Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Feingold: White House is Whistling Past Afghan Graveyard
In an exclusive interview with The Nation, Sen. Russ Feingold defends his lone vote to oppose an amendment to the latest defense spending bill.
In 2001 Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold famously and courageously stood up as the lone senator to vote against the Patriot Act. On July 21 he did it again, casting the lone vote opposing Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman's amendment to the 2010 Defense Authorization bill that immediately authorizes an expansion of the military by 30,000 troops. In an exclusive interview with The Nation, Feingold says he "did not believe it was in the best interest of our troops or our national security." The measure passed 93-1.
Feingold said he is increasingly disturbed by the war in Afghanistan,
where troop levels are escalating by the month, US casualties are
mounting and the insurgency is expanding. "It appears that no one even
asked the president about [Afghanistan] at his [July 22] press
conference after apparently thirty or thirty-one Americans were killed
in Afghanistan last month. How is that possible?" Feingold asks. "People
have to wake up to what's going on in Afghanistan, and my vote is a
request that people wake up to what's happening, which is we are getting
deeper and deeper into this situation in a way that I don't think
necessarily makes sense at all and may actually be counterproductive."
On July 23 Vice President Joe Biden told the BBC that "in terms of national interest of Great Britain, the US and Europe, [the war in Afghanistan] is worth the effort we are making and the sacrifice that is being felt.... And more will come." Feingold said Biden's statement and requests from Defense Secretary Robert Gates for more US troops in Afghanistan are making him "very worried that this is heading into a free fall of support for something that may not make sense."
Feingold believes "the so-called surge may actually make matters worse by pushing militants into Pakistan, a nuclear-armed nation which is still not effectively dealing with terrorist sanctuaries in that country." He is particularly concerned with what he calls the "balloon effect:" resistance fighters in Afghanistan being pushed into Pakistan, where "they may be safer."
As a member of the Senate Intelligence and Foreign Relations committees, Feingold has grilled both civilian and military officials. In May he asked Obama's special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, Richard Holbrooke, "Are we sure that when we...get up to a level of 70,000 troops, are we sure that that isn't making the situation in Pakistan potentially worse?" Holbrooke replied that the troop buildup "could end up creating a pressure in Pakistan which would add to the instability."
"Are you sure that the troop buildup in Afghanistan will not be counterproductive vis-à-vis Pakistan?" Feingold asked. "No," Holbrooke replied. "I'm only sure that we are aware of the problem."
Feingold received a similar answer from the chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Mike Mullen, in May. "Can I [be] 100 percent certain that won't destabilize Pakistan? I don't know the answer to that," Mullen said.
"This is something I've been trying to hammer away at," Feingold tells The Nation. "They admitted that it's a problem, but where's the follow-up? This administration is almost whistling past the graveyard on this issue." Feingold added, "How is it that the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and our special envoy to this region both agree that this could be a problem and that it is not talked about as a serious mistake if we're going to keep increasing troops and increase that effect? This is, in my view, the central flaw in what is otherwise a policy that is better than the Bush administration's. This is the central flaw in the thinking of the administration on this issue, and it needs to be pursued."
In the halls of Congress, Afghanistan remains the "good war," though little by little, legislators are speaking out and a handful are standing up. In June thirty House Democrats voted against continued funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It was a rare moment when the collective votes of the small number of antiwar legislators mattered--indeed, the bill almost failed. That was due in large part to the fact that Republicans overwhelmingly opposed the bill because a massive bailout for the International Monetary Fund was attached to the spending measure. Consequently, the White House needed to persuade some of the antiwar Democrats to vote with the president instead of with their conscience or their constituents. The White House feverishly lobbied the Hill and threatened some freshmen representatives with not campaigning for them in 2010 if they did not switch their votes in favor of the war-funding bill, which narrowly passed. The Senate, however, is a much bleaker landscape when it comes to opposing the expansion of the war in Afghanistan--as Feingold's lonely dissent underscores. In May Feingold was one of just three senators--and the only Democrat--to vote against a $91 billion war spending bill.
