Kucinich working to rally House members against request for $87 billion

This comes from today's edition of The Note.

http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/TheNote/TheNote.html

<edit>

"Kucinich is spending the week in Washington, working to rally House members to vote against the president's request for $87 billion for Iraq. Kucinich prides himself on being a leader who can rally the troops behind even the most unpopular initiatives, and uses the Iraq resolution as an example in almost every campaign speech he makes. Corralling another large Congressional contingent to vote against the $87 billion would be another notch in his belt, and another example he could use to show voters his influence within Washington."

end...

I don't know if it'll accomplish anything.....but still, good for dennis.

n/t

We MUST fight, even when the odds seem insurmountable.

Go, Dennis, go!

is the one making the most noise, along with the man who has raised the most (Dean).

Where are the other 8 candidates?

Dennis is something else. The other 8? surely you forgot Al Sharpton. Now I am about to say, I was so pleased when I heard Dennis talk about repealing the Taft-Hartley act, I doubt Dean will ever so much as mention it. This used to be a key democratic goal. Go Dennis, fight for us, for the guy next door, and fight for the world. Kucinich!

Great Kucinich - you're my guy too, but now that we've rejected 87billion dollars, we still have an Iraq that WE raped and obliterated, WE still have the blood of Iraq innocents on our hand, WE still have a country that is in shambles because of what WE did -- what do we do about that? It is going to cost some money right? So what is your plan for America's paying to un-do the devastation and destruction that we did?

I'm not saying the 87 billion dollars was going to do that - I understand full well it was money for everything but taking care of iraqi people. But I don't "rejoice" if the 87 billion dollar packed is voted down if there is NOTHING PROPOSED IN ITS PLACE. I do NOT support the idea of "bring our boys home now" and just leave the country wasted and devastated. I don't support any plan that inculdes the aboslutely abandoing of Iraq as "someoen elses problem."

So great Kucinich - you go and fight that money -- now let's hear what you plan to do about a ravaged and mutilated Iraq, compliments of the United States of America...

that the Pentagon reported "missing". They found several million tucked away in a variety of special ops programs in Florida this week. Probably LOTS more in similar "rainy day" funds. The Pentagon has got PLENTY of money.

He won't leave Iraq devastated and alone and just abandon it. He says "We broke it. We've got to fix it." But this doesn't
mean that we have to do it ALONE.He wants UN troops to go in and be in charge of policing, and us have only a small contingent of troops. But THE UN MUST BE IN CHARGE!!

A large part of these troops could be active and in-country prepared to go to work within a month.Many troops around the world are experienced in policing, as our soldiers are not.As they take over control, our troops can leave or go to support functions.This will save us on the death toll AND money.

POINT TWO:Our money will always be necessary for reconstruction of Iraq, but WE DON'T HAVE TO DO IT ALONE. Many countries in the world would contribute IF THE UN WERE IN CHARGE AND IRAQIS(not selected by the US exclusively) HAD SOME SAY.Even France wants to contribute IF the U. N. is in charge.

Contracts for reconstruction would have to be open and transparent, not given out just to Bush contributors.This would save us UNTOLD amounts of our tax money over the years.

At the time Pretzeldent Bush went to the U. N., everyone wanted to help. Kofi Annan said so, and Bush just ground his feet into his face. NO ONE wants to see this instability in the area.We are treating Iraq like a conquered nation thatwe stole for the prize of oil.NOW is the time for Congress to say: We can't do it alone. Let the UN take charge.

AND NOW IS THE TIME FOR THESE DISCUSSIONS.

In my frustration I guess I made it sound like I was attacking Kucinich. I made this statement:

I don't support any plan that inculdes the aboslutely abandoing of Iraq as "someoen elses problem."

And that sounds like I was saying that's what Kucinich had in mind. That's not what I meant. I was thinking about the current climate of congress in general, and the fact that the money is desparately needed now. Right now there is no movement in congress to really fund the humanitarian needs in Iraq of any seriousness. I appreciate Kucinich taking a stand but when I asked "what's so awesome about it" what I meant was - what is going to come of it. If Kucinich manages to succeed, no bill that will be better for the Iraqis will take it place in this congress - and that was the real hard of my criticism.

The Senate is debating right now about postponing the tax cut of the wealthy for a couple of years to pay for this. Supported by repugs too! So NOTHING is off the table, as tax cuts are sacred to repugs.

They could mandate that the U. N. take over "the occupation. They could turn over the reconstruction to the U. N. They could make all contracts be open and transparent, thus reducing the cost for a $14,000 pickup truck for Iraq from the $32,000 that is in the bill.They could have a joint command of the occupation, with U. S. commanders in charge of U. S. troops(thorny issue).

If there is enough oomph getting behind DK, there could be a lot of amendments that would help our troops and our money situation.The probable situation is that the repugs would run over them in a party line vote, or kill them in committee.But the stage for eventual consideration of other options would be set.

