Return to blog

Pete, Nancy, George and WWIII

Posted by Cindy Sheehan  

12:00 AM Oct 25, 2007

"You don't have money to fund the war or children. But you're going to spend it to blow up innocent people if we can get enough kids to grow old enough for you to send to Iraq to get their heads blown off for the president's amusement.? Pete Stark (D-Ca) ?While Members of Congress are passionate about their views what Congressman Stark said during the debate was inappropriate." Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, (D-Ca) ?But this -- we got a leader in Iran who has announced that he wants to destroy Israel. So I've told people that if you're interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them from have (sic) the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon.? George Bush, War Criminal I cheered inside my head when I heard, Rep. Stark unbelievably utter his words condemning the murderous acts of BushCo on the House floor and I was impressed with his candor, compassion and what I consider an appropriate amount of rage and honesty. How many of us were not thinking the same thing about the S-CHIP votes? I knew, however, that it would not be long until Pete Stark had to apologize and it happened today. I believe that Speaker Pelosi?s comments about Rep. Stark were utterly inappropriate and out of line. I believe that when she said that impeachment was ?off the table,? her remarks were not only inappropriate but also antithetical to our Constitution and directly in opposition to why the people of this country put Democrats back in power. We may remind the Speaker of some of the things George has said: He told us that Saddam was able to reach the Eastern part of the US with drones that contained either chemical or biological weapons; that the smoking gun might come in the form of a ?mushroom cloud? and that Saddam was also seeking significant amounts of ?yellow cake uranium.? George and his co-criminals also told us over and over again the 9-11 was the justification for an attack on Iraq because Saddam had something to do with 9-11. It is imperative that Ms. Pelosi be a true leader and lead the charge to impeach the liars, or at least get the hell out of the way so they can be impeached. I buried my son for no logical, moral or truthful reason for God?s sake, and she has neither the integrity or fortitude to finally say that BushCo has to be stopped before George is the instigator for Armageddon., Ms. Pelosi is not the only one who condemned Rep. Stark; she joined hands (again) with Republicans to do so. However, for the Republicans to say that Congressman Stark?s comment demeaned ?the troops? is so patently ridiculous, it is stunningly pathetic. Our troops and their much higher paid cousins, the mercenary killers, are killing innocent Iraqis. IT IS A WAR! What do these morally bankrupt Chickenhawks think occurs in war? It would be better for everyone if ?the troops? went over to play pinochle with the Iraqis, but occupied peoples have an inherent hatred of their occupiers and want them to leave their country: dead or alive. Congress wants to hide behind ?the troops? by giving BushCo billions of more dollars to wage the occupation so their lobbyist buddies and campaign contributors can become richer off of the flesh and blood of those same troops that they claim to support. BushCo has over 14 more months to sew their demented seeds of destruction all over the planet and we must all join Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-Oh) in his call to remove them from office not only for their past, but for their future, illegal wars of aggression, possibly even doing the unthinkable: using a nuclear weapon. The terrorists that wear Brooks Brothers and Armani and live and work in the big white house on Pennsylvania Avenue are more dangerous to our way of life and safety than any others. I wish Congressman Stark had not caved to the establishment elitists. George is the one that needs to apologize to each and every one of us for killing just about everything that we hold dear: our treasury, our Constitution, our standing in the international community, our ecology, our children, and for murdering our hopes and dreams for the future. When I replace Nancy Pelosi as the Representative from California?s 8th district, I will fight for the lives, security and prosperity of, not only my constituents, but for all the human beings in the world. If BushCo is still in office, God forbid, when I am sworn in, I will do everything in my power to hold them accountable for their crimes against humanity and I will never, ever apologize for telling the truth. To Contact Cindy: CindyforCongress.org To contribute to the campaign, or sign up for email alerts: Dede@CindyforCongress.org To volunteer for the campaign: Dianne@CindyforCongress.org For media or scheduling requests: Tiffany@CindyforCongress.org

Add a comment

Reposting your blog

— 06:35 PM Oct 25, 2007

To help spread your message Cindy I'll have my website administrator repost your blog on my Yellow Rose of Texas Bus for Peace website with links backs to your original.

