Kerry email: Time to Defeat DeLay, Santorum and Reed

[kerrygoddess]

Time to Defeat DeLay, Santorum and Reed
October 18th, 2005

In an email today from John Kerry’s Keeping America’s Promise PAC, Kerry says, it’s time to “break the Republican’s grip on power.” Tops on the list of those who have got to go: DeLay, Santorum and Reed.

It’s the question that’s on everyone’s mind: with Republican incompetence, cronyism and corruption on full display, when are Democrats going to stand up and break the Republicans’ grip on power and finally move America forward?

How about right now?

If you’ve had it with incompetent, divisive, uncaring Republican officials, I hope you will act immediately to help Keeping America’s Promise wage an all-out effort to remove the worst of the bunch from office in the upcoming elections. Support Keeping America’s Promise


I’m talking about people like Tom DeLay whose bare-knuckled, dictatorial style has earned him a nickname — the Hammer . . . like Rick Santorum in Pennsylvania, the leading Senate apologist for the miserable record of the Bush administration . . . like Ralph Reed, the former radical right leader turned Abramoff-tainted lobbyist now running for lieutenant governor in Georgia.

One thing is certain: America would be better off if the 2006 elections ended with all three of these figures — DeLay, Santorum and Reed — standing in defeat. And your support for Keeping America’s Promise’s grassroots efforts to win the most critical electoral contests of 2005 and 2006 can drive them from office.

Reed was one of the architects of brutal attacks on the patriotism of Senator Max Cleland, a Vietnam War hero, and he’s counting on benefiting from a new poll tax in Georgia that puts barriers in the path of voters. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution says that the Republicans’ tactics will “make Georgia the toughest place in the nation to vote.”

MORE - http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=875

[welshTerrier2]

1. Kerry mentions anti-choice Bob Casey but not his Dem challenger?

thanks for nothing ...

and no, i don't feel all too excited about the "love me love me love me i'm a Democrat" ...

Hillary Clinton's call for an expanded war effort is disgusting ...

if Mr. Kerry wants my support, he'll stop campaigning for pro-war Democrats ...

oh, and Bob Casey? ... he's not just anti-abortion; he's anti-choice ...

nice to see that all Kerry supports is a party label and a woman's right to choose means nothing ... Casey has a Democratic challenger in the primaries ... I guess Mr. Kerry doesn't care about that ...

[beachmom]

2. thanks for posting this, KerryGoddess

Welshterrier,

I understand your frustration, but you can be a purist or you can win. I live in a very red state, and the Dem gubernatorial candidate is pro-life. If you live in a blue area, it is difficult to understand how different people think in other parts of the country. Nevertheless, the difference between a pro-life Dem and a pro-life Repub is it is not the Democrats' agenda to pass kooky abortion restriction laws or overturn Roe. Instead they are focussed on bread and butter issues like the economy, and simply feel "uncomfortable" about abortion. I can live with that.

In the end, what matters is that we get a majority in Congress so that this corrupt administration can be held accountable for their deeds. I don't mind if a few pro-life Dems are in that bunch as long as they fight for core Democratic values.

Kudos to Kerry for seeing the big picture and keep fighting on.

[welshTerrier2]

5. i resent the term "PURIST"

don't try to push me into a position of being uncompromising and unyielding ... it's an unfair characterization ...

if sellout Democrats are not going to stand for their beliefs, THEY DESERVE TO LOSE ... (read the Kennedy quote in my sig line) ...

I am beyond sick and tired of this bullshit ... before you label me a purist, let's talk about the two issues i raised ... pushing Democrats who are way outside the mainstream of the Party gives us an image of "win at any cost; stand for whatever it takes to win" ... that is NOT what voters want and it is exactly why we are out of power in this country ...

