Rep. Baird Gets An Earful: "You are here to represent us..."
By Nicole Belle Monday Aug 27, 2007 11:15amMoveOn deserves a lot of credit for getting members to this town hall meeting...hopefully, Baird will reconsider his Lieber-stance.
For more than three hours Monday night, Rep. Brian Baird was verbally flogged by hundreds of his constituents for no longer supporting the quick withdrawal of troops from Iraq.
More than 500 people packed a high school auditorium in Vancouver while another 175 or so were unable to get inside. And virtually everyone who got a chance to address the Vancouver Democrat were harshly critical - including several who said they had been long-time supporters and friends.
"You have just broken my heart," said Phil Massey, a Vancouver ship's pilot who wasn't swayed by Baird's explanation that the U.S. was finally starting to make some progress in bringing peace to Iraq. "You have screwed up, my friend. You have screwed up and you have to change course."
That was two hours into the meeting and the crowd was still loaded for bear as the room broke into loud applause. At several points in the evening, Baird simply leaned against the stage with his arms folded, his head down as he let the crowd vent. But he also vigorously disputed several points made by the speakers and defended his independence from the Bush administration. He insisted that he is taking the courageous path.
"The easiest thing in the world would have been to go over there...and just say, using partisan rhetoric, 'Get out now,'" he said.[..]
While some people left the Vancouver meeting saying they respected Baird's sincerity, the town hall had to have been a particularly brutal experience for the congressman. At several points, he pleaded with the crowd to let him finish his explanation. One woman told him the blood of the troops was now on his hands, and several said he was violating the wishes of his constituents.
"We don't care what your convictions are," said Jan Lustig of Vancouver. "You are here to represent us."
Some of the angriest comments came from Vietnam veterans. "I was part of another surge in 1968 (in Vietnam), based on another pack of lies," said Vancouver resident Bob Goss, who served in the Army there. "I really think it's time to get out."
Login or Register to post comments.
He basically had his ass handed to him at this first town hall last night.
Round Two begins tonight in Longview, Washington.
Ed Shultz is live on C-Span right now, Thom Hartmann will be on Friday.
This is what everyone should be doing!! Let them know who they represent and it aint themselves!!!
See, I wonder if the sensationalism of these "angry crowd" proceedings will get any media attention....and if they do, what will the effect be? See, the media may jusy see a politician getting publicly flogged, and think it's good tv, but the public message of large amounts of "everyday" people angirly telling a candidate to veer LEFT really makes it more dificult to malign the "left" as being an out of touch, fringe group.
Glad to see people taking him to task. Iraq is a disaster and the surge isn't working because the Iraqi leaders won't compromise.
However, I do disagree quite strongly with one part of this article:
Politicians are NOT supposed to go whatever way the wind blows. They are supposed to LEAD. Otherwise we wouldn't need to elect anyone, we could just govern by polls.
The guy has his convictions, you shouldn't try to tell him his convictions don't matter - show him how his convictions are wrong!
This is about as close to direct democracy as it gets. This Rep. ought to at least be commended for his courage. Certainly it took more to actually meet with the people he's supposed to represent than it might to drop on in to a bizarre in the "Green Zone".
Now he can either return and stop enabling or, not soon enough, be defrocked.
Baird should get use to the following phrase: "Former representative Brian Baird"
we picket russ carnahan's office every week! he is still a pussy!
Newbie @ 4:
Faux and the a.m hate radio crowd will paint these Americans to be 'angry fringe left extremists' (tm).
eric @ 2:
Thanks for the heads-up, eric! :D
“We don’t care what your convictions are,” said Jan Lustig of Vancouver. “You are here to represent us.”
EXACTLY. Welcome to AMERICA.
Someone needs to ask Baird tonight if his degree in psychology has prepared him well in the evaluation of military and political strategy by occupation forces in a foreign country.
Liberal AND Proud @ 11:
Remember that the next time a Dem opposes something like gay marriage...
Couldn't you just die for that preppie combed down bangs?
Partisan rhetoric would be to say let the troops die, since the GOP claim they're all Republicans.
What dirt do the thugs have on this guy? Tar and feathers come to mind. He is just like all the rest, say anything to get elected and then do whatever the eff you want.
edgar @ 15:
My first thoughts exactly!
Vancouver, where? It would be nice to have some details on these articles.
cAL DAVE @ 3:
Here in Oregon Senator Ron Wyden was confronted by angry constituents at a Portland State University townhall meeting on the war even though he himself has a pretty good record on it, and I think it was intended that Wyden convey our sentiments back to Washington and to the other Democrats. Even if the traditional media doesn't cover these events, the message still ought to be reaching our elected representatives that the one issue that caused the Democrats to win in 2006 was ending this occupation. Wyden brought out at one point that he had voted against the war, but the peace activists didn't buy that and said that that was too long ago.
“We don’t care what your convictions are,” said Jan Lustig of Vancouver. “You are here to represent us.”
= 100% correct
Some of the angriest comments came from Vietnam veterans. (= AS IT SHOULD BE! Who would know better than a war vet about a pointless war.)