On a wide range of issues that Feingold has hammered away at for years, the senator finds himself confronting a Democratic president for whom he campaigned. Some of the Bush-era policies that Feingold passionately opposed are now Obama's policies. To Feingold's credit, the change in administrations has clearly not altered his core principles. Since January 20 Feingold has pressed the Obama administration on Bush-era policies that are either being continued or expanded under Obama.
In a May 22 letter to Obama, Feingold expressed concern over the president's suggestion that the United States can engage in indefinite detentions, saying such a practice "violates basic American values and is likely unconstitutional." In the same letter, Feingold said Obama's policy could set "the stage for future Guantánamos, whether on our shores or elsewhere." While the Obama administration has continued to defend the warrantless wiretapping program in various court cases, Feingold has hounded the president to "formally" oppose the program, which Obama has thus far refused to do. In a June letter to Obama, Feingold suggested that by not "renounc[ing] the assertions of executive authority made by the Bush administration with regard to warrantless wiretapping," Obama may be sending a message that the Bush-era "justifications were and remain valid."
Recently, in a sharp break from many Democrats, Feingold wrote Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder, calling for a prosecutor to investigate the torture program. Feingold said the investigation should target officials at "the highest levels of government, which is where the need for accountability is most acute. Those who developed, authorized and provided legal justification for the interrogations should be held responsible."
In some cases, the policies are getting worse, as Feingold has pointed out. "It's both an easier and a lonelier role," he says. "It's easier because this president understands these issues and cares about them deeply. He wants to support the side of the law and civil liberties, but he's getting counterpressures from, obviously, elements of his administration that are not wanting him to give any ground in this area at all."
"But it's lonelier," Feingold adds, "because when I do have to disagree, yes, it's disagreeing not only with all the Republicans but even a Democratic president and some Democratic senators. That's a role I still have to play. I'm here to defend the Constitution and try to protect this country. That's why I'm here. And if it means sometimes I'm going to disagree with my president, I will."
- Posted in
49 Comments so far
Show AllWell now I know which senators to vote against - both of them.
Senator Feingold....do not fly in small aircraft...and for that matter, 757's, either.....be overly cautious.
...and then there was one.
Thank you ,once again, Mr. Feingold. Obama and the war-mongering corporatist democrats give us little "hope" for "change". You are a rare exception.
Remind me, Whwt is our objective in Afghanistan?
Hey there's money to be made selling weapons, importing opium...this war is enriching some very important people!
Israel.
Zionism.
Control of pipelines relevant to oil & gas productions to prep for (hopefully) nonmilitary conflicts with India, China, and Europe.
Is there any information on or books about the oil and gas production and pipelines? What countries are they in and where do they run to? Which countries produce the oil and gas, how much and who gets it. What American companies are in foreign countries running the oil and gas businesses? I have always, unfortunately, been weak on geography...but I'm trying to learn more. When there is talk about the Russian pipelines, I also wonder where they go, where the oil and gas production is, etc. I just don't have a clear picture. I would like to see a earth globe with points on where the oil is produced and where the pipelenes run. I'm sure the oil is like the "spice" in Dune. It's everything. I just want to understand it better. I know we're in afghanistan because of oil, but, I forget, why are we there according to the US government? How come we can go wherever we want without asking the people of a country whether or not we can occupy their country? Oh, I know it's because we do what we do because we can...but.
I have found Pepe Escobar's comments on CD and on The Real News and his *Globalistan: How the Globalized World is Dissolving Into Liquid War* particularly useful for this angle.
I would go to Robert Fisk's THE GREAT WAR FOR CIVILIZATION for the deep history of the wars in the region, assuming you have some time and a strong stomach. It's over 1,000 pages of almost unmitigated imperialist violence, but Fisk writes like a song -- beautifully clear, perceptive prose. Would I could send the man peace.
A good friend tells you the truth even if you don't want to hear it. In questioning our escalation of war in Afghastan Sen. Feingold is being Obama's good friend.
A good friend tells you the truth even if you don't want to hear it. In questioning our escalation of war in Afghastan Sen. Feingold is being Obama's good friend.
Senator Feingold is unique in the Senate.
He has courage, (balls).
The other 99 are playing ball.