During the governor's race in PA, Casey said that not only is he against abortion, but he opposes it even in cases of rape and incest ... it's unconscionable ... for the national Democratic Party, and Kerry, to endorse bullshit like that lacks any commitment to Democratic values ... "what difference does it make if we deprive a bunch of women of their civil liberties as long as we can win?" ... it's disgraceful ...

and Clinton's call for expanded war in Iraq? just what Democrats does that view represent? she is a war hawk and is totally out of touch on this critical issue ...

we can differ over withdrawal timelines and seek to work out compromises ... but to not label bush's motivations for war as commercially motivated and to not label them as a form of imperialism is just not right ...

i don't call for "ideological purity" but i do call for standing for something ... standing for more war and depriving women of their civil rights is well outside the bounds of compromise ...

[Mandate My Ass]

8. I'm right there with you, welshTerrier2

Refusing to sell out the fundamental human rights of half the population to win an election is not being a purist, it's being a democrat.

The Dem leadership is telling us they can't mount any kind of opposition until they are the majority party and in the next breath they tell us we have to support candidates who are so ideologically akin to neocons as to be almost indistinguishable.

Casey supports the war in Iraq and the death penalty. He is NOT pro-life, he is anti-woman.

I didn't care much for his father either.

[kerrygoddess]

29. And remember who Kennedy supports -

KERRY.

[welshTerrier2]

35. is Kerry perfect?

if not, what do you see as his faults?

what issues do you believe he is wrong about?

or are you a Kerry "purist" ???

[TayTay]

37. Good gawd no. There are no perfect candidates.

Personally, I thought of writing him the following letter during last years race:

The Honorable John Kerry
Dear Sir:

I think the following explanation would greatly increase your vote among women. Please explain how you manage to eat a humongous breakfast, huge snacks, campaign food, drink beer and are thin as a rail. When President Clinton ran he had the good sense to gain weight on the campaign trail. You seem to get thinner. This is extremely puzzling and I wish to know how you do it.

Kindly share this secret with the women of America. It's probably worth 5-10 points in the women's vote.

Thank you kindly,
TayTay

What the f*ck is that all about. How can anyone who hasn't made a pact with the devil be so damn thin and be on the rubber chicken circuit? It's an affront to God and to nature.

There. I don't think he's perfect.

[welshTerrier2]

39. so last year was your fault???

you should have sent the damned letter ... what were you thinking ??

[TayTay]

40. You think that would have done it?

I think he should have gone on Oprah and talked about this. Most women would have said, "Yeah, yeah, I want to hear about all the plans and stuff, but first, how to you stay so friggin thin?"

Next stop, the John Kerry Diet program on Oprah. He may not be President, but he's still thin. (Oprah knows what really matters in America.)

[welshTerrier2]

42. actually ...

maybe he should have picked Oprah as a running mate ...

[TayTay]

43. I like Oprah

But, to complete the circle, what is her stand on ethanol? How could we win Iowa without a decent stand on ethanol? (What? We lost Iowa, even with that stand on ethanol? Damn. Well, she didn't help at all, did she? No more Rich, AA, women from Chicago on my national tickets. She didn't help at all. I think we should just go with virtual VP's from now on. Adaptable to wahtever state you're in.)

[kerrygoddess]

3. Kerry's positioning for those poised to win

Casey is leading in the polls. Like it or not - WE NEED WINNERS right now. There are no perfect politicians. If we want to take back the House and the Senate we need to get together not keep pushing one or two issues as litmus tests.

[TayTay]

4. I understand the sides on this.

Everyone has make or break issues. I think that bills like the Bankruptcy abomination that passed Congress this year would either not have come up or would have come up in a vastly different way had Dems been in charge of the Congress.

It is always a personal balancing act, as the many debates in DU have shown: Are we for Democrats or for policy issues. (Both, I hope. But I would have to go with supporting Dems in general and I dont' want the Dems to go below 44 Sens. I understand Kerry doing this. I sent Casey a donation for that reason.)

Your mileage may vary, of course.

[ray of light]

9. Right...

Make or break issues. Some people are strongly anti-war, anti-choice, anti-anything. Others pick or chose their issues. If Casey is not lined up with 'Democrat values' at least 80% of the time, then he's no democratic candidate--more like a Zell Miller.

