I wasn't too sure about Cindy Sheehan before this latest outburst

...but then I read all the reasons people are providing for why she should NOT have disrupted Emanuel's preff conference today...and it hit me...the only way we are going to impose our wishes is to replicate 1,000,000 Cindy Sheehan's.

I realize now that she "get's it" better than most. She understands that only the Dems can stop this madness. THEY are the ones who need to be pressured, hounded and ridiculed until they do exactly what it was that we hired them for. If anyone believes that they will DO anything without people like Sheehan shaming them, may not have the most realistic expectations.

So thank you Cindy, you won me over.

I'm pretty sure that it's only the really annoying people who manage to cause real change.

W has tons of money to use out of the defense appropriation that was passed. It was one of the only things Congress did pass in the last session. BF said that if they didn't fund the war, W is able to then draw funds from the defense budget and keep it going.

Btw, BF said he would vote against more money for the war.

be a while before anymore money is asked for. at that point the dems can then not give them the money. that is how the dems have to do it. along with investigating this whole mess too. but it is not something congress can say, k.... we want them to come home. from some posts i am seeing, i am wondering if people understand how the dems have to do it in order to bring the troops home. i think they are also going to work on getting their timeline, but geez... we all know bush wont go for it.

:(

it is important that people know how the dems have to do it and where we are at now. so they are not demanding something of dems that dems can not do. i am all for a huge push next time bush asks for money.

not speaking of you of course, but often on this board i hear a call to democrats we elect to do things they cannot do and find that counterproductive.

This is the most critical disaster in American history - a little guts can go a long way.

to do this. from what i know the only way to stop pres with war is not fund it. is that correct?

The Dems need to declare that the mission in Iraq is finished. We won. Get the hell out!

Actually, * has already done that after the first few months.
They need to ask if the 'Mission was Accomplished', why are we still there?

Strictly a publicity move, but it may take the wind out of the Idiot-Hawks blow-hard mouthpieces. Congress has the power to declare war, let them undeclare it, or declare it's over.
Just get the troops out of Iraq and end this nightmare.

do they have the powers? are there the votes? they do have rule of law to follow, whether bush did or not, does not mean the dems can break the law. i have not heard any one suggest this is a possibility until just recently. i dont think they have the power to say get out. if they dont have the power to say get out, why are you demanding this of the dems. now from what i hear they can put a referendum together and vote on it. that is what i am hearing that feinstein, feingold? is doing. that is how congress procedes. and it will be voted on.

We could take this country back in record time!

He richly deserves this interruption.

From his website

http://www.house.gov/emanuel/aboutrahm.shtml


pass the Brady Act; enact the historic 1994 crime bill, which put 100,000 new police officers on the street; secure passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement and other trade measures; reform welfare; raise the minimum wage; and balance the federal budget.

He richly deserves a good calling out.

it is smart to know who the insiders are.

Probably because he knows he'd be in a bad position if he did, he knows most of the Democratic Party rank and file oppose it. I find no evidence that he does. If you can show some statement to the contrary, let me know.


http://www.counterpunch.org/walsh10242006.html
I think it makes a very good case.

Did you read any of the blogs which followed individual congressional races? I wish I had a nickel for how many times I read (in such places as firedoglake or digby) that Emanuel was purposely hampering the chances of ANTIWAR DEMOCRATIC POTENTIAL CANDIDATES.

Emanuel is looking more and more like a Lieberman Democrat to me. While he deserves praise for his work in building the new majority, it is still very apparent to me that he supports this fraudulent Iraq war--or, at the very least, that he is not moved to END IT.

He was the right person for Cindy Sheehan to protest. (The republicans are now irrelevant.) And his policies regarding this fraudulent war are the very policies I am glad to see Russ Feingold opposing.

And I'd like to see what they are going to do. The media isn't giving them a chance, saying already they don't have a plan. I am giving them a chance.

that we voted for them.

repukes we're always in their reps faces (and in their ears) about what they wanted!

We definitely won't get an end to this war in Iraq if we don't keep hounding the Dems by telling them what WE want!

bush payroll. Forget about our media, their asses should hung out to dry too.