This is the U.S. budget:
- = War and weapons
+ = Social Programs
* = INTEREST PAYMENTS ON THE NATIONAL DEBT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
********************************************************************************
********************************************************************************
********************************************************************************
********************************************************************************
********************************************************************************
********************
The Federal reserve banks have gamed the government so that deficit spending is ensured (i.e. lots of "defense" spending) because deficits require borrowing from that group of private banks called the "fed". If we did not run deficits, we would then pay less and less interest as the national debt was paid down. This is a no-no for bankers. The "social programs will break the government" canard is total bullshit. Our government would run a surplus if we didn't have the bloated war and war profiteering budget. Our people would be more secure, healthier and more productive. The big downside to all this is that bankers would make less money, the stock market wouldn't be as profitable (more capital would be invested in productivity than speculation) and wealth would be more evenly spread. Why is this a downside? Because a happy, secure and independent ppopulace is very difficult to manipulate and intimidate.
When did the elite figure all this out? Just before the Spanish-American war. It's been great for the elite ever since. Corporate personhood began the attack on all people of conscience and good will. Stop believing the myths and allowing yourself to be gamed. Don't cooperate with the crooks.
Yours is a great diagram, except that it only works in a fixed font like courier. People need to copy it into a word processor and change the font to "courier" to see what it shows. Also, I would like a link or something to show that the graph is correct.
I have multiple sources.
1) Free newsletter on the economy from The Daily Reckoning by Bill Bonner.
2) The Prudent Bear web site.
3) Free news letter on the economy from The Rude Awakening.
4) The Market Ticker web site.
These sites have articles that detail the continuous subterfuge of our government to relabel expenditures in pallatable terms. For this reason, I don't sent you straight to the IRS or some Government site that has "official" figures. At last count, our interest payments on the debt were approaching levels that, were we an emerging market country, would have Moodys rating US Treasuries as junk bonds. Only the fact that we still have the world's reserve currency is keeping this ponzi scheme going. Oh, Jon Markman of Microsoft Money is another source. It's a long slog.
What a rarity a politician with integrity, a case for cloning.
Thanks Feingold, Senator Udall sold out when he became a Senator.
Wow. There's a person in the Senate.
AFPAK is where empires go to die.
Just like the whistling man---let's just walk away.
Given that perpetuasl war + global warming + economic collapse = doomsday, not to mention the fact that time's running out, what's the significance of Russ Feingold being one of only three Senators voting against the 91 billion dollar War Funding Bill? That we have to try harder to put people in Congress who'll, among other things, stop funding wars? Try harder at the same game and home for the best, is that what? And how long will it take for us to put enough anti-war Senators in Congress to shut down these wars? "Oh, but that's the only game in town, so what else can one do but try to elect better representatives. Besides, "Even though nothing may come of it, what else can I do?" Give up on so called representative democracy before it's too late, that's what.
We are not leaving Afghanistan until 2014 and maybe never. That is the year that the Unocal pipeline to India is scheduled for completion. It runs smack through the center of Afghanistan and Pakistan. Another offshoot of it dumps out at the arabian Sea where ships will take it from there. Must we die for India's Industry as more and more US jobs are outsourced to that slave colony of the US? This whole thing is nothing but an end-run around US labor. And I anticipate this intentional overspending/bailout mania is engineered only to give weight to the NeoCON excuse that all "entitlements" must end.
We are really screwed if we can't figure a way to get more people out of the Faux News Matrix.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Afghanistan_Pipeline
TJ
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." - Thomas Jefferson
If Feingold feels alone, please, please imagine how non-existent ordinary Afghans here feel in this global graveyard.
Our Afghan youth volunteer peace group in Afghanistan had posted this on Our Journey to Smile :
American Vice President Joe Biden reiterated the Obama administration's rationale for the conflict. "This is the place from which the attacks of 9/11 and all those attacks in Europe from al-Qaeda have flowed - from Afghanistan and Pakistan."
None of the 19 hijackers of 9/11 were Afghan.
15 were Saudi Arabians, 2 from the United Arab Emirates, 1 Lebanese and 1 Egyptian.