BUT...in this one instance, Casey may fit the area of his constituents better than another candidate. Also, he will be 1000x better than Mr. Sanctimonious (what's his name...lol)

[welshTerrier2]

6. there's another one ... i resent the term "PERFECT"

how about candidates that just don't suck !!

and calling for more war and pushing an anti-choice platform are not "litmus tests"; they're values ...

and as for your "WE NEED WINNERS", Kerry sure as hell isn't one ... and neither is any other Democrat who puts WINNING ahead of standing up for the Party's core beliefs (not litmus tests) that include opposing this insane, obviously failed, war and a fighting like hell for a woman's right to choose ...

if we don't stand for Democratic values, we deserve to lose and we will lose ... WE NEED WINNERS and we'll never get them with a win-at-any-cost sellout of our values ...

[MoonRiver]

7. Thank You, Welch Terrier!

!!!!!!!:thumbsup:!!!!!!!

[welshTerrier2]

10. an article all DU'ers should read ...

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1017-24.htm

i don't agree with all of it but it highlights exactly what is wrong with the Democratic Party ... those who put party ahead of issues are largely responsible for the Party's 25 year decline ...

maybe we should stop the vacuous candidate advertising and start defining who we are and what are the limits beyond which we will not go to win ...

[JI7]

11. the issue in some cases is a Democratic controlled Senate

people are willing to put up with a few Senators of their party who don't represent their views on important issues if it means the party overall would control the Senate.

many of these people would never support Casey if he ran for President.

i put up with Robert Byrd as Senator even though he is anti gay and said that those who don't believe in God should leave the country. but i would never support him for President.

[welshTerrier2]

12. and so?

you are a young woman raped by her father and pregnant and you go out to campaign for Bob Casey so Democrats can win back the Senate ...

i want to win too but i would rather lose fighting for my deeply held beliefs than sellout to candidates and parties that spit at my values ...

[JI7]

14. i am female

i know the issues. i know there have always been anti choice Dems. even Gore himself was anti choice at one time.

my goal is to keep abortion legal. if the Democrats controlled the Senate they would have more power to do this. just as the few prochoice Republicans help the anti choice republicans by keeping their party in power.

so i guess i'm a bit selfish here. i'm willing to put up with people who are against what i want in order to keep those things.

[MoonRiver]

16. The problem is those DINOs don't win. The Repukes, whom they

most resemble, win because Democrats see no significant differences between the two candidates and don't bother to vote. This is an increasingly obvious phenomenon which we ignore to our eternal peril.

[second edition]

31. Pa is different! His chances of a victory are extremely high.

A progressive or far leaning left candidate won't have a chance in Pa. Casey's father was our Governor years ago. People still remember the name and still respect his father for his honesty and good work. Bob Casey Jr. also has a very good impeccable record.

[Mandate My Ass]

20. We have several anti-choice dems in the Senate already

Why give them one more? Casey has said he is a Catholic and will vote as a Catholic on this issue. (altho not on war and the DP) Repubs vote in lockstep, so if only a few Dems cross over, Roe is gone.

Santorum is a deeply flawed candidate. Several pro-choice Dems who could have beaten him were told to step aside. Since when does the Dem leadership shove a candidate down voters' throats without a primary? If the dems can't come up with a strategy to beat a whacked out loon job like Santorum, if name recognition is the only thing that will succeed, as they claim, then we might as well just blow our brains out now.

[JI7]

26. so why not work on supporting someone against Casey

so many times i see people complaining about Dems such as Lieberman. but i rarely see any posts about the work they are doing to support another Dem in the primary against them.

i remember when a defeat Lieberman site popped up. but they had nothing on who to support against Lieberman and what that person stood for.

[Mandate My Ass]

44. I am. I'm volunteering for Chuck Pennachio

in the primary. But thanks for making a sweeping generalization about me based on nothing but your low opinion. :hi:

[second edition]

34. Do you want to win or do you want to make a statement.

With our numbers down in the Senate and the House IMO, it is more important to run an electable candidate.Casey is a real hard working dedicated individual. I'm not at all happy with his abortion stand but I am more than a one issue voter. PA is not as progressive as you might think.Casey has the best shot.

