Governor Dean Blasts Bush For Threatening to Veto Health Coverage For Kids
Posted by Stephanie Taylor on September 28, 2007 at 04:57 PMGovernor Dean blasted President Bush today for threatening to veto legislation that would provide health care coverage for millions of low-income children. Here's his statement:
"It's despicable that President Bush is willing to deny our nation's children health care. How is it compassionate conservatism to stand against ensuring that our children have access to the doctor visits for preventative care and treatment they need? While the President is committed to spending billions of dollars on a failed strategy in Iraq with no end in sight, he is willing to deny health care to our children here at home. Equally shameful, the Republican presidential candidates agree with President Bush's veto threat. The President and the Republican candidates should recognize that the health of our children must be a national priority and join Democrats in supporting this bill."
Comments - 32 »
Comments - 32 «
Chimpy and the GOP stink.
Posted by rjsnj on September 28, 2007 at 05:53 PM
dispicable and shameful.
yes, that's bush.
Posted by Sadie on September 28, 2007 at 09:44 PM
STATE PRIMARY & GENERAL ELECTION Voting CONTACT INFORMATION for the 50 States of the United States
Secretaries of State ELECTION Phone Numbers & Web Addresses
Alabama (334)242-7210; 1-(800)274-8683 http://www.sos.alabama.gov/
Alaska (907)465-4611; 1-(888)383-8683 http://www.elections.state.ak.us/
Arizona (602)542-8683;1-(877)843-8683 http://www.az.sos.gov/
Arkansas (501)682-5070;1-(800)482-1127 http://www.sos.arkansas.gov/
California (916)657-2166;1-(800)345-8683 http://www.sos.ca.gov/
Colorado (303)894-2200; http://www.state.co.us
Connecticut (860)509-6100; http://www.sots.ct.gov/
Delaware (302)739-4277; 1-(800)273-9500 http://www.elections.delaware.gov/
Florida (850)245-6200; 1(866)308-6739; 1-(850)245-6290 http://election.dos.state.fl.us
Georgia (404)656-2871; http://www.sos.state.ga.us
Hawaii (808)453-8683; 1-(800)442-8683 http://www.hawaii.gov/elections/
Idaho (208)334-2852; http://www.sos.idaho.gov/
Illinois (217)782-4141 Springfield; (312)814-6440 Chicago; 1-(800)527-8683;1-(800)923-8683 http://www.elections.il.gov/
Indiana (317)232-3939; 1-(800)622-4941 http://www.in.gov/sos/elections/
Iowa (515)281-5781; 1-(888)767-8683 http://www.sos.state.ia.us/
Kansas (785)296-4561; 1-(800)262-8683 http://www.voteks.org/
Kentucky (502)573-7100; 1-(800)246-1399 http://www.sos.ky.gov/
Louisiana (225)922-0900; 1-(800)883-2805 http://www.sos.louisiana.gov/elections/elections-index.htm
Maine (207)624-7736; http://www.maine.gov/sos/
Maryland (410)269-2840; 1(800)222-8683 http://www.elections.state.md.us/
Massachusetts (617)727-2828; 1-(800)462-8683 http://www.sec.state.ma.us/ele/
Michigan (517)373-2540; http://www.michigan.gov/sos
Minnesota (651)215-1440; 1-(877)600-8683 http://www.sos.state.mn.us
Mississippi (601)359-1350; 1-(800)829-6786 http://www.sos.state.ms.us/
Missouri (573)751-2301; 1-(800)669-8683 http://www.sos.mo.gov/
Montana (406)444-4732; 1-(888)884-8683 http://www.sos.mt.gov/
Nebraska (402)471-2555; http://www.sos.state.ne.us/
Nevada (775)684-5705; http://sos.state.nv.us/elections/
New Hampshire (603)271-3242; http://www.sos.nh.gov/
New Jersey (609)292-3760; 1-(877)658-6837 http://www.state.nj.us/lps/elections/electionshome.html
New Mexico (505)827-3600; 1-(800)477-3632 http://www.sos.state.nm.us/
New York (518)474-6220; 1-(800)367-8683 http://www.elections.state.ny.us/