Not only are our feelings constantly shattered, humanity’s rationale is in pieces too.
Peace from Hakim in Afghanistan
Thanks, Hakim, for putting things into perspective. Obvious as these things may seem to us, they bear constant repeating, if only to counteract the constant repetition of the lies. How extraordinary that so many human beings could be mobilized, and so many others, in far greater number, be affected and afflicted, not to mention killed, by the dense web of falsehoods that constitutes the official narrative of the past eight years, used to justify unconscionable acts of violence by those who pretend to govern us. However much we, like so many, may see through the lies, we must forever be reminded of the human costs and made to see the faces of those who truly bear the brunt of the killing and destruction. And so I thank you, Hakim, for doing this, and for emanating so gentle a spirit in the face of such ignorance and indifference. May the peace you harbor within inhabit, one day, the world around you.
Not only that, but several of the named "hijackers" have been found alive and well in several Mid-Eastern countries. Apparently their names were just used by the CIA? SS? NSA?
9-11 is possibly the biggest hoax in history, and has been covered up and obfuscated by the whole power of the US security and law enforcement agencies.
There have been a number of disastrous skyscraper fires and explosions. Some have burned furiously for days. When the fires burned out, the structures were still there, the steel intact. Fire and police witnesses spoke of hearing a series of explosions just before, and as, the buildings came down. Apparently, key people and government officials were told not to fly on September 11th, and to call in sick if they worked in the towers. Vast amounts of money were made on transactions, airline stocks, property investments, etc., just before the towers. The owner of the towers made hundreds of millions from the insurance. Most of the evidence, the steel, etc., was removed, sent away to be melted down, before those who were suspicious could get permission to examine the wreckage. Even at that, evidence of a controlled demolition has been found.
Anyone who has been at an airliner crash can tell you that whatever hit the Pentagon, it was not an airliner. There should have been engines and wing debris all over the lawn, or against or penetrating the building. Nothing, just a hole that went through a number of reinforced walls. And, of course, there is the fact that all of the security cameras that would have recorded the impact were immediately impounded by the FBI or SS. Nobody has seen them since.
We've been whistling past our own graveyard for many years now. So now we are creating graveyards across the planet to keep our minds off our own ghosts.
I agree, of course, with you, minitrue. I implied all that you say in my few words to Hakim.
تشکر Tashakur. Thanks, Clovis and Minitrue.
Hakim in Afghanistan
I keep hearing "quagmire." "Tar baby" would be more appropriate.
When Bush (W) was pushing Congress for support for the preemptive strike against Iraq Congress did not call middle eastern scholars who would testify that aggression against the Iraqi people would be illegal and immoral. The Nation magazine has been reporting articles of brilliant annalist of U.S. policies that differ with main stream media for many years. These opponents of war have been proven to be correct after the "mistakes" by the government have destroyed foreign and U.S. lives, lands and economies. Senator Russ Feingold is a brave, brilliant, member of Congress who knows that most people read the main stream media and will think that he is soft on defense. Senator Feingold puts the security of America and our children's future ahead of his own political gain. I believe he is a dear and glorious politician.President Obama, please listen to him and other scholars who are against war plans in Afghanistan.
The objective of being in Afghanistan in the first place,[ at least as I see it ]- was to get even with bin laden for refusing the oil pipe line, and then making theats, we will bury you,...-than 9/11 blamed on them. An excuse to attack, invade Iraq out of spite, to eliminate Sadam to please Bush Sr. and the jump back to Afganistan, take control, to be closer to strike Iran to please Israel. The objective then seems to be, the oil pipe line, spite and revenge, and to please the Jews.
Perhaps we should focus on Feingold as a candidate who is for America, not to please another, but to make our country a land that truly stands for each other and for Peace.
Yes, and what nobody wants to investigate are the hundreds of banking transactions between the Carlyle Group and Bin Laden Brothers Construction for Industry. H.W. Bush was director of Carlyle. His son "W" was partnered with Salem Bin Laden (Osama's older brother) in Abusto (later Harken Energy). Salem lost his investment with little bush. Then he had mysterious aircraft trouble in Austin, Texas which killed him.