“I was part of another surge in 1968 (in Vietnam), based on another pack of lies,” said Vancouver resident Bob Goss, who served in the Army there. “I really think it’s time to get out.” (what else could possibly need be said?)
----------------
people elect representatives in the house and senate, not leaders. the president is supposed to be a leader. without good leadership in the WH, the people must be able to rely on their representatives to enforce the will of the majority. bush is destroying this country, not just its standing in the world. Baird was simpley listening to those who are affected by this destruction.
Not supporting an immediate and complete withdrawal which would create a political vacume and doom our long-time allies the kurds (how many times have we fucked them over and gotten thousands of them killed now?) does NOT make you pro-bush. Stabbing people in the back and condemning them to anarchy for own immediate gain and gratification is what's led to half the world hating us in the first damn place. "The war should never have happened" is a valid point, but it isn't a solution to the problems that we are faced with NOW that it has happened.
Go after the people who are really at fault instead of trying to sandbag folks that are trying their best to come up with a real, viable solution instead of screaming "WHA WHA WHA, I WANT IT NOW!" like a bunch of six year olds. Honestly.
kaT @ 17:
Washington-just over the border from Oregon, on the I-5 corridor and the Columbia River.
At least he didn't have them arrested like they do at GOP Town Hall meetings.
Having said that, it's time he was replaced with a good Democrat; cause a "real" Democrat, can be real corporate or real warmongers.
Vancouver WA is like a suburb of Portland, Oregon. People live there because there's no state income tax in WA, and no state sales tax on OR.
Vancouver, British Columbia is 4 hours north.
Swashbuckler @ 13:
Good call there. It seems too easy for some of these other people here to say that what THEY (and only they) want should be in place, ignoring the fact that many of them would make terrible leaders.
miss_kitty @ 20:
Indeed, very confusing. Somewhere in the line of reporting it would've been nice to have seen that this wasn't Vancouver, Canada, but Vancouver, some-other-state-than-Oregon, USA.
Swashbuckler @ 5:
J @ 20:
Well let's face it, most of the people that comment on political blogs have the mentality of 6 year olds.
soothsayer @ 23:
People who live in Washington and work in Oregon have state tax deductions on their paychecks. They don't get off that easily.
hbkblk @ 24:
Where is my inconsistency. If a Democrat does not support my views, I don't vote for him. I don't character assasinate, I don't spread lies.
THAT is democracy.
Something that so many in Washington don't get. The only spew the views of those paying the freight for them...the corporations. Well, this is not Corpmerica.
Votes still count.
Did anybody ask him how he got such a brilliant overview of the situation in 10 hrs while escorted?
Let's see, my constituents say this and that.....I think I'll put into the 'ole spin machine and do the complete opposite.
That seems to be the fashionable way of doing business in D.C. these days.
Liberal AND Proud @ 29:
Yes. And if you're so good at determining what's right for the country and have the vision to make everything better, you should have an easy time getting elected.
Until then, you need to realize what exactly we pay our congressmen to do.
Hazmat @ 25:
In Oregon, people know which Vancouver they're talking about. It would be like the NYT saying Manhattan, NY, so people wouldn't get confused and think they were talking about Manhattan, KS.
Besides, BC isn't part of the US.
I love the media's language:"an angry mob" and "he took a verbal "beating".
You know those "liberals".They're just so "angry" all the time...
pinkobait @ 34:
Ted "such my machine guns" Nugent, Mann "let's execute Billl Clinton" Coulter, Bill "let terrorists attack San Francisco", et al. are "outspoken", but liberals are the "angry" ones.
miss_kitty @ 33:
LOL. I was tempted to write that, but didn't feel like be snarky....yet.
hbkblk @ 24:
When the majority of America and your constituents do NOT support your views, "the only they" is the elected representative who is ignoring that fact that THEY are the outsider.
Swashbuckler @ 5:
I wonder what the White House has on him?
miss_kitty @ 28:
Lets clear this up: People live in Washington's 3rd District because its God's own earth. They also don't mind a catastrophic volcano every once in a while. Furthermore there's still a chance to find DB Cooper's stash of cash. Sasquach Reigns!
Swashbuckler @ 5:
Yeah, his convictions matter, because presumably they are the same as his constituents, which is why he was elected to represent them, not lead them.
Politicians should go "whatever way the wind blows" as long as that wind is their constituency.
While our elected representatives shouldn't govern based on the results of Corporate Polls, which can be easily manipulated based on the questions asked, they sure as heck better be responsive to the direct Poll of the People, as expressed through phone calls, letters, and town hall meetings.
Why else would C&L as well as just about EVERY political/environmental/social cause, both Conservative and Progressive and everything in between, constantly put out notices and calls to contact our elected Representatives (NOT leaders),
The Citizen is the true Leader.
Alone our wind is but a gentle breeze.
Organized and focused, we become more powerful than a tornado.
Nicole-You are back! :)
J @ 20:
Sorry J, I gotta call BS.
No, what's led them to hate us is occupying their holy lands (Bin Laden's first demand, which Bush complied with, was US troops out of Saudi Arabia,) supporting oppressive dictators (Musharef in Pakistan won't even let the leading opposition candidate back into the country,) and wrecking their countries (five years into this mess Iraq has yet to come close to a fraction of the pre-invasion public utility service levels) and terrorizing their womenfolk and kids (have ya seen how our soldiers act when the clear civilian neighborhoods?)