GO DENNIS. NO MORE BLANK CHECKS.

reconstruction of Iraq without allowing US corporations to plunder it. The more Americans know about the situation there, the more likely they'd be to support him. As uphill as the battle is, by fighting it, we increase the chances people will see through the Bush/media propaganda that attempts to justify our war of aggression and immoral occupation.

Kucinich is all for paying to re-build Iraq but this money is not for that- it's for an occupation. There's a HUGE difference.

He's already proposed plenty in its place. Please read up about it.

It doesn't matter what he's proposed if it has ZERO chance of being passed.

is not now, and should never be, the best-armed social workers on Earth. There are others that can do better (e.g., East Timor). We can help them help the Iraqis rebuild after we've left. Nominating a Democrat to auction off Iraq to the global cartels (better than Bush?!) is not only immoral, it's stupid.

to actually help them rebuild (because we're Americans, damn it, and we're the good guys), but it's hard not to believe we're there to pillage on behalf of the same corrupt elite that sent us in there in the first place. Here's a good prediction of what's likely to happen:

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/sep2003/bush-s24.shtml

Bush at the UN—a war criminal takes the podium
By Bill Vann
24 September 2003

<edit>

In the meantime, the gangster regime in Washington intends to carry out the systematic plundering of Iraqi wealth, while using military force to suppress a growing movement of national resistance.

The Bush administration’s plans were spelled out over the weekend, when Washington’s handpicked finance minister in the Iraqi Quisling regime unexpectedly unveiled a blueprint for the country’s economic development.

This economic “reform” package—made public at the International Monetary Fund-World Bank meeting in Dubai and signed into law by Washington’s proconsul in Baghdad, Paul Bremer—amounts to a US plan for the wholesale privatization of the Iraqi economy. It imposes investment, trade and tax policies geared entirely to the interests of US multinationals at the expense of the Iraqi people.

The precedent for this plan is the kind of disastrous economic “shock therapy” introduced in the former Soviet Union more than a decade ago, leading to the plummeting of living standards for the vast majority and the creation of a wealthy criminal elite. In Iraq, however, the process is to be carried out at the point of a US gun, with the assurance that the overwhelming share of profits will be reaped by politically connected American corporations like Halliburton and Bechtel.

The plan calls for the privatization of everything from electric power, to hospitals and a myriad of state-owned industries. This process would inevitably involve a form of brutal triage, in which those few industries considered profitable would be taken over by US corporations, with the rest shut down and their workers thrown onto the scrap heap.

It allows for 100 percent foreign ownership in all sectors, save natural resources, and reduces trade tariffs to a minimum. Foreign companies would be guaranteed full and immediate remittance of all profits, dividends, interest and royalties.

more...

GO DENNIS. WE NEED YOU NOW AND SO DOES THE REST OF THE WORLD.

:kick:

:bounce:

He's a scapper.

:bounce:

The money and the deceit involved in the "reconstruction of Iraq" is THE story that needs to be told. It's called 'war profiteering', and liberals and other straight thinkers don't like it.

The muddy waters...

The best editorial I've seen comes from a rather long piece at >> ..

http://www.nationinstitute.org/tomdispatch/index.mhtml?pid=980 ..

The juice is about half-way down the page, under the heading "Legacy corporations:" >> of special interest is the link to New Bridge Strategies, LLC, which is the corporation set up to "sell off Iraq". The article goes on to detail the links to the Bush administration (it's not just Cheney). LLC link included in the article >> .. http://www.newbridgestrategies.com/index.asp ..

And my "favorite" link in the article >> .. http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com/2003_09_01_riverbendblog_archive.html#106436048107865414 ..
which is a blog entry written by an Iraqi woman who is THERE and tells first hand how inefficient and rotten the "reconstruction of Iraq" really is. This is the story that needs to be told, and a big part of the resistance to our 'help'.

When Gov. Dean was alerted to this yesterday, he issued a statement which gives a good summary of the whole dirty lot >> .. http://blog.deanforamerica.com/archives/001731.html#more ..

... "And now we learn about New Bridge Strategies, a company that confirms people's worst fears about their government by blatantly seeking to trade its insider-influence for lucrative contracts. Is rebuilding Iraq a humanitarian enterprise, or a massive giveaway program for Republican conglomerates and insiders? Who does this government belong to--the people or the special interests?" ...

n/t

Your reply made my day!!

O8)

We did not authorize the invasion of Iran.
We did not authorize the invasion of North Korea.
We did not authorize the bombing of civilians in Afghanistan.
We did not authorize permanent detainees in Guantanamo Bay.
We did not authorize the withdrawal from the Geneva Convention.
We did not authorize military tribunals suspending due process and habeas corpus.
We did not authorize assassination squads.
We did not authorize the resurrection of COINTELPRO.
We did not authorize the repeal of the Bill of Rights.
We did not authorize the revocation of the Constitution.
We did not authorize national identity cards.
We did not authorize the eye of Big Brother to peer from cameras throughout our cities.
We did not authorize an eye for an eye.
Nor did we ask that the blood of innocent people, who perished on September 11, be avenged with the blood of innocent villagers in Afghanistan.
We did not authorize the administration to wage war anytime, anywhere, anyhow it pleases.
We did not authorize war without end.
We did not authorize a permanent war economy.

and, we ARE NOT AUTHORIZING ANOTHER $87 BILLION TO CONTINUE PLAYING THIS SICK GAME!!!!!!!! :nuke:



DENNIS KUCINICH FOR PRESIDENT IN 2004!!!!! :D

:kick: :kick: :kick: :kick: :kick: :kick: :kick: :kick: :kick: :kick:

Wish he had dual-nationality!

