[Peace-discuss] [Peace] Letter to the News-Gazette, on the coming election

Tue Oct 9 22:28:22 UTC 2018

I am glad to see that it has 40 or so co-sponsors, that is still only ( correct if me if I am wrong ) about 1/3 of House Democrats.

I hope more sign on but that doesn’t mean Londrigan will support it IF she is elected.

David J.

From: Robert Naiman [mailto:naiman at justforeignpolicy.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2018 2:24 PM
To: David Johnson
Cc: Peace-discuss List
Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Letter to the News-Gazette, on the coming election

Check out the co-sponsors of the bipartisan Khanna-Massie-Smith-Jones-Pocan Yemen war powers bill. 

What patterns do you see? 

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-concurrent-resolution/138/cosponsors

H.Con.Res.138 - Directing the President pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution to remove United States Armed Forces from hostilities in the Republic of Yemen that have not been authorized by Congress.

Sponsor:  <https://www.congress.gov/member/ro-khanna/K000389?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22khanna+yemen%22%5D%7D> Rep. Khanna, Ro [D-CA-17] | Cosponsor statistics: 41 current - includes 26 original

Cosponsor

Date Cosponsored

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/adam-smith/S000510> Rep. Smith, Adam [D-WA-9]*

09/26/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/mark-pocan/P000607> Rep. Pocan, Mark [D-WI-2]*

09/26/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/james-mcgovern/M000312> Rep. McGovern, James P. [D-MA-2]*

09/26/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/steny-hoyer/H000874> Rep. Hoyer, Steny H. [D-MD-5]*

09/26/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/eliot-engel/E000179> Rep. Engel, Eliot L. [D-NY-16]*

09/26/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/thomas-massie/M001184> Rep. Massie, Thomas [R-KY-4]*

09/26/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/ted-lieu/L000582> Rep. Lieu, Ted [D-CA-33]*

09/26/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/barbara-lee/L000551> Rep. Lee, Barbara [D-CA-13]*

09/26/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/beto-o-rourke/O000170> Rep. O'Rourke, Beto [D-TX-16]*

09/26/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/walter-jones/J000255> Rep. Jones, Walter B., Jr. [R-NC-3]*

09/26/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/joe-courtney/C001069> Rep. Courtney, Joe [D-CT-2]*

09/26/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/joseph-kennedy/K000379> Rep. Kennedy, Joseph P., III [D-MA-4]*

09/26/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/janice-schakowsky/S001145> Rep. Schakowsky, Janice D. [D-IL-9]*

09/26/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/tulsi-gabbard/G000571> Rep. Gabbard, Tulsi [D-HI-2]*

09/26/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/michael-capuano/C001037> Rep. Capuano, Michael E. [D-MA-7]*

09/26/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/yvette-clarke/C001067> Rep. Clarke, Yvette D. [D-NY-9]*

09/26/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/adriano-espaillat/E000297> Rep. Espaillat, Adriano [D-NY-13]*

09/26/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/raul-grijalva/G000551> Rep. Grijalva, Raul M. [D-AZ-3]*

09/26/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/pramila-jayapal/J000298> Rep. Jayapal, Pramila [D-WA-7]*

09/26/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/gwen-moore/M001160> Rep. Moore, Gwen [D-WI-4]*

09/26/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/debbie-dingell/D000624> Rep. Dingell, Debbie [D-MI-12]*

09/26/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/peter-defazio/D000191> Rep. DeFazio, Peter A. [D-OR-4]*

09/26/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/earl-blumenauer/B000574> Rep. Blumenauer, Earl [D-OR-3]*

09/26/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/theodore-deutch/D000610> Rep. Deutch, Theodore E. [D-FL-22]*

09/26/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/peter-welch/W000800> Rep. Welch, Peter [D-VT-At Large]*

09/26/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/nita-lowey/L000480> Rep. Lowey, Nita M. [D-NY-17]*

09/26/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/frank-pallone/P000034> Rep. Pallone, Frank, Jr. [D-NJ-6]

09/27/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/john-garamendi/G000559> Rep. Garamendi, John [D-CA-3]

09/27/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/jackie-speier/S001175> Rep. Speier, Jackie [D-CA-14]