Kinda makes me hate us also.
We need to deliver this type of message to everyone in Congress; unfortunately, too few have the courage to stand up to this type of forum. I very much respect Mr. Baird.
I guess that is what happens when someone in his district, like myself; finally gets a "heads up" of ONE WEEK THANKS TO Crooks and Liars. You see, this guy likes to sneak into and out of the district, talk to his cronies, and leave word of how well it went in the local paper; leaving all of us dumbfounded as to how we can replace him. He has been wasting our time for years and our own local party won't listen because they think as long as there is a "D" on a guy's chair that makes him a democrat. Yeah right! Like Joe Leiberman, huh?
Well I took the story from you guys and sent it to over 100 Democrats in our district the week before the meeting. They held meetings over the weekend to plan this confrontation with him and the news didn't even show the next one a couple of hours later at the Cowlitz County Fairground Community Building. Maybe that held too many people for the camera crew to fit. Or maybe they didn't want to spend their gas money to drive 30 miles.
Either way, the guy got his FIRST earful. If he wants to keep his job, he better get with the program and do the job the PEOPLE sent him to do. He represents OUR POINT OF VIEW NOT HIS OWN.
He is not an independent. He is a representative of Liberal Democrat Progressives from Southwest Washington State and he had better remember that.
Am I missing something Charles?
Your respect seems a tad misplaced.
It's fair to expect a politician to vote his or her conscience or vote to represent the majority of his or her constituents. Ideally, the two are the same. Even assuming Baird's change of mind was conscientious, though, of course his constituents deserve to be heard.
And boy, as others have noted, the press account's language is despicable. An "angry mob"? At least they do feature the vet and the woman at the end, but their framing is lousy.
If he fails to adequately represent the majority of his constituents....he needs to get another job.....get rid of him in the next election.
miss_kitty @ 28:
Yeah, but the people who live and work in WA don't pay income tax, pay lower property tax, and can buy all their worldly goods in OR tax-free. That's a pretty good tax swing. However, you're still considered a criminal if you want to smoke a joint, so it's not exactly Eden.
Oh and welcome back Nicole........
kaT @ 17:
If people would/could read, it was quite easy to determine that this was Vancouver,
Oregon...since the Article itself appeared in the "Oregonian Newspaper" as shown
at top of the C&L thread.
He slid in as a Dem but he's really a Republican. He used the same lines Bush uses. WoW. Oregon, dupped by a man who probably intended to support Bush all along. He probably figured he was electable as a Dem wearing Dem outer wear but wearing Republican underwear.
J @ 20:
Thank you, J. These are exactly the kind of people the Democrats running for office are going to be toying with until November 2008. Until the rhetoric of the most vocal in the party shifts from "Get out NOW!" to "give us a realistic solution," nothing will be done about the war.
Dems need to grow a spine and ACT partisan since they DO represent a party. Republicans aren't your golf buddies, they've nigh destroyed the constitution and if the Dems aren't serious about justice then both parties belong in prison.
The "Whitehouse report" this September is going to be a farce. Get ready for another year of war folks. With so many Dems becoming complete spineless turds, it is a sure thing.
He needs to represent the "WILL OF THE PEOPLE".......not his own ideology
miss_kitty @ 28:
They have very high property taxes too.
The medias' attempt to frame oregonians at a highschool as mobish is the height of media stupidity.
Uh, doggiebobo, there is no such place as Vancouver, Oregon.
Mr. Baird is a respresentative in the state of Washington.
Therefore, the location of the townhall was Vancouver, Washington.
Tonight he will be in Longview, Washington.
And, no, this wasn't Mr. Baird's first roasting - he got an earful for 60 minutes live on the morning show on KPOJ (Air America) here in Portland that same day. He was stuttering by the third call.
helloj @ 32:
We pay our representatives to represent us. Not all things are referendums, so yes a BALANCE is struck.
That's put it as simple as possible. EVERY POLL...including polls sponsored by Fox News show that a MAJORITY...CLEAR MAJORITY of the people in this country...not on the margins...a CLEAR MAJORITY are very clear on this issue. They want the war ended. We can debate HOW and how long...but it is not a debate of going or staying. The COUNTRY wants out. That is clear.
Welcome back Nicole, hope you had a nice break.
Nice title for a new musical:
"Bye Bye Bairdie"
Doggiebobo @ 50:
Similarly, if people would/could have a knowledge of geography... they would know that there is no Vancouver, Oregon. :)
So who is the next one we want to open his or her mind to reality? 3/4's of the American people want us out now. I don't have a problem leaving some troops in the north to help the Kurds. That is help not protect. All three need some incentive to get their collective s**t together. I suppose it is ok to have our elected people debate the pros and cons of a new highway but hey folks don't be so damn casual about the lives of our troops. Staying in Iraq is not worth a single troopers life. The people in this area have survived for thousands of years. The US is only a couple hundred years old. It is quite egotistical for us to take any position in their lives. It is our job as citizens to give feedback to our elected people. Sometimes the feedback is louder then others depending on the situation. Our troopers lives are on the line. It might be a time to yell real loud. Don't be lazy and just vote.