Jim Goodnow
http://www.yellowrosepeacebus.com

US Political system is hopelessly rigged

— 07:35 PM Oct 25, 2007

If elected, you may well be the first ever politician I could actually believe was on the side of the masses. Unfortunately, I don't believe there is a single shred of hope you can be elected, even if every voter voted for you. US politics are under the control of the treasonous, devilish elite and nothing short of God's intervention will change that. The masses are better served by placing their faith in God (Vishnu) and leaving politics and the machinations of the wicked to those who worship material power. Know that God will give to each their due. Relish the fact that those who are faithful can easily sidestep these potholes and will not have to be tolerate the shenanigans of these false religionists in the spiritual realm.

Israel foreign minister- Iranian nuclear arms pose little threat

— 09:27 PM Oct 25, 2007


Livni behind closed doors: Iranian nuclear arms pose little threat to Israel

By Gidi Weitz and Na'ama Lanski



Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni said a few months ago in a series of closed discussions that in her opinion that Iranian nuclear weapons do not pose an existential threat to Israel, Haaretz magazine reveals in an article on Livni to be published tomorrow.

Livni also criticized the exaggerated use that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is making of the issue of the Iranian bomb, claiming that he is attempting to rally the public around him by playing on its most basic fears. Last week, former Mossad chief Ephraim Halevy said similar things about Iran.
Advertisement


The article also reveals for the first time a document Livni prepared and sent to Olmert a few months after the Second Lebanon War proposing a new division of labor between the two. "Enclosed is a proposal for work procedures between us, with the aim of providing an answer to Israel's strategic needs and facilitating early planning and the formulation of coordinated Israeli positions ... within the framework of cooperative relations, full transparency and continuous mutual updates," wrote Livni.

She described in the document a number of required arrangements: "The prime minister and the foreign minister will hold regular work meetings at least once a week." In an allusion to her absence from critical discussions during the war in Lebanon, she wrote: "The foreign minister will be invited to meetings with the prime minister on security matters and other meetings with serious implications."

The most important part of the document relates to the talks with the Palestinians. Livni wrote: "The foreign minister shall represent the prime minister and the government of Israel, and will act on their behalf as the director of the dialogue with the relevant Palestinian representatives, and in accordance with the policy and methods to be coordinated in advance with the prime minster, while keeping him informed."

It is reasonable to assume that Olmert's decision to appoint Livni as head of the negotiating team with the Palestinians at the Annapolis summit is connected to the document.

The Haaretz article also reveals for the first time a draft of a document prepared for Livni by her advisor, Dr. Tal Becker of the Foreign Ministry, who is slated to serve as a senior member of the negotiating team with the Palestinians. The draft, named the Diplomatic Horizon, is pessimistic about the chances of reaching a permanent solution in the near future.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/916777.html

Pete, Nancy, George and WWIII

— 01:02 AM Oct 26, 2007

I love your fighting spirit, but isn't it time you said a little more about Dennis Kucinich. he's the one candidate who has consistently fought against the Iraq war and for peace.

Peace is possible support Cindy Sheehan and Dennis Kucinich

International Criminla Court

— 05:05 AM Oct 26, 2007

Is there any way we can get the court to ACT
http://peacesource.net
Satire at http://peacesource.net/blog
http://peacesource.net/blog.html
Social networking at http://peacesourcenet.ning.com/
Book office space http://peacesource.net/about_us_and_pand

English, but a firm Supporter

— 06:21 AM Oct 26, 2007

Not sure you'll read this Cindy, but I want to assure you that you have growing support among the grass roots peace actavists over the pond. We are I believe at the 11th hour, BushCo need stopping, I'm not a God fearing man, but I pray that you are successful in your campaign and that you lead the charge against these madmen. God bless.

