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

[Debra Schrishuhn]

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.
>
> _______________________
>
>
>
>