North Carolina (919)733-7173; http://www.sboe.state.nc.us/
Ohio (614)466-2585; 1-(877)767-6446 http://www.sos.state.oh.us/
Oklahoma (405)521-2391; http://www.elections.state.ok.us/
Oregon (503)986-1518; 1-(866)673-8683 http://www.oregonvotes.org
Pennsylvania (717)787-5280; 1-(800)552-8683 http://www.dos.state.pa.us/bcel/site/default.asp
Rhode Island (401)222-2345; 1-(877)462-8683 http://www.elections.ri.gov/
South Carolina (803)734-9060; http://www.scvotes.org/
South Dakota (605)773-3537; http://www.sdsos.gov
Tennessee (615)741-7956; http://www.state.tn.us/sos/
Texas (512)463-5650; 1-(800)252-8683 http://www.sos.state.tx.us
Utah (801)538-1041; 1-(800)995-8683 http://www.elections.utah.gov/voterinformation.html
Vermont (802)828-2464; 1(800)439-8683 http://vermont-elections.org/soshome.htm
Virginia (804)864-8901; 1-(800)552-9745 http://www.sbe.state.va.us
Washington (360)902-4180; 1-(800)448-4881 http://www.secstate.wa.gov/elections/
West Virginia (304)558-6000; 1-(866)767-8683 http://www.wvsos.com/
Wisconsin (608)266-8005; 1-(866)868-3947 http://elections.wi.gov
Wyoming (307)777-7186; http://soswy.state.wy.us
Posted by _MarthaA on September 30, 2007 at 12:09 AM
I do not understand why Pelosi says that impeachment for Bush and Cheney is "off the table".
If Americans are ever going to trust their government officials again the crimes committed by the Bushwackers must be addressed, otherwise it sets a precedent for all future presidents that the executive branch is beyond the reach of our laws and they may disregard them and the Constitution with impunity!
Bush just proved that by his recent commutation of Scooter Libby's sentence, even before all court appeals were exhausted, so therefore obstruction of justice is ok - for members of the executive branch!
Posted by dumpbush on September 30, 2007 at 12:19 AM
Why did 22 Democratic Senators vote for a Senate Resolution being pushed by the Republicans to censure Move-On, one of the most supportive groups the Democrats have?
What that vote did was cause the diverting of a significant amount of donations from Democratic political orgs to Move-On. I know I sent Move-On an extra donation which I had put aside to send to some of the various Democratic groups including the Democratic Party. Move-On had one of the best weeks for donation receipts ever after that stupid act.
I also will not support my Senator, Bill Nelson who voted for this atrocity again, and hope Move-on supports primary opposition for Nelson the next time he runs.
Posted by dumpbush on September 30, 2007 at 12:29 AM
ELECTION INFORMATION - Find Out When YOUR Primary Election Will Be Held
STATE PRIMARY & GENERAL ELECTION Voting CONTACT INFORMATION for the 50 States of the United States
Secretaries of State ELECTION Phone Numbers & Web Addresses
Alabama (334)242-7210; 1-(800)274-8683 http://www.sos.alabama.gov/
Alaska (907)465-4611; 1-(888)383-8683 http://www.elections.state.ak.us/
Arizona (602)542-8683;1-(877)843-8683 http://www.az.sos.gov/
Arkansas (501)682-5070;1-(800)482-1127 http://www.sos.arkansas.gov/
California (916)657-2166;1-(800)345-8683 http://www.sos.ca.gov/
Colorado (303)894-2200; http://www.state.co.us
Connecticut (860)509-6100; http://www.sots.ct.gov/
Delaware (302)739-4277; 1-(800)273-9500 http://www.elections.delaware.gov/
Florida (850)245-6200; 1(866)308-6739; 1-(850)245-6290 http://election.dos.state.fl.us
Georgia (404)656-2871; http://www.sos.state.ga.us
Hawaii (808)453-8683; 1-(800)442-8683 http://www.hawaii.gov/elections/
Idaho (208)334-2852; http://www.sos.idaho.gov/
