Anyone see Carl Levin on

[whometense]

This Week this morning?

Video here: http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/11/12/carl-levin-we-need-to-begin-a-phased-redeployment-of-forces-from-iraq-in-four-to-six-months/

All I could think, from one end of the interview to the other, was, Kerry got there six months ago.

Seriously, thank god for you people and for Dean - I might think I was losing my mind. Levin isn't DLC, is he? Or is he? I don't want to get overly tinfoilhattish, but WTF? Is every damned dem either in bed with the Clintons or intimidated by them?

[Inuca]

1. Well.....

.... it is consistent with the "sense of the Senate" resolution he introduced at the same time as Kerry introduced his resolution. Only it seems to be more precisely worded, which of course brings it closer to Kerry's.

[wisteria]

2. Don't expect him to give Kerry any credit any time soon. This was the

great guy who said of Kerry after the flub that he isn't part of "his" party. Levin is on my POS list.

[TayTay]

3. Levin voted against the war

He will be the new chair of the Armed Serivces committee, which has among it's membership, one HRC.

This committee will hold 2 hearings, one of the whole committee, one of a sub-committee, on the situation in Iraq this week. This is a grand-standing opportunity, post-election, of epic proportions. Watch certain possibles be as tough as can be, now that it's safe and the election is over.

Carl Levin is a serious guy. Very, very serious. He would be on my shit list, except that I don't think he treats anyone particularly well.

[whometense]

4. To his credit,

(I don't know if this part was on that clip), he's not running for president in 2008. ;-)

I just am really sick of people echoing Kerry's exact words on this and giving him not one flicker of recognition. I know I should get used to it, but I can't.

[wisteria]

9. Thanks for the information. He sounds like a real miserable guy. n/t

[Mass]

6. I do not think Levin said that. Not sure what he said, but not that he was a part of his party.

Probably that he was not speaking for the party, which was at the same time lame and correct.

[wisteria]

14. delete- dup

[_dynamicdems]

17. I agree. Levin is a total butthead. n/t

[Mass]

5. Kerry got there one year ago. With this position, Levin and Reid are

still asking very little of the Bush administration and of the Iraqi regime.

Phased withdrawal is what ALL dems except Lieberman voted for in May. It is an open-ended proposal, with whom we could still be there in two years, given that they refused any deadline (Reid confirmed that this morning).

So, I do not want that they give credit to Kerry for this one, because this is not what Kerry proposed. The Levin proposition is an empty shell.

In fact, I realize that it is even weaker that the Democratic proposal from last May, that was asking for starting troops withdrawal at the end of the year. Now, we are talking about starting next spring.

The deadline is essential for this proposal, and the deadline is NOT in this proposal.

[whometense]

7. The timeline is similar, though. n/t

[Mass]

8. I did not hear a timeline, just a beginning of withdrawal and no deadline.

Nearly of Democrats support that now, and Kerry may not have been the first one to propose that. I was really bothered when Reid this morning said categorically NO to deadlines. I may have missed something, of course, but I doubt that there is a firm timeline, because Levin has always said he was against it.

This is a big show so that Hillary can show how tough she is by accepting that, nothing else.

I would not expect Levin to be happy with Kerry or Feingold. They forced discussions on the Senate floor when Levin did not want these discussions to happen.

[whometense]

10. Levin said that

troops should be redeployed starting in 4-6 months. That sounds like a timeline to me - of sorts. Again, I listened to the show, but didn't watch the clip, so I'm not sure what's on there and what isn't.

[Mass]

11. Not really. All Dems have said that. Without a deadline for withdrawing most of the troops, it

can last as long as they want. As I said, it is the Levin amendment that was voted by all Dems in May, so nothing new, except that the redeployment was starting earlier. And this is a proposal that Kerry said was not enough, even if he voted for it.

This is the standard proposal that all Dems, starting by Gelb in Summer 2005 (before Kerry) have proposed at a point or another, without any commitment of what would be done.

Now, if what Levin has proposed here is Kerry-Feingold, I do not support it, but, as I said, I do not think it is that.

[ginnyinWI]

19. I heard him too, plus a lot of other Dems,

who all seem to be saying, "we want no timelines, but here's the timeline..." :crazy:

Another detail I hesitate to bring up, because I might have heard it wrong and can't find anything on the net to back it up: Charlie Gibson at ABC said that the Democrats' proposal would include having most troops out by mid-2007? That, of course is the Kerry-Feingold amendment, so what's going on, anyway? I guess we'll find out soon.

[whometense]

21. It's really confusing.

I'm not sure either what's going on. I guess a lot of new stuff will come up this week, with everyone back in DC.

[Mass]

22. Because reporters do not read anything except GOP talking points

Levin's bill does not say that. They talk about STARTING to withdraw troops in mid-07. No clue of how fast it would go.

[wisteria]

12. Ok. he said he doesn't represent this party. It implies the same thing to me

Given a chance to defend Kerry, a decorated Vietnam veteran, Levin instead said that Kerry does not speak for the party, calling his remarks a "botched statement by a former candidate who doesn't represent this party."

ttp://www.mlive.com/news/grpress/index.ssf?/base/news-33/1162397103111700.xml&coll=6

[Mass]

13. As I said, his answer is lame.

[sandnsea]

15. Well, it seems to me

Kerry got there in 2004 because he said if his plan were implemented we could start withdrawing troops in 2005, in order to reduce the sense of occupation and get the target off the backs of our troops. He's way past a tepid withdrawal strategy now. IMO.

[Mass]

23. I agree. I had forgotten that Kerry had already proposed that in 04.

But you are right. He has moved way beyond that now.

[globalvillage]

16. You should tell him how you feel

http://levin.senate.gov/contact/send.cfm

[Noisy Democrat]

18. I'll do it -- I'm a constituent of his n/t

[globalvillage]

20. I'm not, but I wrote him.

I hate those forms. I'd rather write a letter, but this was the best I could do given the format:

Shame on you, Senator. I have given thousands of dollars and put in many hours of volunteer work for the '06 campaign at Senator Kerry's request to hear this:

"Given a chance to defend Kerry, a decorated Vietnam veteran, Levin instead said that Kerry does not speak for the party, calling his remarks a "botched statement by a former candidate who doesn't represent this party."

John Kerry speaks for me, Senator Levin. You do not. You should be ashamed of your nasty swipe at the Senator. It's you who owe the apology.

[wisteria]

24. Good letter, I wrote him also. n/t