Democracy for New Mexico

Urge Senators to End Iraq Occupation: Support Feingold-Reid

Most of us agree that Sen. Feingold is one of our very best progressive Senators.Time and time again he's stood firmly for ending the Iraq occupation and has consistently introduced and supported legislation with teeth. He makes it easy for you to contact our Senators and urge them to support the Feingold-Reid amendment.

From Sen. Feingold: As you may have already heard, this week I plan to once again introduce binding legislation that uses Congress's 'power of the purse' to safely redeploy our troops out of Iraq.  Last May, with your help, we saw a majority of Democratic senators support a similar proposal.  Unfortunately, too many of my colleagues, on both sides of the aisle, continue to be recklessly timid when it comes to blocking funding for one of the biggest mistakes in the history of our country.

But after yet another week of the same old rhetoric from the White House, Republicans in Congress, and through the testimony of both General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker, my hope is that more of my colleagues will finally join the millions of Americans that agree - now is the time to safely redeploy our brave men and women in uniform out of Iraq.

Tell my colleagues to support Feingold-Reid

To be clear, my proposal blocks further funding for the war AFTER the troops have been safely redeployed.  That emphasis is an important one to make, as some Republicans, and way too many Democrats, have time and again incorrectly made the false claim that they couldn’t support my ‘power of the purse’ proposal because 'we can't cut funding for our troops.'  Any elected official or talking head who puts forth that dishonest argument when discussing my proposal, knows the truth and is simply too timid to take on misleading attacks by the White House.  The Feingold-Reid legislation sets a timetable to redeploy our troops by June 30, 2008 - at which time further funding for the war would be terminated.

Let my colleagues know the truth about Feingold-Reid

While many in Congress have acknowledged that the President has the wrong strategy when it comes to Iraq, Congress has thus far failed to do anything about it.  With our military at the breaking point and our ability to go after those who attacked us on 9/11 hampered by an Iraq-centric foreign policy, the time has come for Congress to use its constitutional power - the 'power of the purse' - to end this misguided war in Iraq.  I will need your help to take another step in our fight.  Please contact your senators today and tell them to support the Feingold-Reid legislation.

Sincerely,

Russ Feingold
United States Senator
Honorary Chair, Progressive Patriots Fund

ABQ Cops Bait, Badger, Ticket Peaceful Protestors

Lots of reports circulating about Saturday's peaceful demonstration against the Iraq occupation near the Truman gate at Kirtland AFB in Albuquerque. Mounted police push abruptly into the crowd on the sidewalk. Cops yell out childish insults like "take a bath" and "shave your armpits" at the perfectly legal demonstrators, many of whom were seniors, exercising their first amendment rights. Read all about it.

One officer with a juvenile taste in messaging shouts "Go Bush" from the loudspeaker of a squad car. Goons ticket only those vehicles that bear bumperstickers on a street where people have often parked during previous demonstrations in the same location, and where no signs prohibiting parking were evident. A man is arrested and held for a long period in a squad car with all the windows closed and no AC.

Albuquerque police overstep their bounds and acti like boorish louts, even after demonstration organizers had reportedly negotiated and cooperated with law enforcement officials on all aspects of the demonstration.

Who gave the order to antagonize and bait peaceful protestors this time around? Hey Mayor Marty Chavez, know anything about this? Most all, what are you going to say and do about it? Especially on this day -- Constitution Day? Click to contact Mayor Chavez or members of his staff.

This isn't professional law enforcement, it's harrassment and mean-spirited, in your face citizen baiting. Public officials take oaths to serve and protect the Constitution, not impose their own particular political prejudices on citizens exercising their rights. Clearly, the perpetrators of this latest law enforcement outrage should be called on it and reprimanded by their superiors, in no uncertain terms, as quickly as is humanly possible. No excuses.

Domenici Rejoined at the Hip with Bush: Mayor Marty Considering a Challenge?

After pretending to change his position on the Iraq occupation -- at least superficially -- Sen. Pete Domenici is now back in line, having given up trying to separate himself cosmetically from Bush and the war forever bunch. As the parade of shameless surge pushers and propagandists finished their performances last week, I guess Pete decided it made some sort of cynical political sense to return to lockstep with his keepers. has more on Domenici's return to the fold.

Meanwhile, Matt Stoller over at Open Left asks -- as many others have -- if Domenici intends to retire. Musing on why Bush spent time to raise funds for Domenici here in New Mexico recently, Stoller says:

But why Domenici? Maybe it's personal. It's possible he just hates fundraising, and wanted someone else to do it for him. Or maybe the New Mexico Republican Party is going to need the money since Domenici is going to retire and the seat will be very competitive.  Anyway, I heard just such a rumor, that Domenici is going to retire, that Albuquerque mayor Martin Chavez will run on the Democratic side, and Congresscritters Heather Wilson and Steve Pearce will fight it out in the primary on the Republican side.

