, Betsy Dirksen Londrigan listened to me
>>> the best. It wasn't close, actually. I explained how this war is
>>> different from the other wars, and she got it. The first time I
>>> engaged her, she didn't really understand what I was talking about;
>>> but none of them did. Betsy Dirksen Londrigan
>>> said: send me something to read. So I did. The next time I saw her,
>>> Betsy Dirksen Londrigan knew exactly what I was talking about.
>>> Because she read the thing I send her and she understood it.
>>> I don't need a know-it-all representing me in Congress. Know-it-alls
>>> are a dime a dozen. I need someone who listens to what I have to say
>>> and tries to understand it. By that criterion, it's Betsy Dirksen
>>> Londrigan in a walk.
>>> Second: I like the fact that Betsy Dirksen Londrigan is endorsed by
>>> Dick Durbin. It's not that I think Dick Durbin is the alpha and omega.
>>> I've had frustrations with Dick Durbin. But as a practical matter, on
>>> my issues, if we don't have Dick Durbin, we're not even on the field.
>>> But if we do have Dick Durbin, then we can get all the Dick Durbin
>>> people onside. Today was a perfect example. I was very frustrated
>>> that on the eve of the Senate vote on the Sanders-Lee-Murphy resolution,
>>> I didn't know where Tammy Duckworth was.
>>> So I engaged Durbin's people and said: where's Tammy Duckworth?
>>> Within an hour Tammy Duckworth's staffer, who had been dodging me and
>>> other peace activists, got back with me to confirm that Tammy
>>> Duckworth would vote yes on the Sanders-Lee-Murphy bill. So the fact
>>> that Betsy Dirksen Londrigan is a Dick Durbin person is a big plus
>>> for me, because it gives me great confidence that I can rely on Betsy
>>> Dirksen Londrigan when I need her.
>>> Third: all else equal, I like the fact that she is endorsed by Emily's
>>> List.
>>> Not that I'm totally in love with the politics of Emily's List in
>>> general.
>>> But they are also in it to win it, and I'm confident that if Betsy
>>> Dirksen Londrigan wins the primary, Emily's List will be all-in to
>>> help her win the general, and she's going to need a lot of money and
>>> help to beat Rodney Davis in November.
>>> Fourth: I strongly support increasing the diversity of our Illinois
>>> Congressional delegation. Obviously that doesn't mean I have to
>>> support someone whose politics are diametrically opposed to my own.
>>> But if it's a jump ball, if it's close enough, "the tie goes to the
>>> runner." And, in fact, Betsy Dirksen Londrigan is my best candidate
>>> anyway. She points out that only three members of our current
>>> delegation are women, and says that's unacceptable and we should
>>> change that. I agree. She's right about that. So while I certainly
>>> wouldn't make the decision on this criterion alone, and I wouldn't
>>> want anyone else to, I think it's perfectly wonderful to have this
>>> criterion in the mix. Given everything else that's true, I count this as
>>> a strong plus.
>>>
>>> _______________________
>>>
>>>
>
>
>