09/27/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/zoe-lofgren/L000397> Rep. Lofgren, Zoe [D-CA-19]

09/27/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/joaquin-castro/C001091> Rep. Castro, Joaquin [D-TX-20]

09/28/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/jared-huffman/H001068> Rep. Huffman, Jared [D-CA-2]

09/28/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/jerrold-nadler/N000002> Rep. Nadler, Jerrold [D-NY-10]

09/28/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/paul-tonko/T000469> Rep. Tonko, Paul [D-NY-20]

10/05/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/karen-bass/B001270> Rep. Bass, Karen [D-CA-37]

10/05/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/colleen-hanabusa/H001050> Rep. Hanabusa, Colleen [D-HI-1]

10/05/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/chellie-pingree/P000597> Rep. Pingree, Chellie [D-ME-1]

10/05/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/timothy-walz/W000799> Rep. Walz, Timothy J. [D-MN-1]

10/05/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/dina-titus/T000468> Rep. Titus, Dina [D-NV-1]

10/05/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/hakeem-jeffries/J000294> Rep. Jeffries, Hakeem S. [D-NY-8]

10/05/2018

 <https://www.congress.gov/member/grace-napolitano/N000179> Rep. Napolitano, Grace F. [D-CA-32]

10/05/2018

===

Robert Naiman
Policy Director
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org
naiman at justforeignpolicy.org

(202) 448-2898 x1

On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 1:59 PM David Johnson via Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:

I don’t bet Bob,

Just explain your evidence that would support your belief that she would go against her DNC handlers.

David Johnson

From: Robert Naiman [mailto:naiman at justforeignpolicy.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2018 1:56 PM
To: David Johnson
Cc: Peace-discuss List
Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] [Peace] Letter to the News-Gazette, on the coming election

OK, let's bet. 

I bet you dinner that if Betsy wins, she will support legislation to end unconstitutional U.S. participation in the Saudi war in Yemen. 

Do we have a bet?

===

Robert Naiman
Policy Director
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org
naiman at justforeignpolicy.org

(202) 448-2898 x1

On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 1:53 PM David Johnson via Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:

Bob,

We are 4-weeks away from election day and a lot can happen between now and then.

I said a “ minor miracle “ would be the only way she will win, and that could happen. But I seriously doubt she will win.

My point was that it will make no difference if Davis or Londrigan are elected. Both will continue the same pro-war policies of their corporate masters and neither will be persuaded otherwise by their constituents.

David johnson

From: Robert Naiman [mailto:naiman at justforeignpolicy.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2018 1:44 PM
To: David Johnson
Cc: Peace-discuss List
Subject: Re: [Peace] [Peace-discuss] Letter to the News-Gazette, on the coming election

I wouldn't be so sure that Betsy will not beat Rodney. A recent poll has her down by one point, within the poll's margin of error. My point was, if Betsy is coming close to beating Rodney, then Dems already have the House. Therefore, keeping Dems from taking the House is not a reason to vote for Rodney. It will not have that effect. 

Robert Naiman
Policy Director
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org
naiman at justforeignpolicy.org

(202) 448-2898 x1

On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 1:35 PM David Johnson <davidjohnson1451 at comcast.net> wrote:

Thanks to Bob Naiman and Carl for their views and analysis.

Here is my take on the subject for what it is worth –

I do NOT think it would be better if the Republicans maintain control of the House and / or Senate, but at the same time I see no evidence that if the Democrats would take control that things would improve.

A recent military expenditure increase bill in the Senate was supported by ALL of the Democrats.

The only ones to vote against it were six Republicans and Bernie Sanders ( who is an independent ).

In the House 91 % of Democrats supported it.