There IS a lot of conjecture going around about what Mayor Marty intends to do next. He's obviously gained little traction in his initial efforts towards running for governor in 2010 against our very popular Lt. Gov. . In the recent Albuquerque Journal polling, likely Dem primary voters picked Denish as their favored gubernatorial candidate over Chavez by a 50% to 30% margin (with 20% undecided). Even on his home turf in metro Albuquerque, Chavez trailed Denish 29 to 54 percent among the Dems polled.

Chavez has said that he supports Domenici and won't run against him for Senate. But if Pete's enthusiasm wanes for the rigors of the job or his health worsens and he decides to retire, I wouldn't be surprised if Chavez tried his luck. Whether he'd get more support in the Dem primary than current candidate Don Wiviott is another matter. Mayor Marty isn't well liked within large portions of the Dem base, and he'd have to work some miracles to win them over. Of course there's always the possibility he could encourage his Repub supporters to change their registrations for the primary. He has a fair amount of support among less rabid Repubs, at least in parts of the Albuquerque area.

To check out our previous posts on the 2008 U.S. Senate race in New Mexico, visit our archive.

War Without End

... success [in Iraq] will require U.S. political, economic and security engagement that extends beyond my Presidency. --George Bush, September 13, 2007

(Updated) Edwards Buys TV Time to Counter Bush's Speech Tonight

UPDATE: Above is the message the Edwards campaign aired after Bush's speech tonight.
***********************

Edwards at YearlyKos Q & A in August

In an innovative and bold move, the John Edwards campaign has purchased several minutes of TV time on MSNBC tonight right after Bush makes his latest TV plea to the nation to stay the course in Iraq. Edwards will use the time to rebut the Bush spin on the Iraq occupation and urge Congress to implement a firm timeline for withdrawal. Bush's speech is scheduled for 7:00 PM Mountain Time on all the major networks and cable news stations. Be sure you're tuned in to MSNBC (Albuquerque Comcast channel 30) immediately afterwards to see Edwards. Here's the message from Joe Trippi of the Edwards campaign about the move:

Tonight, after President Bush makes yet another argument for continuing the war in Iraq, John Edwards will speak directly to the American people in a nationwide address on MSNBC.

Our campaign has bought airtime on MSNBC immediately following the President's address at 9 p.m. (Eastern Time), and John Edwards will challenge the President's remarks with a strong call to the nation to end the war now.

Please watch in that timeframe—and forward this message to your friends, asking them to watch as well. Each of us has a responsibility to make sure that President Bush and Congress understand that the time for excuses has run out. John Edwards will deliver a strong message tonight on our behalf. It's time to end this war and bring our troops home.

Buying this kind of airtime is expensive. But we believe that President Bush's address must be countered with a strong voice in opposition to the failed policies that have kept our troops in harm's way for far too long. Tonight, John Edwards will continue to lead, and make the case to the nation that we cannot wait for an election to change course in Iraq—we as citizens must make Washington understand that the time to end this war is now.

Don't miss John's address tonight on MSNBC, immediately following the President.

President Bush will be on every network for free tonight. Our campaign will have to pay for the time on MSNBC so that John Edwards can challenge the President's failed policies. Please consider making a contribution to the campaign—to help us meet the costs of paying for tonight's address—and to help John's campaign continue to grow.

www.johnedwards.com/action/contribute/iraq-address

Thanks for all you do,

--Joe Trippi
  Senior Advisor, John Edwards for President
  September 13, 2007

(Click on photo for larger image. Photo credit: M.E. Broderick.)

What Do We Do Now? Punch In Those Numbers

Sen. Chris Dodd nails it. Now let's start FLOODING THE CONGRESS WITH PHONE CALLS. We need to literally deluge the switchboards with calls. Urge them to join Senator Dodd in demanding that the Dem Congressional leadership refuse to fund the war without withdrawal timetables:

On September 6th, the New York Times reported that Democrats are considering whether to offer a "compromise" amendment on Iraq to the upcoming Defense Department Authorization bill. This "compromise," the Levin-Reed amendment, would reportedly establish a non-binding "goal" -- as opposed to a firm deadline -- for withdrawing our combat troops from Iraq.

The net result would be another blank check for President Bush.