Pete, Nancy, George and WWIII

— 12:57 PM Oct 26, 2007

I love your fighting spirit, but how about talking more about Dennis Kucinich. He has always opposed the Iraq war and worked for peace.

Peace is Possible: Support Cindy Sheehan and Dennis Kucinich

you are the one

— 03:17 PM Oct 26, 2007

Cindy you are the ony hope we have to see justice be served in this country.

Kucinich betrayed us in 2004, will do it again in 2008

— 04:03 PM Oct 26, 2007

http://www.seattlegreens.org/archives/news/2007/01/editorial_denni.html

Dennis Kucinich and the Tune of the Pied Piper
Why Greens and Progressives Should Ignore its Call and Declare Political Independence in 2008.

by Mike Gillis

On December 11, progressive Congressman Dennis Kucinich announced that he would again seek the Democratic nomination for President in 2008.

Having previously run for President in 2004 on a platform of opposition to the war in Iraq, repealing the USA PATRIOT Act and universal healthcare, and considering that I spent months fighting for him then, you'd think that I would be happy to welcome the Congressman from Ohio to the race for the White House, but I'm not.

And you shouldn't be either.

I'm not going to pretend to be a mind-reader or that I have any special insight into Kucinich's motivations for this second tilt at the Democratic windmill. I can't say with 100% certainty what he hopes to accomplish with this primary challenge. But I can tell you what the result will be, regardless of motivations.

It will be a distraction to the progressive voter, most of whom are too smart to believe that Congressman Kucinich has any real shot at winning the Democratic nomination, and will serve to run interference against them organizing true progressive, anti-war opposition to the same old vanilla neoliberal, pro-war, factory model that the Democrats will undoubtedly hand their nomination to.

The end result is that progressives are wasting their time, money and enthusiasm on a campaign that will never be on the November ballot, save in one of two instances: (1) The Democratic Leadership Council and the party bosses in the DNC implode - not likely - or (2) Kucinich abandons progressivism altogether and reassures the bosses that he'll play ball, and back their agenda.

And waiting until Kucinich's inevitable loss and then jumping ship to a third party alternative like the Greens leaves less than six months to build an effective campaign to build our party, energize voters and push a progressive agenda, all the while Kucinich will be campaigning for a nominee that stands against everything he ran on during his primary run and encouraging his supporters to do the same.

Looking into my crystal ball, I see him following his 2004 formula:

(1) Stake out principled and progressive positions on healthcare, Iraq, civil rights, workers rights and the environment and telling the unvarnished truth about his Diet Republican opponents.

(2) Turn his underdog status into an endearing trait, jokingly referencing it, while stoking the "it could happen" flame, Use his progressive credentials to energize people who'd never bothered voting before and get them involved. During this time, he'll be totally ignored by the Democratic leadership and the media.

(3) As the primary season evolves, he'll start downplaying his definition of "success" for the campaign until eventually it's no longer about winning the nomination, but fighting pointless and losing battles over the national party platform, with the stated long term goal of "taking the party back" - but deciding to hold their criticism until after the election.

(4) In the lead up to the convention, he begins toning his criticism of the presumptive nominee and begins employing "big tent" rhetoric. He tells us that there's a place for people like us in the Democratic Party (albeit at the kid's table) and calls upon his supporters to circle the wagons around the nominee and resist the desire to support a progressive third party candidate like a Ralph Nader and trying to convince what few delegates he has to not to actually vote for him at the DNC Convention.

(5) He loses the nomination and then campaigns full time for the corporate nominee, trying to bring what organization and volunteers he has to bear on the task of fighting for the very things he went into the race opposing.

And during this 18 month primary battle, what is the real cost?

Those progressives have wasted their talents and their hopes on a wild goose chase that demoralizes them, lowers their expectations and will leave them believing more and more the long-taught, but largely unspoken Democratic mantra:

"What you really believe in can never win, so why even bother?"