How come those tasty little bits are never on the "Fair and Balanced" news "fronts"...., er, scams......, I mean, Neocon media?
TJ
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." - Thomas Jefferson
Wellstone would have voted against this stuff.
One wonders about his accident... I wouldn't put it past the Democratic power brokers to have done him in.
Russ Feingold and Gavin Newsom for president and vp in 2016.
I say we keep the white house until we eliminate the stazi DEATH grip of the extreme right for the next 24 years , here is my plan.
Obama gets re-elected in 2012. No brainer, especially if the Republicans try to slander and steal votes again.
Fiengold is my man, he is a true patriot, and understands the constitution and the working man.
Gavin Newsome (San Fransico Mayor )is brilliant, just listen to him speak, and you know is is a great American who loves middle American working class.
Fiengold for 8 years, 2016 to 2024, and Gavin for 8 more 2024 through 2032.
A democrats white from 2008 through 2032, that should put American middle class back in good shape.
Start protecting these men now, do not let the extreme right wing lunatics infiltrate their to organizations to smear them.
They are the Real American Future.
HEY RUSS, I WILL VOTE FOR YOU JUST FOR GETTING RID OF THE PATRIOT ACTS AND THE WEB OF FEAR MONGERING POWER GRABBING FREAKS THAT HAVE ENRICHED THEMSELVES AT TAX PAYER EXPENSE.
I like your project, bfm, but I doubt it could ever work, short of mass mobilization. Eight years of Obama would put the final nails into the coffin of the republic.
It's truly depressing that people of honor and principle like Feingold don't stand a chance of ever becoming president. Why not? And why can't the likes of Feingold and Kucinich even be considered for cabinet posts? Do they not better represent than the president himself the war-weariness and fundamental decency of the people who naively voted for Obama? These are rhetorical questions, of course. We know all too well the answers to them. And not until Americans turn off their TVs and take to the streets by the millions to demand the end of the rule of the lobbies will anything change. The rats in the republic's inner sanctum must be made to feel fear. Somehow the bankers can blackmail the government with disaster and get away with it, but the people, the great mass of the populus, is not even allowed to gather in signficant numbers. We have to find a way to blow the lid off this thing. Shut it all down for a few days. Make them sweat.
What a ray of hope. Clovis, there have to be more people that think like you. You made me cry because you are so right and you said it so well. We can't just roll over, we have to find each other and do something, shut it all down.
I live in a community of blank minds but I have been to meetings not very far away where people talk about this and worry about our wonderful country. I have seen Kuchinic and wanted the chance to vote for him so much it hurt. We are too comfortable in our mini-mansions and tidy little cottages; we need to hurt like the people in "those other countries" and by the time we do it will be late.
You can't make them sweat until you have a mass of people who are willing to challenge the police and the military in the streets, who are frankly willing to die to make their point and willing to attack and if necessary kill police and soldiers acting as enforcers for the government, that is, acting against the rights of the people.
You don't have that in the United States. You don't even have enough people willing to participate in an economic boycott, much less fight the corporations and the government on any collective level. What you do have are leaders of both parties who speak of democracy and freedom while they cut both off at the knees, enabled by a populace that is simply too stupid to see, too unwilling to make the effort to understand, and so ignorant that they can be gulled by someone as stupid and blatantly anti-democratic as Sarah Palin.
The recent so-called revolution in Iran failed and will continue to fail because the people would not, en masse, fight the basij and police. Until a government faces a people united against them and willing to fight to the death, if necessary, that government will stand. The United States, with all its talk of democracy, is no different.
So from a US policy perspective, who are the good guys in Afghanistan? Do we intend on killing all the foreigners and their children we supported during the war against Russia's incursion, the Taliban who we supported prior to 9/11, poppy growers and the warlords who don't support our presence? What will be left besides the US supported puppet government and army? The US created this mess and its solution seems to be to kill, kill, kill into submission. Once again we spend hundreds of billions destroying countries, and relatively nothing rehabiliting the countries we destroyed.
"On July 23 Vice President Joe Biden told the BBC that "in terms of national interest of Great Britain, the US and Europe, [the war in Afghanistan] is worth the effort we are making and the sacrifice that is being felt.... And more will come."