Illinois (217)782-4141 Springfield; (312)814-6440 Chicago; 1-(800)527-8683;1-(800)923-8683 http://www.elections.il.gov/
Indiana (317)232-3939; 1-(800)622-4941 http://www.in.gov/sos/elections/
Iowa (515)281-5781; 1-(888)767-8683 http://www.sos.state.ia.us/
Kansas (785)296-4561; 1-(800)262-8683 http://www.voteks.org/
Kentucky (502)573-7100; 1-(800)246-1399 http://www.sos.ky.gov/
Louisiana (225)922-0900; 1-(800)883-2805 http://www.sos.louisiana.gov/elections/elections-index.htm
Maine (207)624-7736; http://www.maine.gov/sos/
Maryland (410)269-2840; 1(800)222-8683 http://www.elections.state.md.us/
Massachusetts (617)727-2828; 1-(800)462-8683 http://www.sec.state.ma.us/ele/
Michigan (517)373-2540; http://www.michigan.gov/sos
Minnesota (651)215-1440; 1-(877)600-8683 http://www.sos.state.mn.us
Mississippi (601)359-1350; 1-(800)829-6786 http://www.sos.state.ms.us/
Missouri (573)751-2301; 1-(800)669-8683 http://www.sos.mo.gov/
Montana (406)444-4732; 1-(888)884-8683 http://www.sos.mt.gov/
Nebraska (402)471-2555; http://www.sos.state.ne.us/
Nevada (775)684-5705; http://sos.state.nv.us/elections/
New Hampshire (603)271-3242; http://www.sos.nh.gov/
New Jersey (609)292-3760; 1-(877)658-6837 http://www.state.nj.us/lps/elections/electionshome.html
New Mexico (505)827-3600; 1-(800)477-3632 http://www.sos.state.nm.us/
New York (518)474-6220; 1-(800)367-8683 http://www.elections.state.ny.us/
North Carolina (919)733-7173; http://www.sboe.state.nc.us/
North Dakota (701)328-7900; 1-(800)352-0867 http://www.nd.gov/sos/
Ohio (614)466-2585; 1-(877)767-6446 http://www.sos.state.oh.us/
Oklahoma (405)521-2391; http://www.elections.state.ok.us/
Oregon (503)986-1518; 1-(866)673-8683 http://www.oregonvotes.org
Pennsylvania (717)787-5280; 1-(800)552-8683 http://www.dos.state.pa.us/bcel/site/default.asp
Rhode Island (401)222-2345; 1-(877)462-8683 http://www.elections.ri.gov/
South Carolina (803)734-9060; http://www.scvotes.org/
South Dakota (605)773-3537; http://www.sdsos.gov
Tennessee (615)741-7956; http://www.state.tn.us/sos/
Texas (512)463-5650; 1-(800)252-8683 http://www.sos.state.tx.us
Utah (801)538-1041; 1-(800)995-8683 http://www.elections.utah.gov/voterinformation.html
Vermont (802)828-2464; 1(800)439-8683 http://vermont-elections.org/soshome.htm
Virginia (804)864-8901; 1-(800)552-9745 http://www.sbe.state.va.us
Washington (360)902-4180; 1-(800)448-4881 http://www.secstate.wa.gov/elections/
West Virginia (304)558-6000; 1-(866)767-8683 http://www.wvsos.com/
Wisconsin (608)266-8005; 1-(866)868-3947 http://elections.wi.gov
Wyoming (307)777-7186; http://soswy.state.wy.us
With the above voting contact information, check with your state to find out the dates of your presidential primaries, state primaries, general elections and run offs, etc. in your area. It is of utmost importance that the DLC be voted out of the Congress of the United States and all state governments.
Vote out the DLC.
Posted by _MarthaA on September 30, 2007 at 12:55 AM
(correction on Arizona)
Arizona (602)542-8683;1-(877)843-8683 http://www.azsos.gov/election/
Posted by _MarthaA on September 30, 2007 at 01:35 AM
We are in perilous times … The stunning admission by Democratic frontrunners Clinton, Obama and Edwards that they might keep US troops in Iraq beyond 2013 is tantamount to announcement of a permanent occupation that could cost us $5 trillion and bankrupt any opportunity to address healthcare reform, education, jobs or any other domestic policy initiatives.
In other words, the future of America is at stake. America has had enough.