The assumption that Democrats will automatically be better than Republicans on the issues of war and foreign policy has no basis in fact. Especially when you consider that there are an unprecedented number of Democratic candidates running for election ( all backed by the DNC during the primaries ) who are former military and / or intelligence operatives from various agencies. In addition the DNC has done everything in their power ( very successfully so with only a few exceptions  ) to prevent any and all anti-war / anti-corporate Dem primary candidates from winning. In addition refusing to budge on more ; democracy, transparency, and accountability within the Democratic party. Which means DNC backed candidates will NOT listen to their constituent’s wishes ( especially in regards to foreign policy and corporate power ) and instead will toe the DNC party line because the DNC wants to keep their corporate donors happy. The corporate donor class is the constituency ( special interest ) who the DNC fears, NOT the voters. Who they perceive to be sheep who will continue to vote for Democratic candidates no matter what, in the tried and true tactic of “ triangulation “ that was perfected by the Clintons. However people are catching on to this and are angry, which is why close to 48 % of eligible voters chose  neither Clinton or Trump either by not voting at all or voting for 3rd party candidates in the last Presidential election. And why many voters selected Trump as a way of “ sending a message “and “disrupting the system “. As fucked up as that strategy was, it is understandable to a certain degree why some people did that considering the betrayal they experienced from 2008 t0 2016 by the Democrats and the lack of other options. 

This reality is especially relevant in regards to issues of war and peace. The war profiteer industry in the U.S. is along with the financial sector the largest and most powerful special interest in the country that not only has it’s own industry lobbyists but also the support of very wealthy and influential lobbyists who represent AIPAC and the kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Both of whom have not only interfered in our political / election process for decades, but also have used their vast financial resources to buy the good graces of the corporate media.

This dynamic will only change when we begin to understand and act accordingly that it doesn’t matter the political party but the individual candidate who is running, rather an anti-war / anti corporate Dem, or an anti-war Republican, or ant-war / anti-corporate ; Green, Independent, Socialist, etc..

The “ Any Blue Will Do “ mindset is WHY we are in the horrible condition we are in. And Rodney Davis is DEFINTELY no Tim Johnson, as Bob accurately stated, and he will continue the pro-war policies of the majority in the Republican party.

In terms of the Illinois 13th Congressional district – Betsy Londrigan will NOT win against Davis ( as Bob pointed out the odds to attest to that fact ). The candidate that could of beat Davis ( who came within .05 % of beating Davis in the one time he ran as Dem in the 13th in a three way race ) and who also had the best platform all around including an anti-war platform was Dr. David Gill. Who the Unions and the academic “ intelligentsia “ in Urbana and elsewhere in the 13th refused to support, and when asked why individually had no clear answer except that they wanted someone “ fresh and new “. ???

Wow ! … Did they think they were buying the latest fashion trend clothing instead of voting for someone who supported 95 % of the issues they claim they support ?

Betsy Londrigan if by some minor miracle would win would follow the instructions and orders of Durbin and the DNC to a tee, if for no other reason because those were her backers / sponsors in the Dem primary.

I saw her twice during the debates and she is a hard core neo-liberal, ESPECIALLY in regards to foreign policy. 

So with these facts in mind I am voting for ; “ None of the Above “ in the 13th Congressional race.

We should NOT vote for anyone who will not only NOT represent our interests, but will actively work against our interests. To do otherwise makes no logical sense.

Nor does it make any logical sense to vote for Davis as a means of punishing the Democrats when Rodney Davis has a clear track record of voting in favor of war.

David Johnson

From: Peace [mailto:peace-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Robert Naiman via Peace
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2018 10:05 PM
To: C. G. Estabrook
Cc: Peace Discuss; peace
Subject: Re: [Peace] [Peace-discuss] Letter to the News-Gazette, on the coming election

Here's another way of looking at it. 

I disagree that the world would be worse off on net if Democrats take the House. I think the world would be better off on net. I think that it would help us end the Saudi war in Yemen, which is pushing millions of human beings to the edge of starvation. I think we can end the war if we can get a vote in the House. So far the House Republican leadership has blocked a vote in the House. We're trying to get a vote as soon as possible, but if Dems win the House, then I'm confident that we'll get a vote in January if not before. I think that outweighs the anti-Russia issue. I don't contest at all that the anti-Russia thing embraced by many Democrats is quite bothersome. But, Russia has nuclear weapons and a big army and a seat on the UN Security Council and while the U.S. may pursue destructive policies towards Russia and we should oppose those policies, the U.S. is not about to invade Russia or start bombing it, while Russia has those means to defend itself, which it will continue to do. Yemeni children have none of these things to defend themselves from U.S. bombs. So I think the Yemeni children should be a higher priority for our defense. Plus, while Trump has advocated, justly in my view, for better relations with Russia, his actual policies have in some respects been more aggressive than Obama. Obama rebuffed neocon pressure to arm Ukraine. Trump acceded to it. This is not to gainsay that Obama did bad things in this regard and Trump did good things. Just that it's not one-zero.