Senator Dodd said it best, "I cannot and will not support any measure that does not have a firm and enforceable deadline to complete the redeployment of combat troops from Iraq. Rather than picking up votes, by removing the deadline to get our troops out of Iraq you have lost this Democrat's vote."

We can stop this before it sees the light of day.

Please contact key Dem Senators and ask them to publicly reject any Iraq legislation that does not include enforceable deadlines for withdrawal of combat troops from Iraq and urge them to support the Dodd amendment:

Senate: (202) 224-3121

• Sen. Harry Reid
• Sen. Dick Durbin
• Sen. Jeff Bingaman
• Sen. Hillary Clinton
• Sen. Barak Obama

House: (202) 224-3121

• Rep. Nancy Pelosi
• Rep. Steny Hoyer
• Rep. Rahm Emanuel
• Rep. Tom Udall

I also like what Kos summarized as a strong position today:

Pass a supplemental bill with a withdrawal deadline. Let the GOP filibuster. If it comes to the point where the troops are being harmed from lack of funding, pass one-month supplementals -- keep forcing Republicans in vote after vote to stand with Bush and his hated war.

If the bigger supplemental, the one with teeth, passes, let Bush veto it. Send it back to him, again and again. All the while, keep the one-month supplementals going to ensure our troops have everything they need.

Tell the American people -- we will support the troops by bringing them home safe and sound to their families, and we will fund them appropriately every step of the way.

In other words, fully fund a withdrawal.

MoveOn Petraeus Ad: The Facts

Oh, the knashing of teeth is loud indeed about the full page ad MoveOn.org placed in the New York Times to coincide with the Petraeus-Crocker spin exhibition. It's dominating discussion in the corporate media, in rightwingnut circles and even among some Democrats in Congress. Sadly, it's much louder than any wailing about the real tragedy of the last few days -- namely, that BushCo has made it clear they intend to keep the occupation-surge going full throttle until the next president steps in to clean up the mess.

The usual unholy alliance between the Repub mouthpiece media, Bush's handpicked military officers (all naysayers have been dispatched) and the White House PR operation is vehemently dedicated to its mission to make sure nothing really changes in Iraq. Well, by summer they MIGHT withdraw troops down to what they were before the 2006 election, but maybe not. It depends on whatever The Decider says it depends on when the time comes. And you know how he is.

Of course there's the minor matter that we can't really sustain the "surge" troop levels after late Spring without condemning those serving to ANOTHER stint in the occupation zone without adequate down time, but that's never bothered The Decider before. He apparently couldn't care less whether he breaks our military as long as he can keep the victory-is-near charade going until he can dump the bloody mess in the hands of his successor. If nothing else, Bush has always been good at escaping the consequences of his bad decisions.

Betrayal is Betrayal
Unfortunately, an abundance of traditional media outlets, all those grimacing Repubs before the cameras and even some moaning and groaning Dems are giving more time to complaining about the MoveOn ad than challenging the failed strategies feeding the debacle in Iraq. What's being ignored is that General Petraeus DID BETRAY THE FACTS during his droning performance before House and Senate committees. And in betraying the facts, he betrayed the people, especially the troops he commands. I guess the "patriotic" thing to do would be to ignore the situation and pretend that distortions, omissions and spin in his testimony is just fine by us. He is, after all, a handpicked four star, and apparently deserving only of praise uttered in worshipful tones.

The Facts
I know it's probably considered nitpicking in many quarters, but what did the MoveOn ad really say beyond its headline? You can see the ad (PDF), along with the full text. MoveOn has aslo provided convincing documentation for its assertions . I don't hear anyone refuting any of them. All I hear is the usual hypocritical grandstanding by Repubs who would love to change the subject from the facts at hand to a sideshow designed to demean Dems for daring to confront Bush.

Even more analysis on how Petraeus and the traditional media are ignoring or distorting the facts is provided by Think Progress and Media Matters. More at Speaker Pelosi's blog and this McClatchy News article.

Come on, everyone knows how things work in Washington, especially Bush's Washington. If generals or anyone else doesn't publicly (or sometimes even privately) agree 100% with Bush, they're either silenced, forced out or labeled "weak on terrorism." Remember how, one by one, previous Generals left the service after straying from the party line -- only to be replaced with someone willing to further The Decider's PR game?

Following in the Footsteps of Powell
Didn't we hear very similar excuses about Colin Powell and his often false and misleading testimony before the UN -- which got us into Iraq in the first place? Turns out Powell wasn't as full of integrity, competence and truthfullness as many at the time would have us believe. Turns out he wasn't really worthy of the degree of respect in which he was held. Turns out we might have entirely avoided the Iraq quagmire if more Democrats had been willing to sacrifice some of their oh-so-sacred "civility" for some speaking truth to power.

