Hey, We Progressives Won Something.

[Alan Grayson]

Two months ago, we were told that if the United States did not attack Syria, we would see a new era of chemical weapons warfare.

Yet here is last week's Reuters headline: "Syria Meets Deadline To Destroy Chemical Production Facilities."

Let's celebrate.

Let's celebrate the war that never happened.

Let's celebrate NOT having to hold sad and somber funerals for young Americans who would have lost their lives fighting in Syria.

Let's celebrate NOT having to nurse and care for the wounded veterans who would have returned from the U.S.-Syrian war.

Let's celebrate Congress NOT having to appropriate billions of tax dollars in emergency spending to support U.S. military operations in Syria.

Let's celebrate NOT having to attend bitter marches protesting the U.S. war in Syria.

Let's celebrate NOT having to rebuild Syria's roads and bridges and schools, so that we can have a shot at rebuilding our own.

Let's celebrate peace.

We won the battle, and the military-industrial complex lost the war.

We should be proud of our victories, because our victories matter. I know that politics sometimes can seem discouraging right now. Progressive often seem to lose, and lose frequently. But, you know what? Sometimes we win. And when we win, we save lives. We promote equality. We serve the cause of justice. We improve people's lives.

I'm going to crow a bit, right now. Because, together, we stopped a U.S. attack on Syria. The military-industrial complex said attack, and attack now. We said what John Lennon once said: "All we are saying is give peace a chance." We said that there is no such thing as humanitarian bombing. We said that we can't go around the world launching missiles and dropping bombs every time we see something that we don't like.

Well, we were right, and the military-industrial complex was wrong. We forced diplomacy rather than more carnage, and now the chemical weapons stockpiles are being destroyed.

This is victory. Our victory. Two months ago, 100,000 of us signed a petition at DontAttackSyria.com. Eighty thousand of us shared it on Facebook, and tens of thousands more shared it on Twitter.
And you know what? We stopped an attack. We saved hundreds, if not thousands, of lives.

And you know what else? We got those chemical weapons production sites destroyed.

Peace won. Lives were saved. Thanks to you. Good job!

We progressives, each one of us, we have a head, a heart and a spine. We can win. We will win.

Peace,

Rep. Alan Grayson

P.S. If you like what we've done so far, we can accomplish even more together. If you haven't signed up already, then please become a $25/month sustainer of our campaign. Help make sure that our voices won't be silenced. Help make sure that we can continue to fight for justice, equality and . . . peace.

[karynnj]

1. Utterly shameless and sleazy

"Let's celebrate NOT having to hold sad and somber funerals for young Americans who would have lost their lives fighting in Syria.

Let's celebrate NOT having to nurse and care for the wounded veterans who would have returned from the U.S.-Syrian war. "

One thing that was clear from Obama, Kerry, Hagel etc was that there was NO intent at all of committing American soldiers - something needed to make this mailing accurate. Pretty obnoxious to raise money on lies.

[freshwest]

3. No credit to Obama or Kerry. Okay, cool, it is what it is. We're used to this.

http://www.politicususa.com/2013/09/09/president-obama-outsmarting-winning-syria-firing-shot.html

IDK if fundraising is the sole reason for the posts. and it's likely his staff post these here, as part of their jobs. People generally enjoy them. But I don't much care for this one.

It leaves out the obvious, and goes with the meme put out by libertarians, the right and media that Obama and Kerry are nothing but warmongers. You have noted the omission, and I'm not rec'ing this one.

See you later, karnnj.

[karynnj]

4. Kerry and Obama were very much involved in the agreement

Obama and Putin initiated conversations - and Kerry and Lavrov were the ones that negotiated it. It did not come out of the blue sky - Russia had no interest in pushing this until there was the threat of a targeted attack. Even as they made the case that a response was needed, they were exhausting the possible diplomatic paths.

You may be angry with Kerry for pushing to get the approval that Obama wanted and you can be angry with Obama for threatening a targeted attack, but the fact is that they are as much responsible for the conclusion as Russia ---- and certainly more so than Grayson, who I notice you did NOT say deserved no credit.

What you miss is that Obama. Kerry and Hagel have been the ones NOT willing to jump into Syria - as Powers, HRC, and Petraeous were. Kerry even spoke of their position of not wanting "to fight someone else's civil war" when in SA - which was very angry that we weren't doing just that.

[dionysus]

21. alan wants to take credit and raise dough from it. nt

[freshwest]

41. karnnnj, 'angry,' 'missing.' You must have missed my plethora of BOG posts on this...

Just a few posts on my threads and the threads:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/110215732#post4

http://www.democraticunderground.com/110214877

http://www.democraticunderground.com/110215549#post4

http://www.democraticunderground.com/110215009

http://sync.democraticunderground.com/110215549#post27

http://www.democraticunderground.com/110215310

http://www.democraticunderground.com/110215787

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1102&pid=15093

http://www.democraticunderground.com/110215010

There are more.. but just for fun...

http://sync.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1102&pid=15196



But I am still not angry at Alan Grayson. Big tent. He's doing the work of a populist. I met with Kucinich who was critical of several things, but when some wanted to bash Obama in the meeting, he shut them down FIRMLY.