Congress has proven to the American people over the last decade that they need some major feedback. There was a big swing in the leadership of congress last election. There is expectation that the swing will grow even more. For all of you who do not understand this you need to take citizenship 101 again.
I guess I am a 6 year old that was drafted in the last war so I may have a different point of view then some. It just might be EAT ME!!!!!
What do you suppose the Bushistas have on him to make him betray his consitituency like that?
This is wonderful - I hope it actually makes a difference. Can we flush some more of these people out for similar treatment? I'm jealous - we have a DLC makeover - Melissa Bean - what a disappointment she turned out to be.
*
Actually, he's from Vancouver, Washington. It's right across the river from Portland, OR
soothsayer @ 10:
Hi!, First time I've seen Big Ed show on c-span....
He's very good will make a point of tuning into his show....
hbkblk @ 24:
HOW CAN ANYONE SAY WHOM WOULD MAKE A GOOD LEADER? RANTING AND RAVING ABOUT AN ISSUE GETS IT NOTICED, BUT TERRIBLE LEADERS? NO, I DON'T THINK SO. MOST OF THE COMMENTS HERE ARE FROM GOOD - HONEST - HARDWORKING AMERICANS AND THAT QUALIFIES EACH AND EVERYONE OF THEM TO BE A LEADER.
Its amazing how these people magically turn into DINO's. Want to bet he was offered a job once he leaves office for his votes? Just another piece of shit who needs to be replaced.
Power corrupts.
Helena Montana @ 64:
Actually, that is a very good point....
I wonder too....
While I'm glad that Baird had to squirm, he'll get over it. The politicians in DC have more in common with each other than with us. Which party talks the most about "working with the opposition"?
To paraphrase George Carlin [or perhaps it's an exact quote]: they don't give a shit about you.
How about this for a "viable political solution"?
We admit that we can't just up and leave Iraq, but if our nation's military is going to continue to be called upon to fight a needless war, then we're going to demand some accountability from those who brought us this war.
In exchange for our continued participation in this war, we are going to nationalize 100% of the assets of Halliburton, Blackwater, Carlysle Group and any of the other war profiteers who've made out so well because of this war. Those institutions who've made so much money on the misery and suffering of others should be relieved of those gains. Their profits come completely from looted tax dollars, so nationalizing them would really just be a form of taking back what's already ours as a nation. Plus, I think it'd be good to have those Blackwater commandos back under the military CoC, don't you?
We're going to demand accontability in the form of criminal charges against those who manufactured the propaganda that convinced so many Americans that we needed to go to war against Iraq. This means a lot of politicians (including EVERY so-called "Neocon") and media personalities are going to spend a lot of time behind bars. Sure, we're there so we can't just up and leave, but that doesn't mean that we can't take away the freedom of those who maliciously dragged us into this fucking quagmire.
We're going to demand a draft. Let's spread this war out a bit. Those elected officials who voted to support this war, either because of political cowardice or because they felt it was the "right thing to do", will have their offspring catapaulted to the front of the line and sent into the most dangerous part of Iraq. This might make them reconsider whether or not this war is really worth fighting. It's one thing when it's a bunch of people to whom your only connection is a common language, it's something else when it's your child doing the fighting.
Let's put some teeth into some of these so-called "viable political solutions".
Mike Mid City @ 38:
We know they must too - what cowards these people are - the whole lot of them letting the White House blackmail them - if they would all simply say "enough already - go ahead and publish your dirt" - wouldn't the White House look stupid? "Spilling the beans" on a whole group at once? Who'd come off as the bad guy? It wouldn't be the victims - it'd be the White House. These idiots need to talk to each other.
CONGRESSIONAL BLACKMAIL VICTIMS UNITE!
*
equilibrio @ 40:
No elected representative has all of the same convictions as those who elected him. That's just plain silly.
rain @ 68:
Lots of people can. There any many books on the subject, suggest you might want to read a few of them.
malcontent @ 72--brilliant.
soothsayer @ 62:
Not trying to offend you Doggiebobo..but...one word....GOOGLE.....
Gene @ 52:
which begs the question: if not now when?
if getting out now is, as you say, "unrealistic", what pray tell is "realistic"?
you do agree that at some point in time we will have to leave iraq, right? i mean, we are not there to set up some sort of roman proconsul or anything, are we?
i take umbrage that sets the stay-the-course side of the argument up as the "realistic" side, while the other is, as you say, the "vocal" side.
is this the type of "realism" that should continue:
"Iraq is suffering about double the war-related deaths countrywide compared with last year - an average daily toll of 62 so far this year, as against 33 in 2006.