Now here we are again. Time to give up the fairy tale belief that Generals, by their very nature, don't lie publicly on behalf of their commanders-in-chief. History is full of cherry picked stats and clever distortions offered by military officers, CIA directors and many other "distinguished" personages to further the desires of presidents. It's not shocking to anyone but those afraid to call a spade a spade, even with so much on the line.

Stop the DC Establishment: Watch & Sign

I certainly support what Glenn Greenwald has to say:

"Jane Hamsher of FireDogLake has produced a video, which, along with Matt Stoller, I helped put together and narrated, documenting the four-years-long record of Gen. Petraeus in repeatedly assuring Americans that the war is going well and great progress is being made. The video can be viewed, among other places, here at FDL.

"It is actually amazing to watch media coverage of Gen. Petraeus' testimony depict him as though he has just risen from the apolitical ether as the objective and trustworthy source with regard to the war. The White House is desperate for that image to be maintained because the nation no longer trusts George Bush or Dick Cheney or other Republican office-holders, precisely because they have heard from those individuals over the last several years countless assurances of "progress," only for events repeatedly to prove those claims to be untrue.

"But since the inception of the war, Gen. Petraeus has been at the forefront of issuing those sorts of highly -- and unduly -- optimistic statements about the war's progress. The media should not take a position as to how much credibility ought to be assigned to Gen. Petraeus' testimony, but it is inexcusable to exclude from their coverage these facts -- facts which demonstrate indisputably that what Gen. Petraeus is claiming this week about the war's success is exactly what he has been claiming for the last several years.

"In addition to documenting Gen. Petraeus' history, the video is also intended to spur support for an online petition, created and to be submitted to various Congressional leaders by Matt Stoller and Open Left. That online petition, which I encourage you to sign, is here, at Stop The DC Establishment. As indicated, the video can be viewed here. This is the first step in trying to develop a template for channeling the intensity and growing anger with the political class into meaningful pressure."

Amen.

More evidence that Petraeus is spinning and dodging and politicking is offered by Juan Cole in his post "McClatchy: Civilian Deaths Steady through Surge; August Secret Official Toll Staggering 2,890; Mahdi Army Continuing Ethnic Cleansing." It's getting better all the time ... better, better, better ....

Weenie Cops. Weenie Skelton. Too Many Weenie Dems.

Remember when they used to be called "peace officers"? That was back in an era when many cops saw their job as doing just that -- keeping the peace. Now too many, even among the U.S. Capitol security force, apparently just look for excuses to gang tackle people and knee them while they're down. And do they really have to tightly handcuff everyone they are arresting or escorting out? That used to be reserved for legimately dangerous people. I guess anyone with enough gumption to mention they have rights is considered a dangerous person now. Unfortunately the really dangerous people are in the White House and the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House and the Department of Justice and testifying before Congressional committees.

Peaceful Reverend Gang Tackled
This makes me hissing mad. The video above captures the incredibly rough arrest of Rev. Lennox Yearwood outside the Petraeus hearing room today. Here's an account of what happened. He was doing absolutely nothing threatening that I can determine. He was merely asserting to the officers that he had a perfect right to be in the hearing room after waiting all morning in line. Which he did. I wonder who made up the arbitrary rule that no more than seven "peace people" could be in the hearing room. I wonder who defined the characteristics that define "peace people" and who told the cops to gang tackle Yearwood. Was it Democratic Rep. Ike Skelton? Was it other Dems on the committee? Or did they just sit idly by and ignore it?

Ike Skelton, Friend of the War Profiteers
Of course it's not unexpected that Skelton, long in the pocket of the defense corp profiteers, would rather have "peace people" manhandled and would rather say dismissive things to citizens against the war in the crowd than call out Petraeus and Crocker as the spinners and yes men they are.  Skelton was more than happy to get people tossed out of the hearing room with a scowl and a grumble. We aren't "his people" -- those in the "defense establishment" are.

I don't begrudge him having the protestors escorted out after they were warned about outbreaks, but he could have done it with respect for those working so hard to get our troops home and some meager sense of sanity restored in Washington. He or another Dem on the committee could have said something like, "I regret being forced to have you removed because I identify with your frustration and anger with an administration and its spinners who have lied us into war and who are continuing to distort the truth." But no, instead he praised Petraeus and Crocker like they were saints and reserved the dirty looks and nasty treatment for the citizens. Us.