He said Obama's doing his job and he was doing his and Obama has much different responsibilities and info than a Congressman. Questioned about war and UHC, he said said Obama did the best he could with what he had ans called Obama a true progressive. He didn't have to say that, you know, we were his supporters.

So if Alan gets some money, which he does not keep, but gives it to progressives that are running to what's needed, I have no objection at all. I am sure he doesn't keep it, he is no grifter, but a millionaire who is true to his roots.

He and Obama are not on opposing sides, despite some who would love to see that. There is an effect caused by net activism, even if it's sometimes perjoratively called slacktivism. If it does not get out the vote, does not change the states, it's ego and not getting anything done.

Grayson was elected as part of the Obama wave and I'm sure there is no animosity.

In fact I've seen a number of times when Obama gives all sides enough time to holler and then the votes change. Not because he is regressive, but he needs us to speak up.

Remember when he tossed some changes to SS out and made it radioactive, so much that the GOP had to answer to their voters, who told them 'no way in hell?'

Obama took the hatred, but got the job done, all right. Not happy when credit is not given, or trash is thrown at Obama and Kerry that has been whipped up by media, but Grayson, for all we know, chatted with Obama before he gave his speeches.

PBO doesn't need strokes for his ego, it's all about what he can get accomplished in his eight years. He's on a mission and it's not about him. I doubt any of this is about Alan, either.

They are not enemies, not even if some want that. When Grayson came out and said stuff about the NSA, the fact is that Obama had said most of that first.

Those who want to cheer from the gallery at a battle between Democrats that does nothing but demoralize the voters, need to think ahead. Grayson and Obama have. It's the mission, not the men.

[RobertEarl]

6. What?

Alan was front and center, heck, he is front and center of our efforts to accomplish more of the things we did by stopping the MIC and their missiles.

Millions of dollars from the supporters of the MIC are up against him because he is one of their main antagonists.

In order to compete he has to raise funds. Unlike other congress critters who go to the rich and get bought by a single issue interest, Alan comes to us, on DU, with a reminder of what he has accomplished with our help and asking us to keep ahead of those spending millions trying to silence him.

Why can't you be happy we did not bomb Syria and put ourselves at war with Syria? Does peace piss you off?

[karynnj]

7. Nothing Grayson did had anything to do with Syria giving up chemical weapons

I am proud that our President and Secretary of State were able to avoid a targeted attack on Syria, which would have had less effect on its chemical weapons, AND are getting those weapons out of there. I hope that the next step is a ceasefire and aid reaching the people who need it. I hope THEY end THEIR civil war. Helping those things happen may take international diplomacy - something that President Obama will ask SoS Kerry to do.

[RobertEarl]

11. Oh, I see now

You think that Alan has done nothing to further our goals? You think that we the people had no influence on stopping the drones and missiles?

NEWS: If we had not stood, and along with Alan, said NO BOMBS, the US would have been right in the middle of their civil war. Obama and Kerry were forced to stop talking war because of people like Alan and those he represents very, very well. You should join us. Send Alan some help.

[karynnj]

12. Who said anything about drones - I spoke about him claiming credit for Syria

Both for no war (and NO ONE in the Obama administration was for boots on the ground) and for Syria giving up the weapons.)

Obama and Kerry never spoke of "war" - but of a targeted attack to help stop Syria from using chemical weapons. It was when through diplomacy that Kerry and Lavrov led the UN in getting a resolution to remove the CW that, Kerry and Obama stopped speaking of an attack.

It had NOTHING to do with Grayson.

[RobertEarl]

17. Alan says : WE did this

Obviously you had nothing to do with keeping us from your 'targeted attack'.

A 'targeted attack' from the air would not have delivered a desirable outcome. It was just warmongering, this idea of a 'targeted attack' bringing peace is bullshit. In fact, you are just repeating what we came to expect from the Bush years.

But what the rest of us managed to do was to actually use peace to make peace, not your 'targeted attack' to make peace.

Really, you should just stop, you are really sounding Bushian, and that is bad juju.

[karynnj]

23. I far prefered Kerry's and Lavrov's diplomacy

Not to mention, the goal of the targeted attack was to stop Syria from future use of chemical weapons by making the consequence too high.

The problem Obama had was that he said that using chemical weapons crossed a red line. To do nothing - Alan Grayson's preferred plan - would have had an enormous negative impact on how much weight the world put on Obama's word.
If you think that making the case - which in Syria's case was real - while exhausting diplomatic alternatives is like Bush, you missed a few things back in 2003. The case was not honest and they did not exhaust the diplomacy. (In fact in January 2003, Kerry spoke out and one point he made was that they had not exhausted the diplomacy. )

[RobertEarl]

29. Nice dancing

You, tho, make Obama look bad. I wish you wouldn't do that.