[Mandate My Ass]

45. Selling out women's basic human rights is not a win

Living in a Handmaid's Tale is not any better whether it was a (D) or an (R) who put us there. There are a lot of electable candidates, that's what primaries are for but the Dem leaders want to shove Casey down our throats without a primary. No thank you. Kerry was supposedly electable too.

Casey sucks. Calling him repub lite would be a compliment. I am more than a one-issue voter too. He has many, many strikes against him in my book. The anti-choice one is just the cherry on top of the whole shitty pile, IMHO.

[wisteria]

61. I doubt things would get as far as the "Handmaiden's Tale".

We are talking one vote here. I certainly don't want to sell out women's basic rights. But, sometimes you have to make tough calls and you have to weigh all the issues-not just one. Why do you think "Casey sucks". I have been aware of his politics for years and I can attest to him being honest and hardworking.His values are Democratic values. I haven't read anything that would lead me to believe him to be worse than a repub lite.
Kerry was very electable even being a liberal. He didn't win yes, but his loss had nothing to do with him being a Bush lite candidate.
I'm sorry, but I have to disagree with you that running a pro-choice candidate in the current political climate would be a sure fire win for us. I personally think it would be a disaster.

[TayTay]

15. It's not that simple and you know it

You're smarter than that. I vote for the people that I consider are Democrats. (You know, support baseline Democratic isues that deal with a fair shake for everyone up and down the economic ladder, good schools, funding for higher ed, funding for lower income people to pay for basics like food, housing and heating. That sort of thing. Veterans issues are a big deal with me as well.)

I have every reason to believe that Casey will vote for these things.How does that make me someone who is voting in a non-issues oriented way. For me, economic issues trump social issues. This is my baseline concern. It's how I vote, from the heart and the soul.

Again, your mileage may vary. Do you really want to kick me, my time, my money and my effort out of the party because I would vote pocketbook issues before social issues?

[welshTerrier2]

25. prioritizing issues is fine

selling out on any person's civil liberties and constitutional rights is not ...

which of YOUR civil liberties are you prepared to give up? maybe freedom of religion? how about freedom of speech? how about something minor like your Miranda rights? would you support a candidate how called for that if they were good on all the other issues you care about?

i have no problem with anyone prioritizing what issues are important to them ... in fact, i hope they think about the issues enough to do exactly that ... but i also hope they understand that there are certain human rights, constitutional rights, than cannot be compromised ... freedom to choose is one such right ...

[JI7]

28. depends on what they were running for

Robert Byrd said those who don't believe in God should leave the country. he is also anti gay. but i hope he wins re-election.

of course i would never support him for President though.

[TayTay]

36. Which are you prepared to give up

Housing assistance, Food Stamps, Aid to Families with Dempendent Children, Veterans' health care?

It is a matter of priorities, as you have stated. And Mr. Kerry has apparently chosen his. I concur. If I have the right to pick my priorities, doesn't he?

[MoonRiver]

19. Exactly! It's about principle. But it's also about pragmatics.

Over the years, our losses appear to be in exact proportion to how much we compromise on core Democratic values.

[Mass]

24. agreed - can you tell that to Duers who do that all the time?

How many people have been labelled anti-war here where they are not.

[kerrygoddess]

32. Who the heck is calling for more war?

Kerry's not winner? I guess you really believe he lost last year.

The vehemence and back and forth gets old after a while. There are a lot of democratic values beyond the war and abortion. And FYI, I'll fight tooth and nail to protect the right to choose and I've spent many a Friday night in the past 2 1/2 years protesting this friggin war - but Santorum has GOT to go and it appears at this point that Casey is the one who can do it.

Not everyone in the democratic party hangs out at DU and sees the war as the number one issue. We need to remember that and consider that DU members are a minority voice among the democratic party.

