IndianaJones
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-01-08 07:19 PM
Original message |
Dennis Kucinich, the only real anti-war candidate on funding the war... |
|
"I think it's inconsistent to tell the American people that you oppose the war and, yet, you continue to vote to fund the war. Because every time you vote to fund the war, you're reauthorizing the war all over again."
|
msongs
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-01-08 07:22 PM
Response to Original message |
1. the progressive is out, the populist is out. Dennis would've investigated repub crimes |
|
if he was elected.
ObamaHillary are complicit and they are not likely to do so.
Msongs
|
Sybbis
(82 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-01-08 07:26 PM
Response to Original message |
2. Yes, but we're living in the real world... |
|
And in the real world, Clinton or Obama are both preferable to any Republican nominee. Funding the war isn't the same thing as creating it, no matter how you try to shape it. That distinction goes to George W. Bush and his merry band of monsters.
|
IndianaJones
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-01-08 07:26 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
3. I'm just commenting on the Obama claim that he was always against the war. nt. |
Sybbis
(82 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-01-08 08:18 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
|
I just hate it when people go on and on about how it's just as bad to fund the war as it was to start it. I also hate it when folks rant about how voting for the IWR was just as bad as creating the war in the first place. I don't see either as accurate or useful in the current election season.
You, obviously, were doing neither of those things. I'm sorry that my reply jumped on your head.
p.s. I'll be seeing the lovely and talented Hillary Clinton in LA tomorrow morning - for the first time since.. EVER! (I saw Bill a couple of times in the 90's.) I'm pretty jazzed about seeing her this close to when I will actually get to vote for her.
|
hippywife
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-01-08 08:06 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
|
"re-authorizing." Plenty of Dems and Repubs alike fall into that category.
|
Sybbis
(82 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-02-08 12:29 AM
Response to Reply #5 |
10. Yes they do, and it's still not the same... |
|
At least it isn't to me. This is George Bush's war and there isn't a rationale anyone can put forward that will make me believe anything else. Whatever minor role others have in funding the troops is, frankly, negligible in my opinion. Every death is George Bush's responsibility. Every maiming and injury is George Bush's responsibility. Every young Muslim who is learning to hate America even as we argue these points is George Bush's responsibility.
I blame him for every bit of it. That's my opinion and you are more than welcome to your own.
|
hippywife
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-02-08 08:24 AM
Response to Reply #10 |
13. Slice it anyway you like but |
|
only a few stood up and sent up a resounding "No!" when the IWR was presented. Many cowards looked the other way and went along...many.
|
LWolf
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-01-08 07:50 PM
Response to Original message |
VotesForWomen
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-01-08 08:31 PM
Response to Original message |
7. correct; obama is no different than clinton on the war. nt |
genie_weenie
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-01-08 08:32 PM
Response to Original message |
Fire Walk With Me
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Feb-01-08 08:44 PM
Response to Original message |
9. Recommend. And I wish that they'd stop saying war and start calling it what it is: an invasion. |
Sybbis
(82 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-02-08 12:30 AM
Response to Reply #9 |
11. Agreed. And the "surge" is an ESCALATION n/t |
zulchzulu
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-02-08 12:37 AM
Response to Original message |
12. So I guess we should make sure the troops in harm's way have jackshit to protect themselves |
|
What Dennis was saying with his statements:
"Likewise, fuck them if they come home with missing limbs and shit. We ain't payin' no stinkin' money to support the troops whe they are in harm's way.
Yunno why? Because we are into political theater and not really interested in the troops anyway."
Are people serious that once the troops were in harm's way, we should pull the rug from under them and leave them for dead? I have yet to see any logical REALISTIC reason where not funding the troops (and vets) would actually be a "good thing".
|
hippywife
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-02-08 09:17 AM
Response to Reply #12 |
16. That's not what he is |
|
Edited on Sat Feb-02-08 09:19 AM by hippywife
saying at all. The power of the purse is meant to stop the invasion and bring the troops home, not strand them in harm's way. And Dennis would never, ever defund the vets. A more compassionate soul has hardly ever existed in the seats of power in this nation.
If you think this man is in it for "theater," then you don't know the first thing about him. If he makes a statement, he also has a plan and has researched what is needed to back it up and make it succeed.
|
Cessna Invesco Palin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-02-08 09:15 AM
Response to Original message |
14. Candidate for what? The 10th in Ohio? n/t |
cgrindley
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Feb-02-08 09:16 AM
Response to Original message |
15. Um... he's not a Candidate (nt) |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Tue May 07th 2024, 01:17 AM
Response to Original message |