These war candidates must be held accountable for their roles in this illegal, immoral and disastrous war and that's what I intend to do. We must show them and the world that there are those of us who would truly support peace and the rule of law, who understand that a strong defense starts first with skilled diplomacy and statesmanship rather than the failed policy of pre-emptive war.
We are so close! Your help has already brought us to 270,000 dollars and now is the time we need you to propel us through that last 30,000 dollars before the critical FEC filing deadline at midnight on SUNDAY, SEPT. 30th.
I know you want this war to end. I know you don't want war with Iran. Help me be the voice of reason for our country. The clock is ticking on our future. The time is NOW for a leader to emerge who represents the interests of the People … I am that leader and I will lead this nation so that your future and all our futures will not run out of time.
Thank you again for your continued support. Please take action today, NOW, at this critical juncture in our history.
It's your America!
I'll make sure your voice is heard!
Dennis Kucinich
************
Please help Dennis Kucinich as he helps the 70% MAJORITY POPULATION regain representation in the government of the United States.
Posted by _MarthaA on September 30, 2007 at 04:13 PM
Has this president no shame, let alone any morals? What has the self proclaimed 'moral right' have to say about the veto of health care for children? It disgusts me to think that this administration will happily hand out millions of dollars to companies such as Blackwater (cause they're politically connected to this White House), but will deny access to childrens healthcare. What has this country become...
Posted by AlanC on October 3, 2007 at 11:18 AM
It appears he doesn't care about the people in this country. This type of problem is what impeachment is for to remove Bush and Cheney from office. Because it will take generations to undo the damage this band of thugs have done to our country. Now the American people are seeing the consequences of relecting Bush or any Republican at this point. Impeach Bush and Cheney and send them to the Hague to do long prison time.
Posted by Darien on October 3, 2007 at 01:10 PM
Why would the Democrats stop Bush from rejecting child healthcare? They won't stop him from sending soldiers to the death in Iraq that had no other option but to join the military. They didn't stop him from cutting veteran benefits. They didn't stop him from starting an illegal war. They didn't stop him from stealing elections in 2000 and 2004. They didn't stop him from widening the gap between the rich and the poor and they won't stop him from illegally invading Iran. Of course this is really all Cheney with Bush's face on it but my point is the same. The Democrats and the Republicans are both about to be history. When are you going to understand that we elected you and gave you the power, the people, not the corporations!!!!!!! The love of money is truly the root of all evil.
Posted by Nfamous on October 3, 2007 at 01:15 PM
Where's the media now? Democrats across the country are horrified at this veto. Dr. Dean, please speak loud and clear for our children. This is an outrage.
Jane
Posted by JaneD on October 3, 2007 at 02:55 PM
Well I really wanted a big plasma tv in my living room, instead the Prez Bush, vetoed S-Chip. I make 65,000 a year, with this new program my two kids, who are 16 and 21 would have free healthcare while I spend that money on things that I want, aka 56 inch plasma tv and a new deisel truck. But no, I guess i have to take care of them kids, no-thanks to Bush.
Posted by OldDemocrat1 on October 3, 2007 at 03:20 PM
Well I really wanted a big plasma tv in my living room, instead the Prez Bush, vetoed S-Chip. I make 65,000 a year, with this new program my two kids, who are 16 and 21 would have free healthcare while I spend that money on things that I want, aka 56 inch plasma tv and a new deisel truck. But no, I guess i have to take care of them kids, no-thanks to Bush.
Posted by OldDemocrat1 on October 3, 2007 at 03:21 PM
Don't censor me, I'm a vet!
Well I really wanted a big plasma tv in my living room, instead the Prez Bush, vetoed S-Chip. I make 65,000 a year, with this new program my two kids, who are 16 and 21 would have free healthcare while I spend that money on things that I want, aka 56 inch plasma tv and a new deisel truck. But no, I guess i have to take care of them kids, no-thanks to Bush.
Posted by OldDemocrat1 on October 3, 2007 at 03:22 PM
This veto can be over ridden, and should be. Show us an action page we can BLOG, send to Forums and drop on the desk of the local newspaper editor.