And after it's over, what will the Kucinich 2008 campaign have accomplished? A good place to start would be to look at what it accomplished in 2004:

Without winning a single state's primary, Kucinich failed to force Kerry or Edwards to answer a single direct question put to them during any of the televised debates or alter their agenda in any way, he failed abysmally at getting even a single of his progressive planks in the national platform and was largely ignored by the very party he was trying to change

I cannot imagine a bigger waste of a year and a half.

And historically, how does it differ from the aborted Democratic primary campaigns of Eugene McCarthy, Jesse Jackson, Shirley Chisholm, Jerry Brown and countless others? Candidates who - whatever their motivations - wooed the progressive voter with a lot of hopeful talk and delivered them en masse to nominees far less progressive than themselves.

And if we are honest with ourselves, the end result of the Kucinich campaign will be to seduce progressives away from their own potential relevance, to distract them from building a genuine and independent progressive party like the Greens and away from that party winning votes in the only election that really matters: November 2008.

We Greens will have our work cut out for us in 2008. We'll have to fight the Democratic machine for access to the ballot in several states. We'll have to find a dynamic candidate that will run a strong independent run for the White House in all 50 states and weather the insults and denunciations that stem from running outside of the corporate two-party duopoly. We'll need to raise money and register millions of new voters and fight to promote the Green message of peace justice and sustainability.

And we'll have to do it with people like Dennis Kucinich actively working against our efforts to reach and convince voters to cast their ballots for a progressive Green alternative.

The abolition of slavery, the right of women to vote, the end of child labor, the Social Security Administration, the 40-hour work week, unemployment insurance and the right to form labor unions.

These victories were only won because of activists like the members of the Socialist, Progressive, Labor Greenback, Liberty and Equal Rights Parties, not because of quixotic primary exercises and impotent platform battles.

They were won because these men and women, upon whose shoulders we proudly stand, realized that they had more important things to do than waste their 18 months - and beyond - on such futile efforts and used their time on building a movement built on their values than on trying to force parties opposed to those same values to adopt them against their will.

They were willing to fight and lose and fight and lose and fight and lose, until their agendas won.

And we will do no better unless we adopt that same philosophy of stubborn independence and long term perseverance on ending the occupation of Iraq, repealing attacks on our civil liberties and creating a system of universal healthcare for all.

The clock is ticking on 2008 and we've got real work to do. Let's not waste a single second on what amounts to little more than political masturbation.

-- Mike Gillis is Vice Chair of the Green Party of Washington State


Kucinich sold out in 2004, will do again in 2008

— 04:09 PM Oct 26, 2007

http://www.seattlegreens.org/archives/news/2007/01/editorial_denni.html

Dump the Democrats! Call for a new party now!

— 03:27 PM Oct 27, 2007


We need a People's Peace Party founding convention now!

— 04:08 PM Oct 27, 2007

Hi Cindy!
Individualistic campaigns such as yours, Dennis Kucinich, Ralph Nader,etc. are doomed to failure under the current political situation. The Democratic Party (Obama, Clinton) is now receiving more corporate funding than the Republicans.

The existing "third parties" such as the Greens (registered Green over 10 years) are impotent for lack of members, internal squabbling, etc.

When people get upset and want to change the status quo today, they join a "single issue" or "special interest" group and become an "activist". Anti-war groups, environmental groups, human rights groups, unions, PTA associations, etc.etc.

The problem has been that all these groups (thousands) that involve millions of people, have been atomized and isolated from each other. Thus individually these groups are kept politically powerless and unable to succeed.

The vast cost of the wars, militarism, and the vast corruption of the current regime (supported by both Republican and Democratic Parties), has meant that the funding for the essential social services and infrastructure of the nation has been diverted to war.

We need a new People's Peace Party (PPP)to unite all these groups and people into a new political party. A new party that refuses corporate money so that the party can end the "privatization" (looting) of the resources of the federal government for private profit.

The PPP would make up a platform from the single-issue agendas mentioned above. Candidates, educated on the issues and supportive of the platform, would be then run at every level (local, state, national) of elective office. Such people could be a source of people for cabinet posts, administrators, etc.