How many troops are Great Britain and Europe sacrificing in their "national interest"?
Feingold's is a lonely voice indeed. Where were Progressive Caucus members Sanders and Udal on this vote? But lest we despair, we need to remember that even the "left" in Congress - except perhaps for Dennis Kucinich, and maybe a few more like Barbara Lee and John Conyers - is well to the right of the American people on the core bread-and-butter issues, and on foreign policy as well.
The stage is set for a political upheaval, and as the economic collapse continues the strain on the whole elaborate system of political and mind control is building toward an inevitable earthquake. Obama represents the last best hope of the "centrist" "Cold War" Democrats - with one foot in the people's camp, one in the world of big-money donors and a core loyalty to the Empire.
This is the final attempt to win something for the people through a grand compromise. And it's failing.
But we must not write off the democratic system. It was ours at the beginning, the fruit of our Revolution, and preserved at the sacrifice of a whole generation in our Civil War. We must instead take it back, reclaim it. Perhaps it will take mass civil disobedience, perhaps a "color revolution", but it will not be about overthrowing the democracy, but about retaking ownership of it.
We will need leaders. And it is right to be watching possible candidates for evidence of their moral fiber, depth of understanding, about their consistency and loyalty to the people.
It's right to be watching something like this vote and asking about the Democrats such as Feingold who stand out from the pack: is he or she the one?
Is Feingold the one?
So is Feingold the one?
Someone is going to have to challenge Obama in the 2012 primaries.
It must be someone who will stand up to Obama, the Blue Dog Democrats and the Oligarchs on a broad range of domestic and international issues, and who has the strength of character and understanding to not compromise on a wedge issue such as support for Israel.
It must be someone who stands squarely on the side of the American working people and is not trying to find common ground with the Oligarchs
It must be someone who can reach and rally the rank-and-file activists of the labor movement, and fire up their hearts and their courage.
It must be someone who speaks not just to and for the hopes of the people but who gives expression to our anger.
Ideally it should be someone of color, because many Afro-Americans may otherwise support Obama no matter what he does, but it must at least be someone who understands the centrality of race in America and the importance of confronting racism and building "black-white" unity.
It must be someone with the skills and instincts of an organizer and a leader, not just a lawmaker. Someone with a proven track record of coalition-building. Someone with a vision of a lasting transformation of American politics, a new kind of politics rooted in and driven by an organized people.
And it must be someone who has the charisma to break through peoples' skepticism and cynicism and touch their hearts.
Dennis Kucinich actually comes pretty close on the issues, understanding, commitment and passion, although maybe weak on leadership and coalition building. We need to look closely at why his campaigns for president never caught fire.
Those who have taken the time and effort to really listen to Kucinich and watch his performance at events like the AFL_CIO rally last year at Chicago's Soldiers Field know that there was a potential in his campaign for a great political upset. And yet, a measure of the task we face is that after two presidential runs, his name recognition is still below 80%. Many who do recognize his name are conditioned to snicker when they hear it, without even being able to explain why. Perhaps this was due to the urgency people felt about finding someone who could beat Bush, and the fact that they had not lost all hope in the system as it is. *Which points to the possibility that it is because we weren't ready!*
But certainly it owed much to his being nearly totally ignored by the corporate media. Which points to a "recognition barrier", our need for a candidate who already has a high name recognition and media presence - if possible.
It is not too soon to be looking at the few people who are our trusted voices on the national political stage, not too soon to be thinking and talking about whether "they're the one" who could do it - or rather who could lead *us* in doing it!
Kucinich again? Barbara Lee? Bernie Sanders? maybe Al Franken? Or Michael Moore?
Or maybe Russ Feingold?
Let's keep looking, asking, talking to each other, and challenging them! And organizing in our communities!
And let's keep *our* hope alive!
Here's an interesting question: Can Eric Cantor, a fascist Republican Jew, be elected president?
Can Russ Feingold, a progressive Democrat Jew, be elected president?
Unfortunately not.
Only a decade ago, the answer was "Yes". But that was before Lieberman was recognized for being the representative from the great State of Israel.