You say we did nothing. But I tell ya what, the people your 'targeted attack' would have hit are damn fucking happy Obama did not. Me too. Alan too. Obviously not you. You are not happy we didn't drop bombs, it is obvious.

To be clear: Alan's plan was to use diplomacy. Yours was 'Targeted attack'
Too bad for you, we won. And so did Obama. Just try to be happy, ok?

[karynnj]

39. Alan's plan was to do nothing, Obama and Kerry were the ones who used diplomacy

You still have not explained any LOGICAL way in which any of Grayson's words or actions led to Syria giving up its weapons.

You should be happy that our President and Secretary of State took actions that genuinely did remove these weapons from an unstable country. Would you at least admit that THEY are entitled to credit for the outcome?

[Doctor_J]

58. the BOG attempts to elevate the president by bashing liberals. Grayson and FDR are frequent

targets. Bad taste, and makes the president look like a cowering child.

[bvar22]

65. ^^^THis^^^^

[think]

68. Agree. Bashing progressives who speak out boldy bums me out. Sad to see that kind of response here..

[karynnj]

73. Ha ha ha - Grayson is no FDR - not even close

Here Grayson took credit for Syria getting rid of its chemical weapons. Can you give me a CREDIBLE reason for saying that Grayson deserves credit for that?

I can give a credible reason for Obama getting significant credit:

1) Obama worked behind the scenes to discuss eliminating the chemical weapons with Russia - there was for a long time no action
2) When the US spoke of an attack, Obama repeated this option ... and while there was some discussion, there was no serious response
3) Kerry asked what would it take for Syria to stop the attack - mentioned this - as it was after all the logical response.
4) Lavrov, who at Putin's request had been working with Kerry, responded PUBLICLY in favor and - as important - pushed Syria to stating they would
5) In Geneva, the negotiations moved to a very tough schedule and a credible process for doing it - and Syria also signed on to do it.
6) The UN resolution that was agreed on was essentially the Kerry/Lavrov agreement - earlier Samantha Powers and others tried to add in extraneous issues, but there was no agreement on them so they were all dropped.

[Doctor_J]

113. Except that the Fan Club uses both as targets

[karynnj]

114. "the fan club"???

It is pathetic that any of us unimpressed with Grayson are labeled immediately as "BOG" and now "fan club" and there are complaints that we never disagree with Obama. The fact is that many of us have POLITELY disagreed with Obama occasionally.

What is ironic is the OUTRAGE I see that anyone does not accept everything that Alan Grayson does. If their is a fan club - I think it is the Grayson fan club.

[zappaman]

112. Be Free to make up your own facts.

Well done.

[Ace Acme]

104. If Syria did a targeted attack on our country, wouldn't that be war?

Would you say it was something other than war if Assad pointed out that no boots were on the ground?

How can it be war if Assad does it, and not war if Obama does it?

[frylock]

80. and that thing that happened in british parliament? yeh, that never happened..

these aren't the droids you're looking for.

[karynnj]

84. How did that lead to getting rid of the weapons? nt

Not to mention what did Grayson have to do with that?

[frylock]

109. i think it proved to be pretty signifigant in slamming the brakes on the rush to war..

and it kinda blows holes in the whole multi-dimensional chess narrative that the BOG is so fond of.

[zeemike]

9. No I think what pisses them off is not praising Obama for everything

and not giving credit to progressives for anything has become a habbit....the third way is the only way in some people's minds.
It is under the buss for Alan Grayson and anyone else like him.

But if raising money is such a bad think then perhaps they would support a plan to get money out of politics altogether so that it would not be necessary for Mr Grayson to compete against people with billions to spare and who spend it liberally on congressmen to thwart any progressive grass roots.

[LiberalLovinLug]

63. +100

[rhett o rick]

81. These BOG'ers or whatever, make my head spin. On one hand they deride progressives

if they dont toe the Admin line stating that progressives arent supporting Democrats. This is a case where Rep Grayson thanks DEMOCRATS for being united in their message for no war in Syria at a time when some of these centrists were calling for action.

"They" seem to always be trying to drive a wedge between the progressives and whatever in the hell they call themselves.

[zeemike]

86. Yep...n/t just a kick for Grayson.

[TheKentuckian]

115. The underside of that bus is the only place decent folks should ever want to be

They aren't on "our side" but rather ever seek to either assimilate or otherwise compel us to be on their's because they cannot wrangle the mobs of radical regressives of various stripes from theocrats to anti-government loons to bigots of all kinds and of course being sly, they are always looking to corner the market.

Increasingly, it would seem some no longer even want our votes and work because they just don't even want to tolerate our presence and any semblance of friction in the gears of the corporate and war machines.

[Maedhros]

8. The Pentagon was clear that to neutralize chemical weapons stocks by force

American troops on the ground would have been needed.

Not seeing the "sleaze."

[karynnj]

14. I watched the various administartion people speak - and they were NOT speaking

of troops on the ground -- and that is why in the London press conference Kerry spoke of Assad giving up his weapons as a far better alternative.