The changes needed to turn this country around must involve the masses of people who are most affected by the multiple crises they are now facing.

The time to do this is now. Time is running out at every level. The Bush gang will probably attack Iran (and possibly with NUCLEAR weapons) before leaves office.

Please prepare a draft document calling for the creation and founding convention of the PPP. Circulate this draft document to every public figures (Kucinich, Nader, Zinn, Chomsky) and to the heads of the many groups (such as Robert F. Kennedy at NRDC,Code Pink, Green Peace,etc.) to scientists and enviornmentalists, trade unions, etc.

Ask for their endorsement by having their name on the initial call. Ask for their involvement in preparing the platform within their specialty and in the general notion of a new party.

Cindy, you will be overwhelmed with people willing to help to promote this new party.
They will bring themselves, their intellectual and financial resources, to make this happen.

The very call for a new political party will send shock waves throughout the nation and the world! It would bring hope to the world where now there is no hope!

Thank you.

Jeremy Wells,
jeremy@infowells.com

We need a People's Peace Party founding convention now!

— 04:14 PM Oct 27, 2007

Time is running out! Global warming is destroying the planet. Bush is planning to attack Iran before the end of his term. November 2008 is too late to act.

Please circulate a draft document calling for the founding convention of the People's Peace Party.
Get the endorsement from Nader, Kucinich, etc. Get endorsements from the peace groups (Code Pink, etc.) environmental groups,(Rober F. Kennedy Jr. NRDC, etc.etc.), unions, PTAs etc.etc.

Then issue the final document far and wide and
you will see MILLIONS OF PEOPLE desperate for change willing to follow your lead.

cindy for congress...impeach this administration and re count the votes from 2004

— 06:53 PM Oct 28, 2007

impeach this administration. re count the votes for 2004 and cindy sheehan for congress. audios, nancy pelosi.

winning

— 06:22 PM Oct 29, 2007

I agree with the comment on Kucinich. We need to stop wasting our time and money on campaigns that have no chance of winning. Instead focus on winnable races. Like congressional races.

Contributing to your campaign

— 06:02 PM Oct 31, 2007

Cindy,
I am a down in the trenches singer/songwriter/musician aka, I lack two extra dimes to rub together - my meager contribution will come from hard earned tips. However, I am contributing to your campaign and to Bill Richardson's. However we need to keep working to convince Al to run. Time to see the "Out of Business" sign on BushCo's bloody front door.

To Cindy S.

— 01:19 AM Nov 08, 2007

11/7/2007

Dear Cindy:
I've read many things about you via the Net and other News. I would like to know what is your agenda for America, and how do you see America in coming years?

Sincerely yours,

Joseph Mendiola
Guam

Why not give Ron Paul a try

— 01:33 AM Nov 26, 2007

Ron Paul has the best chance to win and is the most honest cannidate out there he may be a republican but he once ran as a independant
RonPaul2008.com

Ron Paul

Rachael — 02:21 PM Dec 25, 2007

I dont like the 2 party system, but I do believe in the constitution. I believe Ron Paul will win the republican primary and Im doing all I can to make it happen. All we need is our people to watch the exit polling in every state.Ron Paul is direct, honest,and doesnt change his views just to get elected. Hes the only one wholl bring our troops home right away,he wont police the world etc. ronpaul2008.com that will answer questions. more people everyday are joining the Ron Paul Revolution.Lets get our country back.

Ron Paul

Rachael — 02:21 PM Dec 25, 2007

I dont like the 2 party system, but I do believe in the constitution. I believe Ron Paul will win the republican primary and Im doing all I can to make it happen. All we need is our people to watch the exit polling in every state.Ron Paul is direct, honest,and doesnt change his views just to get elected. Hes the only one wholl bring our troops home right away,he wont police the world etc. ronpaul2008.com that will answer questions. more people everyday are joining the Ron Paul Revolution.Lets get our country back.

Login

You must login to post

Email:
Password:

Sign Up

Sign up for an account

Email
User ID
Password:
Confirm Password:

Forgot your password?

Email: