Home
Refresh   Tag(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (more...)  (less...)
Add to My Group
October 28, 2007 at 08:07:29

View Ratings | Rate It

What Will it Look Like After the Dems Declare they Refuse to Further Fund the War

submit to twitter
submit to reddit
submit to digg

Tell A Friend

By Rob Kall (about the author)     Page 1 of 5 page(s)

opednews.com     Permalink

For OpEdNews: Rob Kall - Writer

The other day, I got the idea that we've been going about the effort to get congress to stop the war the wrong way, kind of like Bush attacked Iraq. Bush planned the attack but not the follow-up occupation.

I asked leading progressives what it will look like when and after the dems inform Bush that they will no longer fund the occupation. Responses came in from Dennis Kucinich, Cindy Sheehan, Jeff Cohen, Mike Malloy, David Swanson, Swami Beyondananda, Brent Budowsky

Progressives, myself included, are calling for refusing to fund the war any further. The word is that Dems in congress are afraid they will be cast as failing to provide for the troops. I figured that if we explored the possible responses, plans could be made on how to effectively deal with them.


So I started talking to people, asking them what they thought things would look like AFTER the congress refused to fund the war any further.

What would Bush do?

What would the Republicans do?

What would the media do?

What would the pentagon do?

What would retired generals do?


I put the word out to some of our writers, got a few replies, and spoke to Dave Lindorff and then, set up an interview with Democratic presidential primary candidate and congressman Dennis Kucinich. Kucinich has been the most outspoken advocate for de-funding the war. We talked about how this would work.

First, I spoke to journalist Dave Lindorff. Here's what he had to say:
I think that they've decided that they want the war to continue 'til november. I dont' think they're afraid at all. I've concluded that they want Bush in power and they want the war running. (He writes about this in his article Dead Men and Women Walking)

Emanuel has actually said that-- that Bush in power is good for Democrats and that the war is good for democrats.


If dems cut the budget for the war, the military would have to come up with contingency plans for how to get out. It would change the debate entirely. Obviously, there would be plenty of people saying we're cutting and running. But there would be plenty of retired generals saying it's about time. The dems would be cheered by the troops coming home.

With 70% of Americans and 80 or 90 % of Dems wanting the war to be over, who are they worried about-- the die hard republican core who hates them anyway?

For one thing, democrats would finally NOT be called wimps, which is the disaster they face next november.

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5

 

Rob Kall is executive editor, publisher and site architect of OpEdNews.com, Host of the Rob Kall Bottom Up Radio Show (WNJC 1360 AM), President of Futurehealth, Inc, (more...)
 

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

Follow Me on Twitter

 

Book Recommendations for "Activism Anti War Democratic"
European Socialists Respond to Fascism: Ideology, Activism and Contingency in the 1930s
by Gerd-Rainer Horn

$120.00
Lowest New Price $106.51

Number of pages: 224
Publisher: Oxford University Press, USA

The American Civil Liberties Union and the Making of Modern Liberalism, 1930-1960
by Judy Kutulas

$35.00
Lowest New Price $18.80

Number of pages: 320
Publisher: The University of North Carolina Press

View All Book Recommendations

Share this page: (what's this?)                   Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

FACEBOOK      DIGG THIS      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      NETSCAPE      My Web      Tag!RawSugar      Blink List     (More...)

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
37 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
 

What about Iraq and the world? by Joe Zingher on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 8:55:03 AM
Nonsense by Rick Fisk on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 8:59:17 AM
Pure nonsense by Babyhuey on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 12:13:01 PM
ahhh another first time right wing commenter by Rob Kall on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 2:34:05 PM
Rob, you're missing the point by Rick Fisk on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 8:58:08 AM
Your article should've been titled "Why the Dems Won't Refus by Richard Mynick on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 10:03:41 AM
How much is enough? by ardee D. on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 10:20:50 AM
Bye, bye, Nancy? by Kyle Johnson on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 10:57:18 AM
Let's Not Overlook Bill Richardson; he is showing Leadership by Stephen Cassidy on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 11:05:55 AM
great, well organized, thoughtful analysis by John Howes on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 11:27:36 AM
I've given up on the Democrats by Babyhuey on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 12:06:29 PM
Wishful thinking? by Ben Marble, M.D. on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 12:17:23 PM
this is not even funny by Pat Smith on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 12:25:44 PM
You're confusing two very different things. by Richard Mynick on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 12:54:24 PM
This is sick... by Tony Forest on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 1:01:30 PM
Know a bit about child abuse, pattiepace7? by Rob Kall on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 2:42:55 PM
Pattipace by Bob Gormley on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 3:05:16 PM
Just for emphasis by ardee D. on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 5:42:47 PM
The anger management problem of the corporate profit machine by Darin Walker on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 1:10:37 PM
Well said ... by Mr M on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 1:20:35 PM
Having it both ways by Mr M on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 1:13:59 PM
you should turn this into an article by Rob Kall on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 2:46:11 PM
They can pull funding to the troops..... by Joe Rathbun on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 3:13:23 PM
Mr M called it by truthtruffle on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 3:13:57 PM
ITS ALL THE CONTROL OF THE CFR,TC GLOBALIST by RICHARD SHADE on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 3:36:40 PM
Continue article by Darin Walker on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 5:39:49 PM
"Do"? by Roger on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 10:12:38 PM
Why NOT Kucinich? by treehugger on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 10:31:52 PM
Why not Kucinich? by ardee D. on Monday, Oct 29, 2007 at 9:00:48 AM
The war is over when... by Michael Collins on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 10:43:19 PM
By the way..."the Dems" are complicit in the war, up to by Michael Collins on Sunday, Oct 28, 2007 at 10:45:36 PM
You will lose everything. by David C Beach on Monday, Oct 29, 2007 at 1:15:39 AM
Far worse than the fanatic Islam by Tony Forest on Monday, Oct 29, 2007 at 2:50:11 PM
Do you by ardee D. on Thursday, Nov 1, 2007 at 9:01:11 AM
It's too easy to be biased by Andris on Monday, Oct 29, 2007 at 2:36:52 AM
What Will it Look Like After the Dems Declare they Refuse to by Eddy Schmid on Monday, Oct 29, 2007 at 4:05:19 AM
No false hopes by Rob Kall on Monday, Oct 29, 2007 at 11:21:51 AM

 
Want to post your own comment on this Article? Post Comment


 

 

 

Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews

Powered by Populum