[welshTerrier2]

38. what gets old is the endless stream of Kerry advertisements

yes, Kerry lost last year ... deal with it ... whether he lost fairly or unfairly, he lost ... he is not in power ... he was not able to prove a case that the other side cheated ... sometimes you lose because cheating occurs ... and sometimes you lose because you run a lousy campaign ...

and Kerry did worse than that ... last year's election should have been a cakewalk for Democrats ... the war was going very badly ... the economy was shakey ... corruption was everywhere ... and cronymism too ...

and a majority of Americans, let alone Democrats (and DU'ers), have called for withdrawal from Iraq ASAP ... and Kerry?

you will let me know if he mumbles something on the issue, won't ya?

[politicasista]

46. She has a right to post info..

just as much as supporters of Clark, Gore, Dean, and Edwards do. She posts them out here because people lurk here in GDP everyday and don't want to ask the question "Where are the Democrats?" I welcome any news on Kerry, Gore, Clark, Dean, Edwards or any dem.

[welshTerrier2]

47. the "Kerry Advertising Bureau"

i certainly made no statement suggesting she doesn't have a right to post here ... your post is not responsive ...

in fact, i was responding in kind to a post explaining "what got old" ... interesting that you only focus on candidates 3 years before an election and fail to mention any issues ...

if we had more Democrats like that we'd have fewer Democrats overall ...

[kerrygoddess]

49. FYI

I'm not saying anything here about Kerry being a candidate. I'm posting news about what Kerry IS doing in the Senate -- he is after all a seated U.S. Senator.

I also do not post only Kerry news here - but you never take an interest in any other news I post here - why not?

Today I posted about Miers, where were you to comment in that thread?

Or the thread I posted about Waxman's report on Iraq reconstruction today? Did you jump on that one?

Maybe you should visit my blog and see that there is a wide variety of news there.

[welshTerrier2]

50. well, let's have a look ...

first of all, i don't believe i said that you posted anything about "Kerry being a candidate" ... my post was in response to another poster ...

and as for not responding to your other threads, i'll offer you this from earlier today: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2165025#2165085

[kerrygoddess]

48. If you paid attention

You would recognize that Kerry talked about preparing for withdrawl in his June 28th speech on the Senate floor. Read it. Nothing anyone else has been saying is much different from Kerry's speech on June 28th.

http://kerry.senate.gov/v3/cfm/record.cfm?id=239696

[Mass]

55. Please dont go there

Who cares what Kerry has said or not. This is not the issue here. The issue is Kerry bashing.

[Mass]

51. Sad day today, when people who are normally intelligent lose

their time of what is only an informative email (with little substance).

There is better to do if you want to fight this war than to attack a poster who likes Kerry.

BTW, where were you when Clark said that we had to stay in Iraq?

(sa, make your mind, my friend. Is it Kerry that you dislike or is it the war in Iraq that bothers you?).

Kerry is still my senator (as yours), and I still want him to do things, whether you like it or not.

People are pushing people who do not support leaving Iraq everyday here, including people whose opinions are a lot worse than Kerry. Once again, why Kerry? I am beginning to doubt of your motives.

[welshTerrier2]

53. a few responses ...

1. you couldn't have said it better ... yet another post, what was the term you used for the OP, oh yes, a post "with little substance" from the Kerry Advertising Bureau ...
2. When i agree with Kerry on issues, i say so ... but i'm not going to just sit back and let posts that are nothing but advertising go by without comment ... you call it wasting time; then don't waste your time commenting on my posts about it ...
3. i like Kerry less and less ... so yes, Kerry bothers me ...
4. where was i when Clark said we had to stay in Iraq ... how many links would you like me to post about my criticisms on Clark's position ... pick a number and i'll try to find some bookmarks for you ... or better yet, go ask the Clarkies ... they know exactly where i stand on Clark's Iraq position ... i even blogged directly with Clark and was critical of his non-response to me ...
5. you "doubt my motives" ... that's nice ... doubt away ... convincing you of my motives is not an objective ... if you want to pledge allegiance to someone who lost an election because he had a fence post up his ass on the war, that's really your business ...