A Democrat(ic) Jew, along with the vast majority of Democrats, are tools of AIPAC.
The reason that they can't be elected is that the association is too obvious. Better to have someone like Obama front for them.
Also - how many truly progressive Democrats are there? It's almost a contradiction in terms.
Are you sure that Feingold goes to Schul every Friday evening and/or Saturday morning? If you have no evidence that he does you are a sad person because in my opinion a Jew is a person who adheres to the Jewish religion and goes regularly to Schul. I know that both orthodox Jews and Hitler declared a person a Jew when his/her mother was a Jewess so I do not need a lecture on that.
George C. Brown - Afghanistan is a "Black Hole" for western outsiders. If it weren't for the oil barons, we'd have absolutely NO business being there! We need to get off of a perpetual war mode, and try peace and reconciliation for a change - - and that goes for the Secretary of State as well (or maybe ESPECIALLY as well).
Yesterday Boone Pickens stated that no amount of drilling for oil on land and in coastal waters of/near the USA will ever get us "energy independence". Eventually most of these wells will go dry. It has been a consistent US policy perhaps since President Eisenhower to make sure that sources of crude are controlled elsewhere in the world when that time comes. It may not be far ahead in the future. The Obama administration has made no changes in this policy. Control of the oil-rich Middle East and of western Africa remains an essential ingredient of our oil-policy. The policy demands that Russian and Chinese influence remain small compared to ours. In Saudi Arabia that is no problem because its government hates/fears Russia and China. It is in the countries on the mainland that the battle for oil and gas occurs. Hence the buttering-up of India. Hence the rumors that we will not withdraw our troops from Iraq in 2011. Hence the war in Afghanistan. Hence the increase of the army's manpower. Hence the worry about the stability of the government of Pakistan. Hence the hassle with Russia over Ukraine and Georgia.
At a time when our soldiers die in Afghanistan, what does the MSM and apparently much of the public talk about? A spat between a professor, a policeman and the "commander-in-chief"!
How many troops are Great Britain and Europe sacrificing in their "national interest"? Gail July 25th, 2009 11:06 am
____________________
And how many Muslims are to be sacrificed in an illegal war ? ? ? ?
The US "War" is against Islam and was successfully promoted by the noecons who support Right Wing Jewish Israeli aggression against Muslims in their agenda to dominate the Middle East.
Since the invasion of Iraq over 1,331,758 Iraqis have been murdered , over 2,000,000 displaced, 4,000,000 orphans created. The WMD called Depleted Uranium is all over Iraq as are Cluster Bombs and the appalling death and destruction has just about caused a civil war within Iraq.
All the above was planned before 9/11 as part of the "New American Century" by the Jewish Zionist American cabal led by Irving Kristol , Richard Perle , Paul Wolfowitz , Lewis "Scooter" Libby ,Elliott Abrams ,Eliot Cohen , Douglas Feith et al.
The neocons were helped by 9/11 which helped start the war on Terror or as they called it the promotion of democracy in the Middle East with the first step being the Invasion of Iraq .
Actually, Maxwell, the displaced (i.e., refugees) in the Iraq war number upwards of four million.
maxwellhammer July 25th, 2009 2:15 pm
"And how many Muslims are to be sacrificed in an illegal war ? ? ? ?"
This sacrifice is obvious but is it really an agression against Muslims or a strategy to secure U.S. future supply of energy? The globe is going to depend on oil for at least the next 20 years, according to experts in geopolitics.
Here's an excellent website on the subject:
http://www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/
The point I was trying to make is when politicians insist on using "national security/interest" as an excuse for going to war and they include other countries in the same sentence, some of us would like to know just how serious these other countries are in defending they're alleged interests.
Feingold is not mouthing mere disagreements with the president. He is voicing complicity by the Obama administration in the illegal policies of the Bush administration. This should be clear to anyone who cherishes the rule of law over that of the rule of men. The significance is that these policies have survived the transition from administration to the other, and will therefore find a defensible establishment within the legal framework. That is not even the lesser evil, but surely the greater for it solidifies these policies into the minds of the governed as normal.