As to sleaze - it was the entire montage of claims that he said he did - when I know he didn't. I would have no problem with an honest claim that he spoke for progressives against any strikes on Syria. That is true. However, it would not have resulted in Syria giving up the weapons and it likely would not have stopped the President.

[Maedhros]

24. Not following your logic.

Grayson is trying to rally people behind a Progressive banner and raise funds. Standard lefty political stuff. I agree with his sentiments.

You're seeing a cynical insincere money grab? I suppose that's a fair interpretation, though open to debate.

[karynnj]

26. That has nothing to do with what I am saying

Alan Grayson is claiming credit for removing the weapons from Syria. Did he have anything to do with that?

Why doesn't he simply list the things he really did - that got humongous praise here - in his appeals.

[Maedhros]

45. I think you're being a bit unfair.

He's celebrating a Progressive victory, and counting himself as one of us. Is it a naked appeal for funds? Well, that will depend on what he does next. But he's not claiming credit here - he's glomming on. THAT'S GOOD - we have a politician cozying up to us, rather than putting us at arm's length.

[karynnj]

49. Was it a progressive victory or was it an Obama administration victory?

The Obama administration was sure as hell not considered progressive as they worked on this issue. Even when they fought to get the resolution, people here gave the credit to their newest best friend, Russia. There was very little celebration here from the people angriest with Obama and Kerry when the entire UN signed off on the resolution that was essentially the Kerry/Lavrov agreement. There is occasionally STILL anger here against Kerry (and to some degree Obama) for ever threatening to take action.

Grayson is counting himself as a progressive - and he votes that way which is more important. However, he can be a loose cannon in terms of what he says and how he says it. It is often when he is making DU happiest, that he is turning off some in the middle that we could (and often do) win.

I don't have a problem with a politician reaching out to the progressive internet base. I was very impressed with the coordinated Daily Kos diaries by Kennedy and Kerry when they led the fight to filibuster Alito - against the wishes of the centrist Democrats. The pressure from the base moved many who were against filibustering to voting for it - including Clinton and Schumer. It failed, but without it, the issues against him would likely not even have been covered in the media.

After that, many politicians wrote diaries AND responded to some of the comments - including Kerry, Gillibrand, Sanders, and Feingold. I'm sure there were others as well, but these are the ones I remember with certainty who really seemed to get that a diary was not just an oped, but the start of a conversation.

Alan Grayson himself had a good diary on Daily Kos - http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/11/06/1253642/-Has-It-Become-Too-Easy-To-Kill - but he (or his staff) posted it and never replied. Still the diary made a lot of good information accessible. This is something worth praising. However, his staff does not seem to treat DU with similar respect. Instead, we get hyper money appeal after hyper money appeal. Where the DK diary could be seen as "cozying up to us" (especially had he made a few informal comments), this really isn't.

I don't care if he wants to use DU as an ATM, but I objected that this particular appeal was dishonest. I said his MSNBC appearance on Chris Hayes' show saying the same thing in the wake of the agreement was as well.

In addition, I find it telling that people are objecting to relatively mild criticism of Grayson - when there was widespread far rougher criticism of Obama that most did not object to.

[RobertEarl]

76. Relatively mild criticism?

Your words: ""Utterly shameless and sleazy"" are not ""mild criticism"".

I recall no one using such words to label Obama.

If any did, they didn't last long on DU.

I'm sorry to say, Karynn, you seem to feel deprived because you didn't get your 'targeted attack'. You didn't get your war.

And that you see Alan as someone who deprived you of war, and that is why you are going so far as to slander Alan and all the rest of us who Love and Celebrate that we didn't have to attack Syria.

Thank Gawd the warmongers lost. Get over it.

[karynnj]

82. I was not all that happy that we might attack

I could understand the reasons given. I did understand that a response was needed and I thought the UN was blocked - as Russia had vetoed a resolution.

My first real dislike of Grayson was years before. When he was running for re-election, in a race he was likely to win, he ran a commercial that would have been very good and hard hitting if he had told the producer to edit out a comment that was half of a sentence spoken by his opponent. The full sentence changed the meaning of the half sentence to the exact opposite. This is something that Republicans have done and it is despicable. It is also stupid, as his opponent immediately put out the full text. It is very likely that caused his loss.

Not to mention - as I said - I would not care had he said he stopped the bombing -- even though I don't believe even that. At least that would be not provable either way. What I said is that he did get Syria to dispose of its weapons. (Maybe in some alternate universe he flew to Damascus and proposed the idea directly to Assad, who then called a press conference and announced that he was getting rid of his chemical weapons. )

[karynnj]

91. "baby ideas"

Not to mention, integrity is a word that no one should use for Grayson after that ad. Not to mention after this dishonest ad.

1) He did NOT do anything that led to the elimination of chemical weapons in Syria
2) He is distorting the "war" that never happened - to be Iraq like like in soldiers killed and wounded, while EVERY administration person when they were speaking of a targeted attack said would not happen.