Nearly 1,000 more people have been killed in violence across Iraq in the first eight months of this year than in all of 2006. So far this year, about 14,800 people have died in war-related attacks and sectarian murders. AP reporting accounted for 13,811 deaths in 2006. The UN and other sources placed the 2006 toll far higher."
http://www.newsday.com/news/printedition/world/ny-wodead275348138aug27,0...
consider this: getting out "now" (and i am assuming you know that "now" is not exactly a speedy process) is actually the "realistic" and intelligent decision. as our being involved in the iraq clusterfuck actually HELPS terrorist recruitment--not to mention needless americans and iraqis losing their lives, and the Billions of dollars spent weekly, and america's low-as-dirt image worldwide.
your POV reminds me of friedman units. in that there is a belief there is just another 6 months before we see 'progress' and then another 6 months and then another.
and, as far as people berating congressmembers, like baird, they friggin deserve it. they should get on their knees and thank whoever they need to that the people haven't pulled a gray davis on them (or worse). no, this baird guy is just like the brookings institute flunkies who provide needed cover for bush after receiving a DOD-facilitated and approved "tour"
i say BRAVO to soltz (and the other "vocal" people)
Swashbuckler @ 5:
I agree, however his conviction at the time of the election was to end the war and he change his mind after we voted him in. If his conviction was for staying the course, then he should have let the people know before he got elected.
When in doubt.....Google.......it'll save you a lot of embarrassment........
[...] House Rep. Baird Gets An Earful: “You are here to represent us…” » This Summary is from an article posted at Crooks and Liars on Tuesday, August 28, 2007 This [...]
paranoia @ 79:
Sounds like they were passing out torches and pitchforks at the front door.
This guy is ripe for a primary challenge.
McCain famous phrase "We are where we are!"
This phrase somehow ease their guilt to justifying staying in the quagmire.
The fact that Saddam was desperate for cash flow into his country after the trade embargo, that he was lowering the oil prices to sell. This did not forebode very well with this administration. Why war with Iraq? Every reason they had was debunk! The pilots of 9/11 were Saudis! Hugo Chevas offer to sell his oil cheap to the Americans in the harsh winter, and Bush put out a referendum that Hugo is a terrorist threat. The only threat Saddam and Hugo poses were to the oil prices falling.
Our occupation is the equivalent of holding the Iraq people hostage for the oil prices to stay high. The sooner we get out of Iraq, the lower the prices of oil will be, just so that Iraq could rebuild their country. When their country is in shamble, they will not care who buys their oil.
As I watched a clip of this guy repeating Bush talking points the other day,I wondered what dirt the Bush people got on him via the Bush,NSA illegal wire tap program.
For the Dems to do the 180 that they`ve done since Jan., there must be something more than just politics involved.Conyers et. al changed their tune from impeach to "we`ll think about it if we get more sponsors."There`s got to be blackmail going on
Baird did a total sellout 180.He deserved any shit that was thrown at him last night.
If those guys have skeletons in their closet,then they should face the damn things ,and do their fucking jobs whether they`re getting blackmailed or not.
I`m headed to the Jean Schmidt town hall meeting tonight.It should be interesting.
# 83
McCain, McCain, McCain..........no where have I heard that name before?.....Oh, wasn't that the fella who was the shoo in for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008 before he tied his wagon to George Bush's war caboose?
Should serve as a warning to Republicans and Democrats alike.
Swashbuckler @ 5:
Yeah, if did what his constituents voted him in for, he'd be a 'Representative'.
paranoia @ 84:
The Iraqis will not rebuild their country until they have their civil war. The sooner we get out, the sooner they have their civil war, the sooner it's settled - and the number of dead will be lessened.
The longer we're there, the longer until the big civil war starts (and yes, it can get much, much worse than it is today) and the more people (both American and Iraqi) that will die.
Swashbuckler @ 74:
Not only that, but the citizens just vote them into office. After that, they just sell their votes to the highest bidder. It's their job to follow the other pigs to the trough.
Weaseldog @ 87: Yeah, if did what his constituents voted him in for, he'd be a 'Representative'.
Government by opinion poll - not a good idea.
Weaseldog @ 89:
Hence the need for public funding of elections!
Weaseldog @ 87:
"If the people lead the leaders will follow".
And likewise his constituents are free to vote their convictions when they show him the door.
bottom line: the lady doesn't give a damn what his convictions are, he was elected to serve his constituency. what part of that doesn't he get. and if he is a supporter of elmer fudd lieberman, all the worse. he's putting his head in the guillotine and his time will come. All he is is a "sincere" Bush republican. go to hell with the rest of them.
Ruthless People @ 92:
Absolutely.
That happened in CT, and sadly ol' Joe is still with us...
Swashbuckler @ 5:
What is with this desire to blame the Iraqis and/or their government representatives for our failed occupation?
Weaseldog @ 87:
The two great points of difference between a democracy and a republic are: first, the delegation of the government, in the latter, to a small number of citizens elected by the rest; secondly, the greater number of citizens, and greater sphere of country, over which the latter may be extended.
The effect of the first difference is, on the one hand, to refine and enlarge the public views, by passing them through the medium of a chosen body of citizens, whose wisdom may best discern the true interest of their country, and whose patriotism and love of justice will be least likely to sacrifice it to temporary or partial considerations. Under such a regulation, it may well happen that the public voice, pronounced by the representatives of the people, will be more consonant to the public good than if pronounced by the people themselves, convened for the purpose.
--- James Madison, Federalist Paper #10
Isome @ 95:
Just holding people accountable for not doing their jobs.
