Senator Levin on Iraq

[JNelson6563]

I had the opportunity to talk with Carl Levin this past weekend, among the questions I asked him were a couple on Iraq.

14 permanent bases in Iraq, why? He says those are to be handed over to the Iraqi army. He also explained that commanders in Iraq predict the Iraqi army to be ready to start taking command by year's end. He is certain they will start major troop pull-outs befre November elections and will declare Victory! Says that the same plan he offered on the Senate floor that was denounced as "cut'n'run" and "cowardice" will be implemented and marketed as brillaint and victorious.

Mother of all embassies being built in Iraq, why? "Arrogance and bravado" he said. heh Good ol' Carl, always tells it like it is. He did elaborate some but his initial reaction which I quote perfectly sums up all that he said on this topic.

He is out there, addressing crowds across Michigan and not pulling any punches. I think we're pretty fortuante to have him.

Juile

[sabra]

1. thanks for the update.

[herbbrown]

2. Good Post

Damn Right both Levins are two of the good guys!

[skipos]

3. I don't always agree with his votes, but I think he is genuine.

He has been pretty good for us here in MI.

[JNelson6563]

5. I love how the R's fear him

The best they can do is offerup sacrifical lambs when Carl's up for re-election. The day Carl announces his retirement will be one of the happiest days in MI Rethugs' lives.

His brother Sander is delightful and now his son is running for Congress too!

:toast:

[noonwitch]

16. I'm lucky enough to live in Sander's district

It was Bonior's when I first moved there, but they redistricted south Macomb county to create a district for Candace Miller to run from, that she could win. So, they took Bonior's district from him, sent us all into Sander's district and gave northern Macomb it's own district. Since they are religious fanatics and gun nuts up there, they vote for republicans even if they are drunken wife beaters (David Jaye).

[IdaBriggs]

4. That's my Senator. (brag)

I like Stabenow, too. They don't always agree with me on everything, but I like how they think. :)

[madokie]

9. I like how you think, we need more of it. no one can be everything

to everyone. 'They don't always agree with me on everything, but I like how they think.'

[ray of light]

6. I wish his bill would have gone farther and been more like

kerry/feingolds. Frankly, Kerry/Feingold's bill is the one that the people support when names are not mentioned on the bills. The fact that they gave no accountability, no timetable--and not even a 2 year one...

I think he could have risked a little more since they knew the Republicans weren't going to cross over. Their plan was basically rhetoric. And yes, Bush is talking about pulling the troops out because it's an election year, but in January what will happen then? Kerry/Feingolds plan? Not since they wouldn't support it against popular support. Levins? Doubtfull.They'll just put more there as soon as the election is over. Why? Because Levin's bill had no accountability or oversight. Kerry/Feingolds did.

[NNN0LHI]

7. Did you ask him about the war crimes Bush appears to be committing in Iraq?

That would have been on the top of my list of things to ask.

Don

[JNelson6563]

10. I asked him that in 04

At this point we're more focused on getting the hell out of there.

In the real world of politics it is seen a lot differently than here on DU. Believe me, there is no one who is even entertaining doing anything about Bush being a War Criminal. No one with any real power/clout.

Sad but true.

Julie

[NNN0LHI]

11. Much has happened since '04. Seems like decades ago

If I get to ask any of my politicians here in Illinois a question I will ask them about Bush committing war crimes in Iraq. Whether they like it or not.

Thanks for your report.

Don

[JNelson6563]

12. Don't waste your chance Don

Go ahead and ask, I did. "Are we going to do anything about Bush committing war crimes?" "No. Next question."

All you get from that effort is an opportunity to walk away empty handed. I've learned, if you MUST work in that wording, do it in the form of an essay question with that being part of the commentary section of your question. Really. Don't blow the opportunity to get a real answer to a more answerable question.

I'm offering this advice so that my earlier mistakes aren't repeated. I'm a long time NNN0LHI fan so if I can save you an avoidable error, glad to do it.

On an unrelated topic, how come I don't see you posting the scoops in LBN anymore? I remember when you and Keph were LBN.

Cheers :toast:
Julie

[KoKo]

15. Sadly what you say is too true, Julie, about the "essay question."

I learned it the hard way when I got involved in local politics in my state.

We activists asked "Blunt Questions." And were treated like rude children. One is forced to phrase a question that can have an "out" for the politician to escape through. And, we have a couple of very good more progressive leaning politicians but there are just some questions one learns not to ask in a "recognizable" blunt way.

It has turned me off...being a blunt person and so tired of the "pussy footing around" when it's clear Bush and his whole administration should be tried for War and Corporate Crimes. It's hard to hold in the outrage...so not wanting to appear to be a "rude child" asking about the "emperor having no clothes" I confine my "political activism" to other areas, these days. :-(

[JNelson6563]

17. Yeah, I've also learned that DU terminology

goes over like a lead balloon in Real World Politics (RWP).

Also have learned to do one question or issue when you get a chance to talk to a big player. I'm a small player but I still get approached at events. Those who hit on one issue only with me, I remember them and their issue. Those who try to cover a litany of issues with me, much harder to remember. Also, when you've only got, say, an hour of mingle time at an event, it is wise to stick to one thing for a couple of reasons. First, the person you're wanting to talk to will be talked to by many others too. YOu want your issue remembered in that mass of others AND, it's not polite to monopolize someone's time while others are waiting.

The more people who know all this stuff the better chance we all have of our key issues being heard and addressed.

:toast:

[NNN0LHI]

18. I understand Julie. And you are correct

I have switched to GD because I like it a lot better here. We can post old stuff, new stuff, or just about anything here. I like having that option.

Take care for now and see you later.

:toast:

Don

[madokie]

8. And I am stuck here in OK with the likes of inhofe and coburn

one is a dick and the other is a dick head it just depends on what day and topic it is as to which one is which. My hat's off to you folks, I like Carl Levin and am jealous of you'all. Oklahoma, the home of the quack dr tom coburn and the out of touch james inhofe

[Old and In the Way]

13. I still don't understand building the bases.

Iraq had plenty of airfields....why was it necessary to build more? I assume some must have been in remote areas more designed for US strategic offensive use against Iran and other targets in the area. Building more bases to give to the Iraqi's seems pointless..I suspect Carl knows the real reason but prefers to gloss that point over.

[KoKo]

14. I suspect so, too. I think maybe Murtha's idea of re-deploying the troops

is to these bases so that they can be "ready." Bush will declare Victory but some amount of troops will be in these bases (we won't know if they are real troops or mercenaries) where they can be ready. I don't really believe that at any time in the forseeable future the Iraq Army will be able to function and neither the Dems nor Repugs want to leave the area entirely because we've made such a mess in destabilizing it...which was the PLAN all along.

I think we are being lied to still. If we want to believe that most of our "troops" are coming home we will...but shortly after there will probably be another confrontation over there and we can just move back in full force under another "Emergency" Act of War or the one that's still considered in force forever with the "Unitary President."