I'm sorry but your dear hero has clay feet.

[RobertEarl]

95. Awww, you haz a sad

We, together, forced diplomacy to eliminate the chemical weapons. You didn't get your targeted attack and now since Alan, who made you mad once, is a champion of NO BOMBS, you are all over the place trying to make yourself look reasonable. Yet you fail every time you write about this subject.

You should just step away from the keyboard.

[karynnj]

97. Obama and Kerry were working diplomatically way before Grayson spoke up

It is amazing that you are so eager to take credit for a result - the elimination of chemical weapons - that would NEVER have occurred if Grayson's repeat of Sarah Palin's line - let Allah sort it out - wou;ld have been followed.

I have always thought than when people have no real proof or logical arguments, they result to insulting the people disagreeing with them -- as you are doing to me and others.

The fact is that his appeal contains some very questionable things he takes credit for.

[RobertEarl]

98. You have that correct

We, along with Alan, who championed our cause in congress, beat down and crushed all those who were clamoring for a 'targeted attack' on Syria.

We won, and Alan did, indeed, lead the way for our voices to be heard in congress, and the White House. It is really weird that makes you haz a sad.

Yeah, I cop to making warmongers look bad, and insulting them every chance I get.

[karynnj]

102. "haz a sad" That sounds really intelligent

Maybe you should ask Grayson to lead the effort to prevent a war with Iran. Maybe by stopping AIPAC from pushing Senators to pass the bill - that Grayson helped write - to increase sanctions. At the moment, it could derail the effort to get a diplomatic "first step" to create the space to avoid a war here.

[Ace Acme]

107. Oh but we muz be nice to war mongers! If we're just nice enough long enough

... then they might stop being war mongers!

[Whisp]

10. Grayson also said 'Let Allah sort them Out'

saying that sister Sarah was right about that one thing.

wtf. I just don't like this guy. He has got a nasty mouth and his hand open all the time for money doesn't help either.

[RobertEarl]

13. What's with all this trash talk?

Alan is fighting a lonely battle against the usurpers of democracy, and all some of you can do is scribble trash words?

Of course he is asking us for money. You prefer he goes to the Koch's in secret rather than in public on DU? WTF?

[Whisp]

15. and I say WTF is wrong with someone who uses Let Allah Sort them Out...

Now that's disgraceful.

Send all your money to him, cheer him, send him flowers too, I don't care.
Do whatever, dude. And I'll do my whatever.

[RobertEarl]

20. I see what you are doing

It is called slander. And against one of the leading progressives of our time.

Don't you have some real enemies you need to attend to? This making an enemy out of Alan is not welcomed on DU. I guess you don't like what Alan says about the RWingers, and so you attack him?

[karynnj]

27. "slander" - for repeating his words??

[think]

32. WTF

seriously....

[karynnj]

57. Very seriously! nt

[think]

67. Sorry. I do give credit to Obama, Kerry, & Hagel but to denigrate Grayson's efforts

because he puts in a plug for campaign funds seems very very disingenuous.

Grayson walks the walks. He puts himself out there and I appreciate his bold stances against very entrenched special interests. Very few in politicians are willing to speak out.

Yes, the diplomacy by POB and his admin is very commendable. But we need people in congress that will put it on the line. For me Grayson is one of the very few that is willing to do that.

Peace out....

[karynnj]

90. I'll stop posting on this because I am beating a dead horse

Just look at the claims made. He takes credit EXPLICITLY for the elimination of the chemical weapons - something that following his advise would not have happened. He also lists a huge number of things - soldiers dying, soldiers wounded etc that were never likely given what was proposed.

To believe him suggests I should think of Obama like Bush - someone who was intent in starting a full scale war to turn Syria into Iraq. There was NOTHING to think that was true at the time - and at this time it is even clearer that was not his intention.

What this means is that everyone reading this Grayson appeal is being told an account that makes Grayson a hero and IMPLICITLY the Obama administration evil and defeated by Grayson and his loyal followers. (This when the truth is that by a very convoluted process, Obama kept his word on Chemical weapons being over the line, chemical weapons were removed from a dangerous state and Russia and the US worked together diplomatically to achieve this.)

[Beacool]

55. I agree.

That was my first thought too. Neither Obama or Kerry would have committed to troops on the ground. If anything, it would have been like Libya.

[bvar22]

66. And Libya has turned out so well.

#t=23


“The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.” ---Senator Obama, 12-20-2007

[Ace Acme]

108. Gosh, to read that 2007 statement, you'd almost think the Senator had read the constitution! nt

[LiberalLovinLug]

64. "Utterly shameless and sleazy"....to dis such a hard-working representative.

If its just Obama and Kerry doing all this in a vacuum, why even bother voicing an opinion? I had no idea that foreign policy decisions were made after Kerry went out for a beer with the President.