We can "see what they're going to do" while we shout. I would like to instill a bit more urgency in our so-called representatives. I have yet to see them even commit to the principle of ending the war.

They respond to the demands of the people. It is our responsibility to hold their feet to the fire. Cindy Sheehan is doing just that.

Cindy's political trajectory over these last few years one would see in her words and analysis quite a maturation and level of sophistication that points to a deep understanding of how the game works. She understands the BS of political theatre and how much it costs us all.

I missed the brouhaha if you've got a link I'd appreciate it.

Just think how far the Civil Rights would've come if they had bided their time and remained polite.

I'm not quite sure about that. Would Rahm Emmanuel's press conference actually have been noticed by ANYONE if Cindy Sheehan had not interrupted it?

conservative, pro-war republicans, generals, etc., joining with dems to defund it.

That strikes me as wrongheaded. Now, if people would like to convince the majority of something that is fine, but 'imposing' seem a bit undemocratic to me.

in congress, in the electorate, in the state house, and in the outhouse. The majority spoke in November and the message was not muddled.

and I've reluctantly come to the conclusion that the DLC is simply another AIPAC/PNAC instrument for more destruction.

And Bush isn't going to take any hints (like a midterm mandate to change by his party losing everything). The Dems are going to have to do something drastic. I argued on this site before that the Dems can't risk defunding the military, but I've changed my mind. With the "surge" talk (and NOT to train Iraqis!!!) and the "sacrifice" crap that we are going to hear next week... we must get this this evil idiot out of office and away from the military command. Anything and everything that we can do to stop him must be done.

These are the courageous foot soldiers who are putting their lives on the line to do the right thing now.

:patriot:

plus, she is ever so gleeful about her son's death.

Why the fuck should "we" listen to her??? :sarcasm:

here is my poorly worded posting on it also. Thanks for the succinct writing.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x3036058

We need to pressure our pols to do what we want them to do, not what their corporate contributors want them to do.

:shrug:

Not even going to give them a chance to get sworn in.

That's a red herring, right?

not going to get it. go, cindy!

and if we don't hold their feet to the fire, it's gonna be "same old same old" for the next two years . . . the people have spoken, but rest assured that the Democratic goal is to do as LITTLE as possible to upset the applecart, i.e. the corporate contributions they all benefit from . . .

but since it's the corporations that are largely responsible for the vast majority of our critical problems -- the war, global warming, environmental destruction, the healthcare crisis, degradation of the food supply, etc. -- the ONLY way to solve problems is going to be to take on the corporations and STRICTLY regulgate what they can and can not do . . . this is a battle that the Dems most definitely do NOT want to initiate, so it's up to us to convince them of it's absolute necessity . . .

Cindy Sheehan has the right idea . . . now all we need is about a million more Cindy Sheehan's to keep the pressure on until the Dems start addressing our problems by attacking their root causes . . . and in most cases, those root causes are entangled with corporate actions, inactions, and illegalities that MUST be brought under citizen control via the Congress . . .

I wasn't there, but I'm sure there were people who poo-pooed the tactics used in the Boston Tea Party. Cindy had a child who was murdered for a lie, and the murder is still free to kill. She and the others with her are trying to send the Dems a strong messages that she is deeply concerned about the lives of the troops and that the first priority of the new Congress is to bring the troops home.

her son, but she needs more support from us.

where white men hid behind Mohawk disguises? I poo-poo those tactics.

Well la dee fucking da!

:rofl:

Poo-poo was from verse18's post.

Disguising yourself during a demonstration is a little bit cowardly, but disguising yourself as another group is unjustifiable.

I gotta poo-poo it again.

were too loud, I give those protestors my utmost respect and admiration. They were reciting something loud and clear. Yes, we need more voices like Cindy!!

party leaders on the real priorities?


Is ending the war something that can wait for the next election?

Outta the park!

What you said, burythehatchet!!!!

AbsoFUCKINGlutely what you said!!!!

We need 1,000,000 Cindy's. The war is illigal. That should be reason enough not to prolong it.

what needs to be done.

Rahm Emanuel does not.
:kick:44!
Death to tyrants!