Posted by EdEKit on October 3, 2007 at 09:06 PM
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
October 3, 2007
4:50 PM
CONTACT: CODE PINK
Medea Benjamin 415-235-6517
Ann Wright 808-741-1141
Dana Balicki 202-422-8624
Canada Refuses Entry to CODEPINK Cofounder Medea Benjamin and Retired Colonel Ann Wright
WASHINGTON - October 3 – Two well-respected US peace activists, CODEPINK and Global Exchange cofounder Medea Benjamin and retired Colonel and diplomat Ann Wright, were denied entry into Canada today (Wednesday, October 3). The two women were headed to Toronto to discuss peace and security issues at the invitation of the Toronto Stop the War Coalition. At the Buffalo-Niagara Falls Bridge they were detained, questioned and denied entry. They will hold a press conference on Thursday afternoon in front of the Canadian Embassy in Washington DC to ask the Canadian government to reverse its policy of barring peaceful protesters.
The women were questioned at Canadian customs about their participation in anti-war efforts and informed that they had an FBI file indicating they had been arrested in acts of non-violent civil disobedience.
WHEN: Thursday, October 4th at 1pm
WHERE: Canadian Embassy, 501 Pennsylvania Ave NW, Washington DC
"In my case, the border guard pulled up a file showing that I had been arrested at the US Mission to the UN where, on International Women's Day, a group of us had tried to deliver a peace petition signed by 152,000 women around the world," says Benjamin. "For this, the Canadians labeled me a criminal and refused to allow me in the country."
"The FBI's placing of peace activists on an international criminal database is blatant political intimidation of US citizens opposed to Bush administration policies," says Colonel Wright, who was also Deputy US Ambassador in four countries. "The Canadian government should certainly not accept this FBI database as the criteria for entering the country."
Both Wright and Benjamin plan to request their files from the FBI through the Freedom of Information Act and demand that arrests for peaceful, non-violent actions be expunged from international records.
"It's outrageous that Canada is turning away peacemakers protesting a war that does not have the support of either US or Canadian citizens," says Benjamin. "In the past, Canada has always welcomed peace activists with open arms. This new policy, obviously a creature of the Bush administration, is shocking and we in the US and Canada must insist that it be overturned.
Four members of the Canadian Parliament--Peggy Nash, Libby Davies, Paul Dewar and Peter Julian-- expressed outrage that the peace activists were barred from Canada and vow to change this policy.
Interviews available on request.
Posted by _MarthaA on October 4, 2007 at 01:07 AM
Suit: Dems Stripping Votes From ... Dems
Florida Lawmakers Suing Democratic National Committee Over Presidential Primary
TALLAHASSEE, Fla., Oct. 3, 2007
(CBS/AP) In a “monumental irony,” the Democratic Party is violating the Constitution and federal law by stripping 4 million Floridians of their right to vote in the presidential primary, says a lawsuit.
Sen. Bill Nelson and Rep. Alcee Hastings plan to file the suit Thursday, CBS News Radio correspondent Peter King reports.
The suit will claim that the Democratic National Committee did not have the right to take away Florida's presidential delegates just because Republicans set the primary for Jan. 29 in violation of DNC rules. It will also say presidential candidates were pressured into boycotting the state, which takes away voters' rights to engage the candidates on issues important to them, according to a draft copy obtained Wednesday by The Associated Press.
It will name the DNC and its chairman, Howard Dean, as defendants. Nelson and Hastings, both Florida Democrats, scheduled a press conference Thursday morning to discuss the suit once it's filed.
“The defendants have combined to create a Presidential primary election with a stunningly anti-democratic scenario - every one of the more than 4.25 million registered Democratic voters in Florida will be completely disenfranchised,” it says. “Their constitutional rights with respect to that election will be rendered meaningless.”
The draft, which was being circulated among congressional staffers and legal experts Wednesday, details how Democrats rallied around voter rights issues after the 2000 presidential recount, in which President Bush won Florida by 527 votes, capturing the White House. Democrats claimed that thousands of votes went uncounted and that Vice President Al Gore would have won.
“In the aftermath of the shattering events of 2000, Democrats here and around the country have made continued efforts to assure that every vote counts,” the draft says. “It is thus truly a monumental irony for the Democratic National Committee to issue a decree that no Florida Democrats' vote will count.”