Of course it has nothing to do with the rumblings from not only the liberal base but from moderates/independents as well. And nothing to do with pressure from the liberal wing of the Democrats in Washington, such as Alan.

No...its all a 2 man show. We are simply blessed that Obama and Kerry decided on their own, maybe with a little help from Hagel, to not engage in war with Syria.

And its a red herring to argue about raising money. If you want to go after that problem then at least be honest and go after the real cause...the out of control spending, blessed by the SCOTUS. Grayson is only competing for $ as he is forced to do.

[bvar22]

70. Lets NOT forget this twisted rationalization via Kerry & Obama:

[font size=3]Kerry: Bombing other countries is not "Going to war."[/font]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023588257

THAT one broke my mind.....
and my heart.
I loved the Anti-WAR hero from the 60s.
Before he uttered these words promoting another useless WAR,
I carried the picture of his courageous testimony before the Armed Services Committee in my head.
That mental picture and place of honor in my head has been replaced with the utterly sleazy rationalization for dropping bombs on people who haven't harmed us.

What happened to that guy?

[karynnj]

79. Kerry made a distinction between a targeted bombing of military facilities

involved with chemical weapons AND committing thousands of US soldiers. After all, do you speak of Clinton's strategic bombing of Iraq in 1993 as the 2nd Gulf War? The fact is that from his confirmation hearings on, he has been very reluctant to endorse the US aiding the rebels. This has to be somewhat awkward, as Obama to some degree enabled that even though he rejected the Clinton/Petraeous proposal to do more. At any rate - even when speaking of the targeted attacks - he said the goal was NOT regime change and the administration was against boots on the ground.

I am NOT surprised that someone who knew war by being in Vietnam where hundreds of thousands of US soldiers were committed did not think a one or two day series of remote attacks was "war".

As to Kerry - it was 1971 - not the 1960s and even then he was not a dove.

Having been here for years, I know you have NOT been someone who ever liked Kerry. What is clear here is that he was against the use of chemical weapons and Obama had committed the US to responding if chemical weapons were used. This was so large an atrocity, that without some response, Obama's word would be seen as meaningless and more important, Assad would have no reason not to use chemicals again.

Not to mention, we KNOW that he was working behind the scenes with Lavrov even as he made that case. It was clear that he - at the direction of Obama was trying to find a diplomatic solution. They succeeded.

Not to mention, he is working hard to get a diplomatic solution that might avert a war with Iran. In addition, Kerry (and even more hands on - Feingold) have been instrumental in helping end one part of the war in the Congo - the M23 rebels have entered into a peace agreement.) I suspect that by the end of his tenure as Secretary of State, it will be clear that he is a man who is dedicated to using diplomacy to avoid war when he can.

[bvar22]

105. ...and the entire World laughed because...

....Bombing military targets is NOT an Act of WAR!
Is it?

[msongs]

2. send money. just like a fundy preacher lol nt

[dionysus]

19. jesus christ, i agree with you on something...

[think]

34. Ya avoiding wars is so like a fundy,,,,,,,

[libodem]

5. It is cause to celebrate!

[ancianita]

16. Yes, we won something. I'm glad for that and won't begrudge credit where it's due.

Pressure from progressives helped a lot, however sloppy media portrayed the diplomacy at the time.

[dionysus]

18. "now send me 25 bucks a month for me reelection campaign!"

[RobertEarl]

25. Your sig line

Marks your thinking here well: "ignorance of the sedated masses", indeed.

You'd rather he goes in secret to the Koch's and sells his soul as so many others have? You have a problem with him asking his true friends on DU for financial support?

[dionysus]

40. 1) i wrote my sig line 2) still just a fundraising ploy by Alan

I do think Alan is pretty neat though. i'd probably send him a few bucks myself if I had any extra dough.

[calimary]

60. Um... and you'd rather see him with less money than his GOP opponent?

Just what we'd need. Another republi-CON in the House next year. Adding to THEIR totals and not ours.

I support Alan Grayson. He doesn't bother me at all. And quite often he DOES speak for me.

[libdem4life]

22. I was just watching Rachel...two of the largest critics of PBO...one was the Whirlpool spawn,

and another is the hubby of the Clear Channel heiress. One worth half a billion, the other, close to it. I didn't even make a note of their names, it's so ho hum. Oh, and they are Republicans.

Then checked in here to read posts of supposedly Democrats ... people on this Liberal board who have the cheep-cheep to criticize a member of Congress, doing what he was elected to do. It's not like there are so many rich Progressives out there.

Get over yourselves.

[truedelphi]

30. Libdem4life - Wish I could rec your remarks n/t

[libdem4life]

38. Thank you.

[ReRe]

42. Hear! Hear!

... but they won't. Like mad dogs, a few of us have just got to tear someone limb from limb.

[noiretextatique]

53. most sensible post in this thread

thanks! and

[Botany]

28. Alan never stop speaking the truth because that is what "they" fear the most

You are one of the smartest members of Congress.
You have more money than God.
And you speak with a honest tongue.
Please keep it up.