[Mass]

54. I personnally could not care less of your motives

I just see that there is a double standard that pushes you to attack Kerry and not others.

For the rest, it's your business. It will continue to defend my issues and not what the politburo tells me to support (which I have the feeling may be the same as yours, except for the yelling that brings us nowhere).

I am sure Teddy must have PO you a lot last year.

[welshTerrier2]

56. double standard ??

you think i'm not disgusted with Hillary the war hawk?? as i said, go talk to the Clarkies ... Clark is dead wrong on Iraq on two key issues: he won't support withdrawal and he does support the construction of "permanent" bases ... there is no one in the Senate, including Feingold, whose position i like on this critical issue ...

Democrats have turned their back on the majority of Americans and the majority of Democrats ... i see no double standard there ...

you apparently either don't believe i say positive things about Kerry or are shooting from the hip and really have no idea about the overall composition of my posts ...

[wisteria]

59. Look,or better yet, don't look for them and reply to them.

DU is not just for your favorites or for those who share only your opinions and respond in what you consider to be an appropriate time frame. Actually, who are you to question an call out a senator on his responses or non-responses to certain issues? Frankly, I happen to like these posts on Kerry. AND I HAPPEN TO LIKE JOHN KERRY.

Also, you must of had inside information on all the ills in America during the last election. To think, I thought the WAR ON TERROR was the dominant issue during the campaign. And I thought it was actually unprecedented to be able to unseat an incumbent President during war time.

In regards to your reference to a majority of Americans wanting a withdraw from Iraq ASAP, I don't recall seeing that poll-could you post it. You call out Kerry for no response on this issue and leave other Dem's out. Why only Kerry? And isn't it just possible, that the Dem's were requested to stay together on this issue for a time before making their individual feelings known. Notice that Feingold hasn't said much recently.

Finally, I would be glad to notify you when Kerry does speak out on this war, but somehow I don't think that will be necessary, because I think you will be watching for it anyway.

[welshTerrier2]

60. garbage ...

DU is not just for your favorites ... no, but i'm certainly entitled to my opinion ...

Who are you to question? um, a citizen? would that be OK with you if we designed a system of government where citizens held their own opinions? some who blindly follow the party elite seem uncomfortable with that ...

yes, i'll go find the poll you asked about ... i have a link to it saved somewhere ... i trust you'll be citing the poll on a regular basis once i provide it ...

criticize Kerry only? give me a break ... where are all your comments about my positive Kerry posts ??? hmmmmmm ....

Dems staying together? i don't support the position of the Democratic Party on Iraq ... it's a disgrace ... cowering in the corner together doesn't change that ...

so, what are your criticisms of Kerry? you're not one of those who thinks he's perfect are you?

please nag me about that poll if i don't get back to you ... it was a CBS News / NY Times poll ... i think it was taken last month ... i'll post it here or PM you ...

[wisteria]

63. Bash the party as a whole not individuals.

And yes, I have seen one or two positive posts. I probably even replied to them.
And no, I don't think kerry is perfect. I think he is to cautious sometimes-although I give him the benefit of the doubt, knowing he is closer to the issues than I am and has access to information that I do not.It would be nice however, to see him "seize the moment" once in a while. It would make him a more exciting candidate IMO.

[welshTerrier2]

64. nope ...

my criticisms will be focused on issues i care about and will be directed at both party and individuals ...

what i don't like is using DU as a billboard for candidates ... and certain Kerry posters see it as their job to endlessly promote Kerry ... when they do that, they are fair game for criticism ...

yes, it's their right to do so ... but i don't like it and will continue to criticize it ...

and if you'll look all the way back to the first response in this thread, you'll see what my original criticism of the OP was ... it's not Kerry bashing when the criticism is based on a legitimate issue ... it's disgusting (that's an opinion) that Kerry is endorsing Hillary the war hawk and it's disgusting he's supporting Casey when a pro-choice Democrat is running against him ... that's where this all began ...