That the Iraqis cannot agree among themselves on the most basic things, things that they have said they would reach agreement on, is the fault of the Iraqis - not the fault of the U.S.
Swashbuckler @ 90:
Government by opinion poll - not a good idea.
Ignoring your constituents - not a good idea.
mudshark @ 77:
It's Vancouver, WASHINGTON not Oregon. Vancouver is a suburb of Portland just across the Columbia River in Washington state.
Dr. Matt @ 98:
Depends on what your priorities are, getting re-elected or doing the "right" thing.
If politicians always did what their consituents wanted in some places we'd have:
- the 10 Commandments on display in court rooms and other government buildings
- mandatory Christian prayers before and after government functions
- bans on interracial marriage and dating
- etc.
Swashbuckler @ 97:
First and most importantly, whether they agree, do not agree or cannot agree is not our concern, because we have no right to occupiers of their country. Secondly, our own government is plagued with constant disagreements.
It's an odd thing to hold them to standards that we do not apply to ourselves all the while discounting the fact that we have no right to be there.
So Sampson, we just come home and what happens to the people in Iraq? Watch them get slaughtered on the news everyday like they are now? I don't advocate the surge or "staying the course" (which is a quick label to put on people that don't agree with you, sort of the like the "cut and run" strategy of last year-classy), but hopefully someone smarter than I can craft a multilateral solution. Maybe some of the Iraq Study Group solutions.
Or we can just not engage on any level and watch people get killed in the street like dogs on MSNBC.
This congressman is my representative, and he just got my email regarding my anger over his recent foolish remarks. I voted for the dufus in the last election, but he was informed it will be the last vote he gets from me without MAJOR damage control on his stance regarding Iraq and this lunacy of the shrub admin.
I'm ashamed of this guy. They'll do anything for the vote, and then they'll sell their soul to the devil as soon as they can get the silver coins.
Isome @ 95:
it'd be nice to see the Iraqi govt. make some progress....but again this just shows how little research this admin did before starting this.This admin had no understanding of the way that countries people worked...NO WAIT.....Cheeney knew full well......he just didn't care.
Gene @ 102:
This is the same argument used about Vietnam, when in fact the killing began well before we left there and it dragged on far longer precisely because we WOULD NOT LEAVE. The same holds true here. There's a distinct arrogance in the sentiment that while we are currently slaughtering Iraqis in the name of democracy and US soldiers protecting themselves, not to mention that the US refuses to give refuge to those Iraqis that we used as interpreters, we are somehow SAVING THEM FROM THEMSELVES by continuing to occupy their country.
Isome @ 101:
That, in a word, is bullshit. It's our soldiers and our money being invested to try to put back together their country. That makes it our concern.
Sure, and when our government does not keep its obligations to other governments they complain.
If and when we start doing that please let me know. Until then...
Biden might be right.....make the country 3 different states...or countries.But that doesn't mean that they'll stop killing each other...
mudshark @ 104:
Agreed. The Bush administration TOTALLY screwed up. And for some reason, the people of this country did not hold them accountable for their blunder in 2004. But, we're there now and we have to get the hell out, sooner rather than later.
sully18 @ 85:
Carl Levin of all people did a switcheroo, recently. For someone that I had knew who could not ever turn, get turned. My first thought on Baird was the same as you. There seem to be something more going on to take a proven unpopular conviction to the front. There is the huge campaigning in the media that Ari Fleisher was promoting on the media, and he was ask who the soldier were that got wounded to promote the staying of the course, and Ari didn't know the name. He could be a very well paid liar playing the part. If your going to sell the campaign of caring for the soldier that sacrifice their effort in the War on rhetoric, then at least know the name of the soldier.
Gene @ 102:
If we follow that line of reasoning to it's logical conclusion we'll NEVER leave Iraq.
The Iraqis will have a civil war when we leave, it is inevitable.
Swashbuckler @ 100:
Depends on what your priorities are, getting re-elected or doing the "right" thing.
If politicians always did what their consituents wanted in some places we'd have:
- the 10 Commandments on display in court rooms and other government buildings
- mandatory Christian prayers before and after government functions
- bans on interracial marriage and dating
- etc.
WORST....ANALOGY....EVER....
Try again, sport.
Those are also extremist fringe movements not supported by the majority of America or even most districts. Not to mention, those fringe movements violate the Constitution. The vast majority of America is against the "war" disaster. Ignoring your constituents - not a good idea. Next.
Swashbuckler @ 110:
When we leave? There is already a civil war going on thanks to herr dubyah's invasion.
mudshark @ 107:
Biden is right (he didn't originate the idea btw), splitting Iraq up into three separate "states" is the best solution. It isn't a good solution, but it's the best one available. The likely problem is that two of three factions couldn't agree on the location and size of their states.
Swashbuckler @ 90:
Government by opinion poll - not a good idea.
Anti-Representation is better? Maybe a dictatorship?
Democracy is representation by polling.
What you are arguing for is not democracy.
Dr. Matt @ 111:
WORST....ANALOGY....EVER....
Try again, sport.