*******

BTW keep going on the Stephanie Miller Show too.

[JEFF9K]

31. The Republicans would have lied us into another $6,000,000,000,000.00 war ...

... and killed 900,000 women and children.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

33. Rule #1 with Conservatives: Never admit you are wrong...

Chalk this up as another example (in a LONG list) of them being wrong.

BTW: I'd like to think you could read back their predictions on the floor and follow each with a well deserved "WRONG!"

[LittleGirl]

35. I wished

that more members of congress had his balls. WTF is wrong with Democrats not showing a spine?

Will Rogers was right. I don't belong to an organized political organization, I'm a democrat. We need more like Alan and yes, he needs money. I don't have any to spare but surely there are some rich democrats that can help him out. He's got the balls to say what needs to be said.
Thankfully, he's back and I can't even vote for him! I don't live in FL.

[JanT]

36. i read this and cheered

because i signed that petition along with 999,000 others. Alan is one of the best progressive movement supporters we have and all you want to do is bash him. i am ashamed of each and every one of you that bashed him. so he asks for donations. So does every single political figure. What is wrong with being honest? Do you all have something against that? he is thanking us progressives that supported his agenda for peace.
He is thanking me. If you don't support progressives then what are you doing here?
THANK YOU Alan for your service. You keep speaking the truth. It's what they fear the most.
And BTW - you're welcome.

[ReRe]

37. I love you Alan...

... and I'm going to give you some money because I believe in you. But you need to give credit where it's due.

[bobduca]

43. K&R

Looks like I have already the Grayson haters on ignore!
Keep trolling them Grayson!

[blue14u]

44. Congressman Grayson in my opinion

is working for the people. He is one of the very few.. How many times have I

read or heard someone say it takes money to win? If he is asking for our help

we need to support him and his work. I seriously cannot believe I am seeing

anti Democrat support posts on DU toward one of our own people who work to help us.

What a shame!!! I will help him, I can't do $25.00 a month, but I will help him

and continue to support Democrat's..

Unbelievable...really unbelievable!!!

[truedelphi]

46. Yet people here wonder why the Republicans win so many times,

but the attitudes are that every single thing done by a person who has a "D" after their name has to be perfect.

[noiretextatique]

54. absolutely!

i swear...we not only have to battle republicons/teabillies, but also third way types holy

[Enthusiast]

47. The Neo-Con chickenhawks will have their war

one way or another. I'm sorry to report. If they have to stage a false flag attack on the nation or its allies they will do it. But the people have had about enough of their bullshit so it won't go down as easily as Iraq.

[karynnj]

50. Maybe you missed that the US/Russia got a resolution that removed the chemical weapons

Maybe you missed that Obama, Kerry and Hagel have ALL said that the US will not fight in the Civil War - angering Saudi Arabia in the process.

Not to mention, the Secretaries of State and Defense can not be chickenhawks - as they fought in Vietnam.

[Enthusiast]

69. I didn't miss a thing.

We might not have war in Syria this year. And we might not have war in Iran next year. But we will have war somewhere, sometime in the near future, because the Neo-Con chickenhawks want war.

[Enthusiast]

48. Kicked and recommended.

"We won the battle, and the military-industrial complex lost the war."

[ReRe]

51. Heads up, Pronto!

Just seen an OP on DU from Will Pitt with a link to TTP docs released by Wikileaks. You might want to get a copy before they somehow disappear. May or may not be what you have collected on the TPP thus far? Thanks!

Edit: Forgot to stick the link in... sorry!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024025551

[rudolph the red]

52. K&R

[Jack Rabbit]

56. We definitely won this one. Now on to the fight against the TPP.

[questionseverything]

61. aren't the cia still training rebels in syria?

so technically "we" are still there

but yes we won a battle

[karynnj]

92. They were never training them in Syria -

I wish they were not training them period.

[questionseverything]

101. ok training them for syria

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10283758/First-Syria-rebels-armed-and-trained-by-CIA-on-way-to-battlefield.html

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jun/21/world/la-fg-cia-syria-20130622

point remains the same,,,we r not really out of syria

[4_TN_TITANS]

59. Might make a good 60 Minutes story...

Thanks for the perspective, Rep. Grayson.

[Jack Rabbit]

62. Hmmmm . . .

As long as CBS is its recently manifested habit putting stories that serve right wing interests with dubious sources on 60 minutes or the network news, I doubt that's going to happen.

[Laelth]

71. I give the President credit for his handling of this matter.

He avoided war, made the Republicans fight against war (which had to seriously irritate them), preserved our alliances, and got rid of the chemical weapons in Syria.

Well done, Mr. President!



-Laelth

[SmittynMo]

72. Grayson for President!!!! n/t

[WillyT]

74. K & R !!!

[ucrdem]

75. "Let's celebrate peace"? WHAT peace?

Syria is a humanitarian disaster of unimaginable proportions and Assad isn't getting a lot of help from the US or its allies. Let's celebrate when it's actually over.