[welshTerrier2]

62. 52% of Americans call for withdrawal from Iraq ASAP

well, the bad news is that the NY Times makes you pay for this link now ... it was free when it was first published ...

here's a link to the DU thread that provides 2 links to the survey ... one is the Times link that you'll have to pay for ... the other is an extract of the survey that provides the 52% figure ...

here's the link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=2109160

i'd like to try to find a free source for this survey because it's important ... i'll post it if i'm able to ...

[wisteria]

65. NY Times poll isn't worth paying for IMO just to prove a point.

The other poll does confirm what you said earlier. However, the majority only applies to Democrats. The country as a whole only has 33% saying a pull out ASAP is a good idea. What this tells me is that most Dem politicians are trying to reach out beyond the current Dem base and appeal to a broader range of people. We should want to continue to grow and gain strength as a party. Is this the best strategy? I'm not entirely convinced it is. People look for leadership and for leaders to tell them what the course of action should be. Sometimes I think our party as a whole is much to cautious.This does not mean that we should single out one Dem and heap all of our frustration onto him.

[welshTerrier2]

66. here's a new survey - now it's 59% for withdrawal ASAP !!!

i wouldn't pay them a penny for their stupid new fee-based program ...

the Times poll said that "52% of Americans polled wanted the US to withdraw from Iraq ASAP" ... not just Democrats ...

the other poll in the link that used showed that same percentage for Democrats only was taken about a month earlier iirc ...

here's a more recent poll i just found ... you'll see the 52% i referred to in an earlier poll ... now it's 59% !!!!! (sorry about the formatting ... the first column is "Stay as long as it takes", the second column is "leave ASAP")

source: http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

"Should the United States troops stay in Iraq as long as it takes to make sure Iraq is a stable democracy, even if it takes a long time, or should U.S. troops leave Iraq as soon as possible, even if Iraq is not completely stable?"
Prior to 6/04: "Should the United States troops stay in Iraq as long as it takes to make sure Iraq is a stable democracy, even if that takes a long time, or should U.S. troops turn over control to Iraqis as soon as possible, even if Iraq is not completely stable?"
.
Stay as
Long as
It Takes Leave ASAP Unsure
% % %
ALL adults 36 59 5
Republicans 61 36 3
Democrats 24 73 3
Independents 29 62 9

Trend:
9/9-13/05 42 52 6
2/24-28/05 55 40 5
1/14-18/05 51 42 7
9/04 54 39 7
6/23-27/04 54 40 6
5/20-23/04 45 49 6
5/11/04 38 55 7
4/23-27/04 46 46 8
12/14-15/03 56 35 9
11/10-12/03 49 43 8

[Mass]

52. So may be you want to write to Boxer?

Because she is supporting exactly the same people. If, of course, the subject is supporting people because of the issues they stand for and not Kerry bashing.

What senators has called to withdraw from Iraq? (and please avoid saying Feingold)- So I guess that I was wrong when I though you were not a Kerry-basher.

[Cocoa]

57. what an odd comment

ask what senator has called to withdraw from Iraq, then say, please don't say the one who has called for it?

And speaking of Boxer, she is the one (last I heard, maybe there are more now) who has lined up behind Feingold.

I wonder, why don't say Feingold? (I hope this question doesn't count as "saying Feingold".)

[Mass]

67. No, she has not. Nor have any other. Sorry.

Except if asking for Bush to propose a timetable or benchmarks is calling for withdrawal. In this case, Kerry has done that a long time ago. This does not fit my idea of calling for withdrawal.

[Cocoa]

68. he's calling for withdrawal and you're spinning it away

how odd, when someone does exactly as you ask for, you react with fear.

Do you really want dems to call from withdrawal from Iraq?

[Mass]

69. Yes, I want and they are not doing that. Sorry.

[Cocoa]

70. you are afraid of Russ Feingold

so afraid that you can't even face up to what he's saying.

