DFA ASKING YOU TO PICK THE BEST FROM A BATCH OF DEMS. ARE THEY ALL KOSHER?
>
DFA is having one of their online participatory democracy things again. You get to vote for a candidate you think is most worthy and then the top 5 highest vote getters receive an endorsement and some cash. All the canidates are either running to displace a Republican incumbent or are running for an open seat. Voting started yesterday and the last time I looked, Patrick Murphy (PA-08) was out ahead and the others in the top 5 were Nancy Skinner (MI-09), Stephanie Studebaker (OH-03), Dave Loebsack (IA-02) and Jerry McNerney (CA-11). Voting for this round closes Friday, June 16 (5PM, Eastern Time). The run-off between the top 5 starts on Monday, June 19. You wanna vote? Click here and give it a shot.
Most of these candidates look pretty good to me, although DFA has allowed some DCCC-type corporate shills to sneak in under the radar. I hope he wins too but why a campaign cash whore like Ron Klein (FL-22) is in a race involving a grassroots, reform group seems strange. Except for the obligatory attack on Bush's incompetence and dishonesty, his Iraq War "solution" is basically indistinguishable from that of people like Bush, Rumsfeld, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Wes Clark, Rahm Emanuel. If someone says they want us out of the war and they don't mention Jack Murtha's real plan or something substantially like it-- or if they ignore Iraq and don't even mention it on their website-- they're fudging and you better be careful before supporting them. At least half the Democrats, not on the DFA site, in general, are full of shit on this. Don't be fooled by what you want to believe.
Take Dan Seals, for example. He's running against Republican rubber-stamp nutcase Mark Kirk in the northern Chicago suburbs as far up Lake Michigan as Waukegan (IL-10). He doesn't pussyfoot around about where he stands. He's a proud progressive, not someone who is trying to tailor a message that pleases out-of-touch Inside-the-Beltway loser consultants. If you read his statement on Iraq you know you're not reading George Bush or Joe Lieberman or Hillary Clinton:
The War in Iraq has been mishandled from the beginning. There was no connection between 9/11 and Iraq. There were no Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq. We didn't plan for the peace. We failed to provide our military with the troops and equipment they needed to do the job. We offered no-bid contracts to Halliburton and did disgraceful things in Abu Ghraib. At the same time, our struggles in Iraq have distracted us from other issues in the Middle East and at home, such as real Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iran, real opportunities for progress between Israelis and Palestinians, and real threats to our national security here in the U.S. By any measure, this has not been America’s proudest moment.
Our job now is to figure out how best to salvage this horrible situation. As the saying goes, the best thing to do when you’ve dug yourself into a hole is to stop digging. I believe our best approach is a responsible withdrawal from Iraq. Our withdrawal should not further destabilize the country and should allow the Iraqi government time to prepare. Most of all, a withdrawal must be accompanied by clear, measurable goals that enable our troops to leave as soon as possible. Our troops deserve nothing less.
Bringing our troops home doesn’t mean the end of our support for Iraq. We should continue to provide our expertise, our money, and even our weapons for the effort – but not troops. At the end of the day, if Iraqis want democracy, they will have to fight for it themselves.
Anyway, some of the genuine grassroots progressives on the list worth the top nod, besides Seals, are Jerry McNerney (CA-11), Bruce Braley (IA-01), Dave Loebsack (IA-02), David Gill (IL-15), Nancy Skinner (MI-09), Tony Trupiano (MI-11), Coleen Rowley (MN-02), Larry Kissell (NC-08), Paul Hodes (NH-02), Michael Arcuri (NY-24), Eric Massa (NY-29), Joe Sestak (PA-07), Patrick Murphy (PA- 08), Chris Carney (PA-10), Lois Herr (PA-16), Dan Dodd (TX-03).
posted by DownWithTyranny @ 6:31 AM
5 comments
|
Reddit
5 Comments:
I take your point about Clay Shaw's opponent, though I do ardently want him to win. He's not in bad shape, moneywise, at least as of figures files 3/31/06, either, which is a second reason to dismiss him.
For the most part I do think it's a trustworthy list of defensible choices. As I said on SwingState Project, I tried to correlate my vote with candidates simultaneously on the similar grab-bag list being circulated by Mark Warner's PAC.