But regardless of all that, the overwhelming likelihood is that whatever happens with Betsy vs. Rodney will not determine control of the House. It's a competitive district, and Betsy could win. But it's not a district Democrats need to win in order to take the House. According to 538, Dems have a 5 in 7 or 3 in 4 chance of winning the House, depending how you count, while the chances of Betsy beating Rodney are 3 in 10 or 2 in 7 or 1 in 4, depending on how you count. These are estimates, of course, but it shows where an educated reasonable guess lies: it's more likely that Dems will take the House than it is that Betsy will beat Rodney. If Betsy vs Rodney is close - if our votes matter - Dems are very likely taking the House anyway. If the contest for the House is close, then Rodney is probably beating Betsy anyway. There's a good chance that Dems will take the House but we'll still be stuck with Rodney. We have far greater potential to influence whether we're stuck with Rodney than whether Dems take the House. 

So I think there's a strong case that we should focus more on whether we're represented by Betsy or Rodney, over which we have more control, than over whether Dems or Rs control the House, over which we have much less influence, and which is not likely to be influenced by Betsy vs. Rodney. 

And there I think it's very much a slam dunk that we'd be much better off, from an anti-war point of view, being represented by Betsy than by Rodney. Not because Betsy would be perfect on all imaginable anti-war things; she wouldn't be. But she'd be good on some important things which are in contest. She'd be good on Yemen. Whereas Rodney is a big fat zero on all war and peace issues, including Yemen, and also Iran. I've tried ever since Rodney was our Rep. to get Rodney to do things, even bipartisan things, simple things, defend-our-Constitution things, for less war. Zero, nothing, zip, nada, he never did anything. He's completely hopeless on war and peace issues, as far as I can tell, a robot of the pro-war Republican leadership in the House. Tim Johnson was much better, night and day, reachable, we brought him around. Rodney Davis is a brick wall on war and peace. With Betsy she will be good on some things and we have a chance to move her on other things, to participate in national efforts to move Congress by moving our Rep. With Rodney Davis our chances are zero. He just doesn't give a damn what people in Champaign-Urbana think about anything, he's made that perfectly clear many times, we are not his base, he does not care at all what we think about anything and doesn't pretend to. 

So I would urge people to think most about what we an do with respect to the matter at hand that will contribute the most to allowing us to participate meaningfully in national efforts to move Congress towards less war in the future. And I think it's pretty clear that means focusing on whether we want to be represented by Betsy or Rodney, rather on whether we want Dems or Rs to control the House. 

On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 9:24 PM Carl G. Estabrook via Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net> wrote:

How should those of us opposed to America’s eight wars and war provocations vote? We have one vote to influence US government policy in the next two years: that comes in next month’s election of a representative to the US House, in the seat held by Republican Rodney Davis.

Davis’ opponent is a conventional Democrat, Betsy Dirksen Londrigan. They generally agree on the neoliberal and neoconservative policies followed by all recent US governments, Republican and Democrat alike - policies that have produced more war and accelerating inequality.

Given a choice between two bad candidates, one should of course vote for the less bad. Here party affiliation makes the important difference, because the House is organized by parties, not the views of individual members. Of the two major political parties in America, the Democrats are the more pro-war today:

(1) their challengers for House seats include a large number of pro-war CIA and 'military intelligence' veterans;
(2) 'Russiagate' is their fantastical attempt to insure that Trump doesn't depart from the belligerence against Russia and China that characterized the Obama-Clinton administrations; and 
(3) they are employing identity politics to defeat those few anti-war votes in Congress (cf. Rep. Michael Capuano in Massachusetts).

The Democrats should not be given control of Congress. They are the greater evil - the greater threat of war - at the moment.

I’ll reluctantly vote for our feckless Republican Congressman, Rodney Davis, in order to forestall the Democrats’ gaining control of the House of Representatives.

—CGE

_______________________________________________
Peace-discuss mailing list
Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss

_______________________________________________
Peace-discuss mailing list
Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss

_______________________________________________
Peace-discuss mailing list
Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20181009/9cb7d8f3/attachment-0001.html>