[RobertEarl]

77. Simple: Not Iraq

Nor Libya. No US bombs.

The warmongers were stopped from getting their war, this time.

We have instead diplomacy instead of bombs. Maybe you feel there is still a chance they can make you, ucrdem, happy by dropping bombs?

Are you sad we didn't drop bombs? No bombs, to us peaceful folks, equals Peace. You should join us.

[ucrdem]

78. Look, the war is far from over, and Syria is being bombed regularly.

Not by us, and yes I'm grateful to Kerry, Obama and Joe Biden for that. Have you been following the news?

[RobertEarl]

83. It is a Syrian civil war

The last president was all in favor of it and encouraged it. Have you been paying attention, at all?

The warmongers have been trying to get us to attack Syria for years. They almost succeeded. We finally stopped them. We stopped our military from creating more deaths in a far away land. Oh, you can bet some part of our govt. has quite a hand in killing people in Syria and if we can stop them we will.


For now, the "Bomb first and ask questions later" crowd of Bush loving psychopaths has been stopped cold. That is cause for a celebration. To hell with the warmongers. Pay attention and join us.

[ucrdem]

85. The point is that the job is far from finished and this OP is badly misinformed.

It's also blatantly exploitative. I'm hoping Grayson isn't behind the fundraising appeals that get attached to his name because they're often brainless and offensive.

[RobertEarl]

88. That's what the warmongers all say

""The Job will never be finished"". Bush pretty much told us that.

They kill to get their war on, and the trail of their destruction is far and wide.

Ok, so you won't join in with us who love and celebrate a bit of peace. Fine.
Just know who you are hanging with.

To hell with the warmongers! May they burn in hell!

[ucrdem]

89. There IS no peace and I find the OP misleading and frankly offensive, sorry. nt

[RobertEarl]

93. Of course you do!!

"The job", you say, "is not finished". Just like Bush says.

Of course you are unhappy.

And so it boils down to this: Alan and the rest of us are happy that we finally got our military to not drop bombs. Instead we forced our country to use diplomacy. And you are not happy. Lets see, should we join with Alan Grayson, or the likes of you?

Easy choice. Alan and no bombs!

To hell with the warmongers! They deserve their fate!

[karynnj]

94. What BS - Alan Grayson FORCED Obama and Kerry to use diplomacy

Ignore that Obama had tried for months to get Russia to work with us and get Syria to give up chemical weapons.

Ignore that Kerry and Lavrov were already working together on that - and that they had already been working to re-establish Geneva 2 - the only way to get a real end to the violence still going on.

Ignore that John Kerry has more diplomatic skills than Alan Grayson could even imagine having and has spent a life time advocating for exhausting the diplomacy - a phrase I think I heard him say at least a hundred times in 2004 alone!

[RobertEarl]

96. We forced Obama

The people forced Obama and Kerry. The people forced the military to stand down. The people. Alan is of the people, and he never said otherwise.

Too bad you weren't in with us, the people. Next time, maybe?

You'll have to drop your desire for 'targeted attack' tho.

[karynnj]

99. No one "forced" Obama and Kerry to use diplomacy

- they were doing so before the issue arose.

Even if that does not fit your assertions that you made them do it.

You might even consider whether you should HELP Obama and Kerry have a better chance using diplomacy with Iran by using your vast powers to STOP AIPAC and Netanyahu from adding to the sanctionc even as Iran has come to the table and negotiated more in the last week than in the last 30 years! http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024026945

Or is that not as much fun as calling out the President? The House - with Grayson making it tougher passed this in July - more than 2 months after Rouhani was elected. Since then the hopes people had of a better government in Iran have been raised.

[RobertEarl]

100. Calling out the president?

Y'know, above, someone told me that the BOG was so hardheaded that they would do or say anything to make it appear that trusting Obama was all we ever had to do or think. I thought that was wrong.

But you are making me consider that person has it nailed down. Your words throughout this thread only make sense in that regard. Whenever anyone so much as makes Obama look like he is not the most all-knowing person in history, and we don't bow to his magnificence, then the wrath of BOG comes down hard.

Targeted attacks, indeed.

To hell with the warmongers. I'm sure Obama agrees. He just needs the people to support him in that effort. Join us, why don't you?

[karynnj]

106. What about asking Grayson to lead on Iran - to help diplomacy there

Why not take action NOW - when there is no threat of war.

[Maedhros]

110. Yes - it's not necessary to actually criticize or insult Obama to drive the BOG mad.

All one needs is to fail to praise Him sufficiently.

[CFLDem]

103. I'm still holding my breath for Act 2.

War profiteers never sleep.

[karynnj]

116. May you can help avoid a possible Act 2 starring Iran, by helping give diplomacy a chance

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024026945

Call your Senators to ask them to try to stop NEW Iran sanctions while the negotiations proceed. Here is the news article from this morning's paper.

http://news.yahoo.com/kerry-more-u-sanctions-could-end-iran-nuclear-192345125.html

[idwiyo]

111. k&r