[Peace] Fwd: [Ufpj-disc] Re: [Ufpj-legislative] Let us debate the filibuster option as a policy- NOW.

[Morton K. Brussel]

Apologies to those on the peace-discuss and peace lists for again  
receiving this message.  --,kb

Begin forwarded message:

> From: "Morton K. Brussel" <brussel4 at insightbb.com>
> Date: March 17, 2007 4:53:13 PM CDT
> To: Peace Discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
> Subject: Fwd: [Ufpj-disc] Re: [Ufpj-legislative] Let us debate the  
> filibuster	option as a policy- NOW.
>
> John Walsh is trying to get enough Senators to filibuster the  
> appropriations for the war, and asking UFPJ to put this high on  
> their agenda. Below are some of his messages to UFPJ. I for one  
> think his proposal is worth backing.  See what he says:
>
> He says: "Almost everyone has an email address of hundreds and many  
> of us have emails from thousands.  If we could get UFPJ, ANSWER,  
> Peace Action and Council for A Livable World to promote it, that  
> would be great.  Of course the Left, CounterPunch.com and the  
> Libertarian Antiwar.com have both carried the pieces I have written  
> on it.  I tried to get it into The Nation at least as a letter -  
> but Katrina continues to wreak considerable damage (the editor, no  
> the hurricane) there by placing  loyalty to the Dems above all else"
>
> ---mkb
>
> Walsh's statement:
>
> I would like UFPJ to discuss the filibuster option as the central
> point of future legislative effort.  I wish to make a few points:
>
> 1.  There is essentially only one way to end the war in a veto-proof
> way.  That is by filibustering to STOP funding in the Senate.  While
> it takes 60 Senate votes to get something passed (or to cut off a
> filibuster), it takes ONLY 41 votes OR abstentions to stop something.
>       Right now a lot of effort is going into supporting legislative
> measures that cannot work.  Why do that?
>
> 2.Yesterday the Republicans in the Senate used this filibuster opton
> for the third time in the last 30 days.  (Although the "date certain"
> measuer went down to defeat by 50 to 48, it was under one of the
> filibuster rules where 60 votes were required to defeat it.)
> Consider those 48 votes - that is seven more than needed to sustain a
> filibuster.
>
> 3. The Senators will be under tremendous pressure to support such a
> filibuster.  IMHO a senator who does not support the filibuster would
> have trouble getting elected in 2008.
>
> 4. There is only ONE reason for failing to do this - again IMHO.  All
> other legislative measures make the Republicans look bad without any
> real demands on the Dems.  But the filibuster option puts the Dem
> senators on the line.  They have to go beyond Bush bashing.  So
> backing other legislative measures helps the Democrats at the expense
> of peace.  On the other hand demanding a filibuster makes the
> Democrats serve the peace movement.  It is our obligation to make the
> latter come to pass.
>
> 5.We have collecting thousands of signatures on our petition at:
> www.FilibusterForPeace.org
> Please take a look and let's discuss it.
> jw
>
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
>> From: John Walsh <jvwalshmd at gmail.com>
>> Date: March 16, 2007 11:46:51 AM CDT
>> To: Bill Scheurer <wcscheurer at comcast.net>
>> Cc: sue udry <sue at unitedforpeace.org>, legislative listserv ufpj  
>> <ufpj-legislative at lists.mayfirst.org>, UFPJ- Discussion <ufpj- 
>> disc at lists.mayfirst.org>
>> Subject: [Ufpj-disc] Re: [Ufpj-legislative] Let us debate the  
>> filibuster	option as a policy- NOW.
>>
>> **Please see footer for list protocol**
>>
>> So how do we do it?
>> 1.  I have been gathering signatures.  Almost everyone has an email
>> address of hundreds and many of us have emails from thousands.  If we
>> could get UFPJ, ANSWER, Peace Action and Council for A Livable World
>> to promote it, that would be great.  Of course the Left,
>> CounterPunch.com and the Libertarian Antiwar.com have both carried  
>> the
>> pieces I have written on it.  I tried to get it into The Nation at
>> least as a letter - but Katrina continues to wreak considerable  
>> damage
>> (the editor, no the hurricane) there by placing  loyalty to the Dems
>> above all else
>> 2. One group in New Hampshire wrote that they will have a filibuster
>> demand on their signs at an Obama event and try to get him to answer
>> what he thinks about it.  (The standard answer (given by John Kerry's
>> aides) is: "The votes are not there."  Our response is: "Is your vote
>> there?  That is where we start.  We only want your vote and
>> leadership; then we will get the rest."
>> (I must note that Kennedy's aide did not respond the way Kerry's did.
>> His response was that he would give it to the Senator and he clearly
>> showed interest in it.  We do have a few real friends.)
>>
>> 3. At what point can we make this come into public view in the mass
>> media.  Bird Dogging Hillary would help.
>>
>> 4. Other ideas?
>>
>> jw
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace/attachments/20070318/cc51f37b/attachment.html