Those are also extremist fringe movements not supported by the majority of America or even most districts. Not to mention, those fringe movements violate the Constitution. The vast majority of America is against the "war" disaster. Ignoring your constituents - not a good idea. Next.
You try again buckaroo. In some areas those things would happen because in some areas the majority of the people would want those things.
Try filling that empty void between your ears with something that allows you to THINK.
Swashbuckler @ 100:
Depends on what your priorities are, getting re-elected or doing the "right" thing.
If politicians always did what their consituents wanted in some places we'd have:
- the 10 Commandments on display in court rooms and other government buildings
- mandatory Christian prayers before and after government functions
- bans on interracial marriage and dating
- etc.
Duh! We've had those things. The public pressured their representatives to do away with them.
You are just arguing for the opposite of reality, right?
Swashbuckler @ 106:
Uhhhh... they have their own money, but of course this administration has played fast and loose with it, as they do with US tax payers money. However, there is no getting around the fact that we illegally invaded. Hence, we have no concerns there except getting our soldiers out.
Sure, and when our government does not keep its obligations to other governments they complain. Uhhh huh... so we can complain all we like, but keep in mind that we have no right to be there.
Weaseldog @ 114:
ROFLMAO!!!
In case you haven't noticed, this country isn't a democracy, it's a republic!
And no, democracy isn't a perfect system. The ignorant masses have too much power - hence Bush's re-election in 2004.
Swashbuckler @ 113:
No the likely problem is the oil fields... and then keeping Turkey from invading the north...and then ofcourse keeping Iran in Iran..........very complex situation......no easy answer...as for the future of Iraq.....it'll be just like Lebanon....for the next 30 years...atleast.We need to get the hell out of there...ASAP.....like starting NOW
The Iraqi's won't get their "act together" on behalf of Bush and his OIL buddies because the country(as has always been known)is eternally embroiled in sectarian strife.
al-Maliki' the puppet,was installed to supposedly "unite" the country but naturally has been using his power to exact partisan revenge on his enemies.
Their is NO military solution to this blood bath.
However OIL interests will continue to pretend to care about the fate of the Iraqi people indefinitely,no matter what the cost.
Just as in Vietnam,sadly,the only option is to get the hell out of the country.
I have zero patience for any one claiming that this will some how doom the populace.
They are already up to their their eye brows in the blood of their own children.
mudshark @ 119:
Err... the oil fields is what would keep them from agreeing on size and location.
But I totally agree regarding Lebanon and getting out. The sooner the better!
Swashbuckler @ 96:
and this quote (and, for full clarification, i'm a pro-madison type of guy--in his struggle against the neo-monarchist hamilton) goes to show the institutionalized economic/racial/sexist discrimination that was just part and parcel of 18th century life.
over 75% of the delegates were direct economic beneficiaries from the adoption of the constitution. and, in order to establish a new american-made aristocracy, the founding fathers needed to ensure that the law of the land was buffered from 'will of the people'. hence, our representative democracy. the land owners, the rich merchant class and others needed a codification of their elevated place in society, so that women, the poor, minorities (see, slaves and former slaves), and the landless didn't have a direct voice in governance. they could only vote for someone who would then vote on their behalf.
i think it is folly to assume the benevolent intentions of the founding fathers, and realize that the same temptations, social stratification and power was in effect in the 18th cen as it is now.
This Republic IS a Democracy........sheeesh!
Swashbuckler @ 106:
Dr. Matt @ 112:
Small scale. When we leave it will get much bigger. The worst days of the past year will become the best days after we leave.
Samson- @ 122:
Agreed. I've posted here before that "We the People..." can be properly read as "We the white male property owners..."
Weaseldog @ 124:
Uhh, yes, yes I do and yes, we do.
Yes, yes he/she does.
It is indeed!
Thank you for the opportunity to unleash some pent up sarcasm.
Swashbuckler @ 121:
Err... the oil fields is what would keep them from agreeing on size and location.
But I totally agree regarding Lebanon and getting out. The sooner the better!
Ummm aren't the majority of the oil fields in the Sunni part?they will neither give up any oil fields or any tribal land...and they damn sure won't share in the revenues.Which brings in Iran in the east and Turkey in the north...very complex situation....no easy answers....we can all thank the Preznit for this one.We will be dealing with this for decades to come..
Swashbuckler @ 118:
ROFLMAO!!!
In case you haven't noticed, this country isn't a democracy, it's a republic!
And no, democracy isn't a perfect system. The ignorant masses have too much power - hence Bush's re-election in 2004.
In a Republic, representatives vote on behalf of their constituents.
What you are arguing for a dictatorship or an oligarchy. You don't need elections in these systems because the politicians do not represent the will of the people. This is what you are in fact arguing for.
If you want to continue this debate, you're welcome to do it virtually, it has already been archived in many thousands of documents on the Peloponnesian War. This isn't the proper venue to teach government.
Strictly speaking, cannot be.
A republic is where the people elect representatives to govern them. A democracy is where the people govern themselves.
sheeesh!
Swashbuckler @ 125:
Says who? Kristol? Saffire? Wolfowitz? ...or one of the other blind-to-history, warmongers with a white male superiority complex who pushed for this illegal invasion & occupation?
mudshark @ 128:
Don't believe so. What I remember was that most of them were in the Shia areas.