:D

I have nothing but admiration and respect for this man. He is without doubt the most extraordinary of all the candidates that are running for the nomination. It is too bad that many Democrats are selling themselves and the country short by dismissing Kucinich as one that cannot win, a self-fulfilling prophecy brought about their own lack of faith in their own liberal ideals and in the good judgment of the American people.

Hes "unelectable" thats your choice not ours. We need people like him. He takes stands and Ive been told a million times now that he cant win. Why? You think your guy has more power than this man who has been fighting Bush as much as anyone. Yet superficality and fear get to people and they say stuff like this. Its too bad because he really is the best of the bunch. I will always be a proud Kucinich supporter.

Keep up the good work!

but it's a terrible move.

If he succeeded in cutting off the money they wouldn't bring the troops home, they would just blame the whole thing on the "traitors" who kept the Iraqi school wall from getting painted or whatever. I know all the money is earmarked straight for Bush's cronies but the inevitable defeat we are facing over there would be blamed squarely on him for not "supporting the troops" as if that price tag meant that any day now the Iraqi's were going to love us and build a few McDonalds and start subscribing to the Wall Street Journal for our $86 billion.

I posted this story as a separate thread for DUers uninterested in the efforts of Kucinich, but the numbers indicate a significant opportunity for the Democrats to force the Bush Administration to bring an end to the US pillaging of Iraq.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/Politics/iraq_spending031002_poll.html

Oct. 2— Three weeks of White House lobbying for its Iraq package has failed to sway public opinion: A broad majority of Americans continue to oppose spending an additional $87 billion on the war and rebuilding effort there.

Sixty-two percent in this ABCNEWS/Nightline poll do not want to spend that kind of additional money, almost precisely the level of opposition that initially greeted the president's proposal. Thirty-six percent support the package.

President Bush's rating for handling the situation in Iraq is also flat, and near its career low. The public divides, with 50 percent approving and 47 percent disapproving. That's about where it's been all month, but down from 67 percent approval in June and a peak of 75 percent at the end of April, just before Bush declared the major fighting over.

If Congress does approve the $87 billion request, Americans fracture over how to pay for it. The leading option — selected by 35 percent — is to eliminate Bush's recent tax cut. Twenty-nine percent would cut spending on other programs to cover the cost, while 17 percent favor increasing the federal budget deficit.

more...

I am supporting Dean, but I gotta say that Kucinich has my heart of hearts these days.

and this is yet another admirable action!

The 77 senators who voted for this war.

Byrd Warns "We Stand Passively Mute"

by Senator Robert Byrd:
"To contemplate war is to think about the most horrible of human experiences.
On this February day, as this nation stands at the brink of battle, every American
on some level must be contemplating the horrors of war.

http://byrd.senate.gov/byrd_speeches/byrd_speeches_2003february/byrd_speeches_2003march_list/byrd_speeches_2003march_list_1.html

Democrats Yes

Baucus, Mont.; Bayh, Ind.; Biden, Del.; Breaux, La.; Cantwell, Wash.; Carnahan, Mo.; Carper, Del.; Cleland, Ga.;
Clinton, N.Y.; Daschle, S.D.; Dodd, Conn.; Dorgan, N.D.; Edwards, N.C.; Feinstein, Calif.; Harkin, Iowa; Hollings,
S.C.; Johnson, S.D.; Kerry, Mass.; Kohl, Wis.; Landrieu, La.; Lieberman, Conn.; Lincoln, Ark.; Miller, Ga.; Nelson,
Fla.; Nelson, Neb.; Reid, Nev.; Rockefeller, W.Va.; Schumer, N.Y.; Torricelli, N.J.

http://www.allhatnocattle.net/senate_roll_call_on_iraq_resolut.htm

Just tell the GOP that they can use their own brains, not Bush's!

I hope he can pull this off. He certainly has the American sentiment behind him, but a bunch of Republican congressman to work against.

inspections for 6-9 months is in this "emergency bill."Surprise, surprise. It comes out of the "reconstruction " part, the same part that has us paying $32,000 for a $14,000 pickup truck, and authorizes a million dollar memorial to Saddam's victims(which the Iraqis don't want.)

And they call this bill an "emergency."

Troops:If the U. S. turned over control to the U. N., we could have our troops out by December, replaced by experienced UN peace-keeping troops.
Money: The EU has already promised $200 million if the U. N. is in charge, and I bet that Arab countries would contribute toward reconstruction, because they hate the instability.