I also put a heavy measure of "winnable" into the mix as I weighed the possibilities. This led to my not necessarily ranking them in the order in which they engage my personal enthusiasm. I looked for someone who can win and who will really benefit from the money.
I ended up with Larry Kissel. Loebsack was a runner-up. Other choices could certainly be defended.
gore has suggested that not holding office allows for much more direct talk about bush's little situation and i guess if you are running for something, you may tend to be cautious about the opinions you articulate. while that may be so, i don't see how actually holding office translates into the right to be dishonest.
bush and rummy have tossed out so many different takes on iraqi war progress that i bet somewhere stashed up cheney's bunker, liberal media types are on a list of "accomplished missions." i've been seeing, within the press, a lot of snapping at scoobie snacks and chowing down on red meat but i am a bit suspicious.
zarky, got zapped. conveniently in the wake of the death of estate tax and the smack-down on the ban on gay marriage. one could surmise that condi's husband really needed to save face. but are we buying this? it strikes me as rather odd - the perfect timing, the pictures and all. the story has it that there was pin point accuracy of the isolated target (what, only one kiddie dead?) gee, why not send in the beave with a slingshot? what's a half ton of bombs go for these days anyway? and this was the culmination of a two week effort? i thought this guy was one of the thousands of "number two most wanted's" for like a few years now! we're quite a few years (and billions of dollars) into this war so has anyone thought of starting up a similar two week effort to catch osama?
and that photo... bomb a guys house flat and he comes out looking like an oprah make-over! i think he even got his hair did. i wish i had the same crew for my driver's license pix. oh but the next day's photos, the bruises and scars showed up! hey, i watch csi and that ain't supposed to happen. but all is well as long as we've turned yet another corner (and if geometry serves, you turn enough corners and you'll end up right where you started.)
politicians are gonna have to start speaking out cause the press is slacking. my vote goes to whoever soothes my restless mind. i hate having to "vote against." bush and the gop(G-oing O-ff to P-rison?)know that lying to the media will certainly get them caught. but involving the press in their bullshit? in-bedded, indeed.
thanks, dwt for much needed illumination.
oh my! the press is finally questioning that crap fest? u.s. army maj. gen. william caldwell is all linked up to the pentagon trying to explain how zarky was dead, but then alive, then rolling on a stretcher, but they could not save him to get info on osama... then, but, wait... ok... the real story...
the more i look at that first photo, the more i'm wondering what madame tussaud's been up to lately. these guys need to hop in the bronco and go out for a few rounds of night golf until they get their story together...
Rachel Maddow has also pointed out another so-far-unexplained curiosity surrounding the unfortunate Zarqawi's unfortunate demise. The statement supposedly issued by the Iraq chapter of Al Qaeda announcing their chief's joyous martyrdom was signed by a supposed "deputy" with the exact same name as someone, supposedly Z's "spiritual adviser," who is reported (by Team U.S.A., of course) to have been killed alongside him. As Rachel notes, there could be two Qaedists who took the same name. Or it could be that our guys still need a few more cracks at cobbling together a story that at least sort of hangs together.
They might try the truth, but I wouldn't hold my breath.
K
ok, i can't keep up with the caca! so it turns out zarky did, in fact, get a make-over... but apparently no cpr! his face was real bloody but they cleaned it for his close up, mr. de mille. the army spokes-general couldn't seem to explain how zarky survived two (count 'em, two) 500 lbs bombs on his little house, but suggested he may have stepped outside - during an air raid. uh...ok.
so zarky mumbled something "unintelligible" before expiring. rosebud? nah, but i guess you would have to be a formerly employed gay arabic linguist from the nsa to fathom a guess.
i am reminded of that old black box flight data ruse...
"let's store the critical data about the failed aircraft, where? on that very craft! you'll know the truth just as soon as we can get to the bottom of the ocean and get that box."
hey guys, how about the "oprah - uma" solution?
black box? blue tooth. blue tooth? black box. no more bullshit story. but then there would not be enough time to "fix the facts."
so what the fuck is really going on over in iraq? who knows, but i think dubya wishes he could go off into the woods and find a black box explanation to save his sorry ass...
i'm still waiting for the politician who can tell me what's going on and how he or she is gonna fix it...
Post a Comment
<< Home