When you get the nerve, read this:

http://www.wispolitics.com/index.iml?Article=42731

[Mass]

71. No need to insult me because I dont agree with you.

Feingold said that may be if all is fine we can plan to have left in 15 months. What do we do during the next 15 months? What will change in 15 months? He still has to give us some lights on that.

I have listen to him during all his recents interviews and floor speeches because I wanted to know if he was going to say something on this subject. Not only did he not, but he also let a door opened to the idea that we may need to stay later than Dec 31, 06.

I happens that Feingold is one of my favorite Senators. I defended him for the Roberts vote and I like that he did not vote for the Patriot Act. That will not change what I think of his "plan" concerning Iraq. He does not have one, nor does any other Senators.

[Cocoa]

72. his idea is that the target date will change things

and he says that the generals in Iraq agree with him, that a target date would change the dynamics of the war.

I've heard him say this repeatedly, so it's not true that he has not said what would change, just as it's not true that he has not called for withdrawal.

You may not like his call for withdrawal, but he has called for withdrawal. You may not like his explanation of what would change, but he has explained what would change.

[karynnj]

74. setting a date is not a plan

he also said if certain (unspecified) political things in Iraq are not ok, the date would slip.

So he set a tentative date that is now 15 months away.

I would gladly vote and canvass and phone bank for Feingold if he gets the 2008 nomination. He's a good person.

[second edition]

18. How much do you know about all of the people of PA?

We have liberal areas as well as many vast conservative areas. Yes, Casey is not pro- choice, but he is a real good fit for PA.I live in Pa. I have been a member of NARAL and I volunteered at clinics as an escort and I can tell you, I certainly do not like his position on abortion, but I consider it a trade off to get a Dem in the Senate from PA. Casey is in a real good position to beat Santorium. His vote is only one of 100 senators and I am not willing to risk all the good he could do with his votes on other issues just because he has a problem with this one issue.

[Mass]

22. is pennachio still running?

last timeI I heard of him in a blog or something else was months ago.

As for Hill, she has noopponent/

I like cleland. Not sure whqt is your beef with him.

Personnally, I was mad he was raising money for Byrd, so I guess we all make our choices for who to support or not.

We need to beat Santorum. If Pennachio wants to get some support, he better began some work, and this comes from somebody who was very unhappy when he was chosen by the Democratic Party as the " offficial candidate"

[robbedvoter]

13. Umm, kerry dear - DeLay is out - or haven't you heard?

Doesn't miss a beat this one! Spry as a chicken!

[TayTay]

21. I wish.

Didn't you hear? He's still in there, just not as official House Whip. He's still directing traffic and telling all the REthugs where to park. We want him gone from DC.

[second edition]

27. He actually isn't gone! He is still in there leading the way.

Don't kid yourself.

[kerrygoddess]

33. DeLay has been indicted - he's not OUT yet.

Kerry is trying like others are to insure that he will be. GOT IT?

[zulchzulu]

41. Pay attention, my friend

Perhaps you haven't been following the situation. Delay is still on the Chimpy ship...

If this was your eager chance to diss Kerry.....whoops!

[catmother]

17. defeat delay

my sister nancy greggs wrote an article for the DU "dear elected democrats" on 9/21/05. if you haven't read it please do. please read all her articles (8 i believe) published in the last 18 months.

i'm sorry i don't know how to direct you to the article.

[welshTerrier2]

30. here's the link

http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/05/09/21_dear.html

[second edition]

23. I've been missing my e-mails- So good to hear from Kerry again!

He is right you know. Its time to start fighting back to loosen the repubs grip on power. 2006 is where we should be focused. Nothing else (including 2008) should matter as much as trying to win back the House and the Senate. There is power in numbers.

[An Unabashed Atheist]

58. I urge Kerry on

The US would be far better off with Reed, Santorum and DeLay completely out of power. They are on the front lines, promoting Christian theocracy in the US. That, to me, is an unpardonable political sin.

[zann725]

73. ...time to ACKNOWLEDGE Kerry actually won in 2004. And give the WH

back to the rightful "owner" NOW...when we really need it.