Isome @ 131: Says who? Kristol? Saffire? Wolfowitz? ...or one of the other blind-to-history, warmongers with a white male superiority complex who pushed for this illegal invasion & occupation?
Says anyone with half a brain that realizes that the presence of our soldiers in Iraq is keeping a lid on the violence.
Swashbuckler @ 113:
Don't any of you find it the least, oh, what's the word--oh yeah arrogant----sitting on your asses deciding what's best for some other country?
I actually have some faith that they'll be able to figure things out for themselves.
we elect people to represent their views ...right.....what we have is a broken system...due to special interests.where the will of the people are no longer represented..right?What is represented is the will of special interests........this is a republic....and a Democracy...it just needs to be fixed....
Swashbuckler @ 133:
Says anyone with half a brain that realizes that the presence of our soldiers in Iraq is keeping a lid on the violence.
You might want to try reading Juan Cole, who happens to be an expert.
Swashbuckler @ 133:
Says anyone with half a brain that realizes that the presence of our soldiers in Iraq is keeping a lid on the violence.
Our forces are not keeping a lid on the violence.....sure it's not as bad as it's going to get......but to say we're stopping the violence....is absurd.
Gene @ 102:
i will use your own words for my rebuttal:
you said, "Watch them get slaughtered on the news everyday like they are now?"
you are correct people ARE getting slaughtered, AND we are there now--including US contractors (see, war profiteers), we have close to 300,000 people in iraq (no one really knows b/c the mercenary numbers are cloudy). yet, in fact, the numbers of dead and wounded have increased since the surge started.
don't misunderstand my intentions: i want things to get better, i'm not down with watching people get slaughtered on the news. but thinking that there is some magical military sol'n to this nightmare is wishful thinking.
and a "multilateral" solution, IMHO, will NEVER happen in iraq as long as the regional players and the world players assume that we will be there in perpetuity.
and, finally, you misunderstand why i used the 'stay the course' label. i'll just leave it at that.
Swashbuckler @ 126:
Agreed. I've posted here before that "We the People..." can be properly read as "We the white male property owners..."
swashbuckler, i didn't mean to infer, if you took it that way, that you were one that made this assumption.
stock market down 219 points.......sorry off topic
[...] Crooks N’ Liars, which links the the Oregonian, so you don’t have to go there yourself. This entry is filed [...]
Hazmat @ 25:
Think people. How many representatives do we have from Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada!? What state does Baird represent. Maybe, just maybe that's where the meeting was.
#140....I have to admit....I thought that was a no brainer....
mudshark @ 137:
Our forces are not keeping a lid on the violence.....sure it's not as bad as it's going to get......but to say we're stopping the violence....is absurd.
However, ...wait, allow to quote those more knowledgeable than I:
"... in the words of sociologist Michael Schwartz, "the U.S. presence doesn't deter, but contributes to, a thickening civil-war-like atmosphere in Iraq", and that if the U.S. were leave Iraq quickly, "it is far more reasonable to assume ....that the level of violence would be reduced, possibly drastically, not heightened."
In a widely-read essay posted on www.tomdispatch.com, Schwartz argued that the U.S. military is already killing more civilians than would likely die in a threatened civil war (he estimates more than 25,000 civilian deaths a year).
He said that the U.S. presence is actually aggravating terrorist violence, rather than suppressing it, and that much of the current terrorist violence, particularly that associated with the radical Islamist group of Abu Musab al Zarqawi, would be likely to subside if the U.S. left."
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0927-03.htm
People should, and probably do, vote for a Representative who most closely represents their views. A Representative should not adopt the views of the constituency. That would be hypocritical. That does not mean that he can't change his minds as things develop, but he should have a plausible explanation for his change of mind.
The surge was designed to buy time for Parliament to come up with a political solution. So far the military has reduced violence merely by their increased presence, but the political side is no closer to its goal. This is what has been going on for years now. It is time to pull the plug and tell them BASTA!!!
There is much discussion above as to whether those elected to the House of Representatives should lead or represent the voters living and voting in their district.
Those with the opinion they should lead have an obligation to explain why the founders named the lower legislative body - The House of Representatives. I'm just saying.
mudshark @ 77:
Could I please have the directions to Vancouver, Oregon?
Swashbuckler @ 133:
Says anyone with half a brain that realizes that the presence of our soldiers in Iraq is keeping a lid on the violence.
hadenuf @ 136:
You might want to try reading Juan Cole, who happens to be an expert.
According to retired General William Odom, "We created the civil war when we invaded; we can't prevent a civil war by staying."
I'm certain he has more than 1/2 a brain.
equilibrio @ 40:
So then why even have representatives at all? Why not just decide everything by popular poll?
Liberal AND Proud @ 59:
Then I suppose we should have bombed the heck outta the whole middle east directly after 9/11. I think it's pretty safe to say that a majority of Americans wanted that. I say we make sure there are NO representatives left from back then that DIDNT listen to the people and DIDNT ensure that the whole middle east got bombed.
Because that's what the reps are for, right?
Login or Register to post comments.