They're Supposed to Work for Us
These members of Congress and their Capitol police thugs think we work for them and not the other way around. I think too many believe they are royalty instead of public servants. They need to be reawakened to what their true duties and responsibilities are in a democracy. Like defending the Constitution, just for starters. Like treating people who dissent with respect. Like demanding that the Capitol cops behave like humans instead of thugs. Every Dem in Congress should be shown the video of the gang tackle of a man of the cloth in the halls of our Capitol merely for asserting he has a right to attend a hearing. And every Dem in Congress should protest the action.

I know that's probably too much to ask when massive defense appropriations are at stake in an era so full of hubris and corruption and lies from on high like this one. But it's displays like today's that show the people who their friends are, and who are more concerned about keeping the defense spending earmarks flowing, the status quo going. I predict this kind of rough treatment of our citizens will become more and more the norm as frustration and anger grow on the part of a majority of Americans about a horrible, futile occupation, about the Republicans who put Party loyalty before country, about the Democrats too stuck in the rubble of their own egos to do what they certainly must know is right. Is this the tipping point?

The Domenici Angle
Meanwhile I see that Sen. Pete Domenici is more upset about a MoveOn ad criticizing Petraeus than he is about the continuing slaughter being kept in place to protect Bush from admitting reality. Domenici is showing his usual skewed sense of priorities. As for Petraeus, he declared he wants to withdraw troops next year because things are going so peachy. Oops, I guess he forgot that knowledgeable people on both sides of the aisle have repeatedly said we don't have the troops to continue beyond that point. Spin, General, spin. That fourth star came with a price.

No, Sen. Domenici, we have a right to criticize anyone in our government. Anyone. As for the MoveOn ad, that was paid for by thousands of ordinary people all over the country, not the Democratic "leadership." Just more hypocritical Republican spin. Time to retire, Pete. You're not getting anything right anymore....

Crisis in Confidence: Politics of the Petraeus Report

Listen to Richard Clark, Roger Cressey, Rand Beers and other national security experts critique the so-called Petraeus Report, which really amounts to a White House-created oral report to Congress to cheerlead for continuing Bush's failed strategy. Note to Democrats in Congress: DON'T BE FOOLED AGAIN.

According to a New York Times editorial:

Mr. Bush, we fear, isn’t looking for the truth, only for ways to confound the public, scare Democrats into dropping their demands for a sound exit strategy, and prolong the war until he leaves office. At times, General Petraeus gives the disturbing impression that he, too, is more focused on the political game in Washington than the unfolding disaster in Iraq. That serves neither American nor Iraqi interests.

Mr. Bush, deeply unpopular with the American people, is counting on the general to restore credibility to his discredited Iraq policy. He frequently refers to the escalation of American forces last January as General Petraeus’s strategy — as if it were not his own creation. The situation echoes the way Mr. Bush made Colin Powell — another military man with an overly honed sense of a soldier’s duty — play frontman at the United Nations in 2003 to make the case that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Mr. Bush cannot once again subcontract his responsibility. This is his war.

General Petraeus has his own credibility problems. He overstepped in 2004 when he published an op-ed article in The Washington Post six weeks before the election. The general — then in charge of training and equipping Iraq’s security forces — rhapsodized about “tangible progress” and how the Iraqi forces were “developing steadily,” an assessment that may have swayed some voters but has long since proved to be untrue.

Also read Gov. Bill Richardson's op-ed in the Washington Post. Excerpt:

Clinton, Obama and Edwards reflect the inside-the-Beltway thinking that a complete withdrawal of all American forces somehow would be "irresponsible." On the contrary, the facts suggest that a rapid, complete withdrawal -- not a drawn-out, Vietnam-like process -- would be the most responsible and effective course of action.

Those who think we need to keep troops in Iraq misunderstand the Middle East. I have met and negotiated successfully with many regional leaders, including Saddam Hussein. I am convinced that only a complete withdrawal can sufficiently shift the politics of Iraq and its neighbors to break the deadlock that has been killing so many people for so long.

Our troops have done everything they were asked to do with courage and professionalism, but they cannot win someone else's civil war. So long as American troops are in Iraq, reconciliation among Iraqi factions is postponed. Leaving forces there enables the Iraqis to delay taking the necessary steps to end the violence. And it prevents us from using diplomacy to bring in other nations to help stabilize and rebuild the country.

The presence of American forces in Iraq weakens us in the war against al-Qaeda. It endows the anti-American propaganda of those who portray us as occupiers plundering Iraq's oil and repressing Muslims. The day we leave, this myth collapses, and the Iraqis will drive foreign jihadists out of their country. Our departure would also enable us to focus on defeating the terrorists who attacked us on Sept. 11, those headquartered along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border -- not in Iraq.