Why Aren't Any Congresspersons Addressing the Protestors?

[cali]

It's my understanding that there are no members of congress involved in today's march in DC, and that the speakers are Ralph Nader, Cindy Sheehan and a few others I'm not familiar with.

Last time I went to DC to protest there were members of Congress and prominent personalities. What's changed?

[rodeodance]

1. I read that very few congresscritters will be involved.

[cali]

3. Why? n/t

[NI4NI]

5. I thought it would have been an oppurtunity for DK

but I quess not.

[cali]

10. It's not an opportunity for any

congress critter. They seem to have all decided that sharing a stage with Sheehan, Clark and Nader, isn't the way to go.

[Robbien]

2. The Dems plan on supporting the extension of our attack on Iraq

Why would they go to a march protesting that goal?

[cali]

4. Not true.

Dozens have signed on with PDA and Woolsey.

[Robbien]

7. All the GOPers need is about 40 Dems in the House and a half dozen

in the Senate. They have that.

I didn't say all the Dems support the attack on Iraq. But if the party cannot hold together on such an important issue such as this, then the party cannot stop people from blaming the party for what some of its members do.

[Captain Hilts]

6. None want to be seen on stage with Sheehan, Ramsey Clark and Nader.

The speakers do not represent the variety of people against the Iraq War.

[cali]

8. ding. ding. ding.

Exactly. This is the result of ANSWER running the anti-war mass protests. I don't think United for Peace and Justice is involved with them anymore. I wish I knew what we could do to wrest the large protests from ANSWER.

[Captain Hilts]

9. You and me both Cali. nt

[Telly Savalas]

11. If speakers who do represent the variety of people against the war

refuse to show up, then we get stuck with those who don't represent this variety.

If Pelosi is truly spearheading the charge against the war as she claims, shouldn't this be an appropriate forum for her?

[cali]

13. Nope. And it ain't just Pelosi

I can guarantee you that my anti-war reps and Senators won't be there. Not Bernie or Pat or Peter. I don't believe Dennis is there or Barbara Lee or Woolsey. Quite simply, we let ANSWER take over the mass protest anti-war movement. And lots of people- not just politicians don't want to be associated with them. More importantly, few. if any, dems want to be on a stage with Ramsey Clark, Cindy Sheehan and Nader. I completely understand why.

[NYVet]

12. Election time is coming up and they don't want to leave a soundbite trail

It seems to me that pols will vote for something, but not say anything about the issue unless they know that their seat is so secure they would be elected no matter what happened (short of being caught red handed axe murdering a nun on the town square).

[cali]

14. There are lots of anti-war dems who

are in exactly zero danger of being booted out of office.

[OzarkDem]

19. They're keeping their powder dry

:evilfrown:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

15. They're too busy doing important stuff..like fundraising and kissing lobbyists.

Politics as usual.

Or, maybe the protesters didn't bother inviting them. Given the polticians' track record in doing anything to stop the slaughter, other than fund it, it would be an exercise in futility.

[cali]

16. I'll repeat myself, and put it bluntly

the problem is ANSWER. In the past I've seen dem politicians at marches in DC. And surely you're not suggesting that Bernie or Lynn Woolsey or DK or dozens of others are off fundraising or kissing lobbyists.

[nosmokes]

17. You keep blaming it on ANSWER but one group can't exclude all the others.

C'mon,the average person has probably never even heard of ANSWER.IVAW is also there, UP&J is there as are any number of other groups opposed to this war.Th e quakers are there,countless little grass roots orgs like Rochester Against War(RAW.) And Code Pink is There and I imagine the Anarchists will be there. To blame AnSWER for a no show on the part of Senators and Representatives and Candidates is disingenious. I think it shows a much more basic level of timidity on the part of the Democrats to really come out swinging and take a strong stance that ending this war and bringing the troops home is their number one priority and they're committed when it's patently clear they're much more committed to coming across as moderate(pronounce that return on success this week) and keeping the corporate cash flowing into their coffers.

[cali]

20. UPFJ is not aligned with ANSWER

but they are organizing protests in 10 cities on Oct. 27.

[nosmokes]

21. I didn't say anyone is aligned w/ anyone Cali. I said UFPJ is in DC as well as

hundreds of other anti-war groups and it's an insult for the Democratic congress members and Pres candidates who alledgedly oppose the continuing occupation not to show up and support the people who went to trouble to travel to DC and face the cops and spent their own money to protest.It's cowardly and reprehensible and there's no legitimate excuse for it.

This could have been a great opportunity to turn dimson's speech and Crocked and Betrayus' testimony right on it's head and really expose it for the total sack of bullshit and lies that it is and show that we are not going to sit passively by and take it any longer. But instead, they sit passively and take it.

[SlowDownFast]

18. I would boo Nader if the opportunity arose.

Why on earth anyone would invite him is beyond me...

Oh, yeah, I forgot - it's ANSWER that holds the permit. Any speakers with Free Mumia or Free Palestine messages yet?

No wonder no congresscritters (not even Kucinich?) are there to speak.