Presidential campaigning in Florida will be a Republicans-only process during the critical stage of the campaign.
the senators, in a draft of the lawsuit
The suit will also name Florida Secretary of State Kurt Browning, saying he is going ahead with plans for the Jan. 29 primary knowing that the vote will not result in delegates being selected for the national convention.
DNC spokeswoman Karen Finney said the organization doesn't comment on litigation and that she had not seen the claims in the suit.
“It's disappointing that after months of trying to resolve the situation and bring Florida into compliance these two have chosen this path,” she said.
A spokesman for Browning declined comment.
Democratic Party rules say states cannot hold their 2008 primary contests before Feb. 5, except for Iowa on Jan. 14, Nevada on Jan. 19, New Hampshire on Jan. 22 and South Carolina on Jan. 29. Michigan has scheduled a Jan. 15 primary. Florida Republicans could lose half their 114 delegates for violating similar national party rules.
Florida's Republican-led Legislature and Republican Gov. Charlie Crist set the primary date. Democrats say their efforts to set it at Feb. 5 were ignored. While other delegate selection plans were considered, such as caucuses held on or after Feb. 5, state Democratic leaders decided that the statewide election was the best way to allow people to participate.
The DNC's decision to take away all 210 delegates and the pressure on presidential candidates not to publicly campaign in Florida will hurt the party's chances of winning the general election in November, the draft suit says.
“Presidential campaigning in Florida will be a Republicans-only process during the critical stage of the campaign,” it says.
“Punishing an innocent electorate, demoralizing Florida Democrats, disrupting their organizational efforts, and minimizing the visibility of the future nominee to the people of Florida could, if anything, be harmful to the Democrats' hopes of winning this pivotal state.”
Nelson's office would not comment on details of the suit, saying the senator will speak on it Thursday. Hastings' office also declined to talk about specifics, but spokesman David Goldenberg said, “We cannot and will not sit idly by and risk disenfranchising over 4 million Democratic voters.”
Posted by _MarthaA on October 4, 2007 at 01:52 AM
Wake up America! What part of "a 156% tax increase on cigarettes to fund SCHIP" doesn't anyone understand?
1) That is unfair taxation, expecting smokers to pay for this increase. Smokers who will get sick because of cigarettes and not be able to continue to by them.
2) It is a decreasing revenue source with more and more people quitting. When the revenue decreases, how will they pay for SCHIP then? Another tax!
3) Taxation without representation. Isn't that what the Boston Tea Party was all about??
BUSH DID THE RIGHT THING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by Fed_Up_Wake_Up on October 4, 2007 at 02:07 PM
Dr. Dean's e-mail has confused me (that's no difficult accomplishment.) However, I am 61 and I have always thought that children's medical expenses are the responsibility of the children's grandparents. Not the responsibility of President Bush.
Please enlighten.
Cordially,
Dinosaur
Posted by Neandertal on October 4, 2007 at 08:21 PM
i live in western maryland where roesoe bartlett resides in the house of representatives what can i do to get him unelected next term he is in with bush his nay vote of schip disgustes me along with he is useless as a legistlator we need a new democratic house member badly in western maryland
Posted by dougforchange on October 4, 2007 at 10:21 PM
Why does every Candidate sound so uncertain even during debates about the nature of the bill and let others get away by saying "Poor Children First", "Nationalized Health Care", etc.
Are there items that really hide the above agenda? Democrates seem to use their words so meticulusly as if they are really hiding something or I am stupid...
lgp
Posted by lgp on October 5, 2007 at 03:14 AM
Why does every Candidate sound so uncertain even during debates about the nature of the bill and let others get away by saying "Poor Children First", "Nationalized Health Care", etc.
Are there items that really hide the above agenda? Democrates seem to use their words so meticulusly as if they are really hiding something or I am stupid...
lgp
Posted by lgp on October 5, 2007 at 03:15 AM
I applaud everyone who voted NO.
The 61 cent per pack tax increase on cigarettes is ridiculous and unfair taxation. It is bad business to build this program on a decreasing revenue source.
It is wrong to expect the smoker's of American to pay for this and disgusting of the supporters of this bill to try to slide this by the American people. They are just setting up the SCHIP program for more taxes at a later date not to mention making all who voted NO look bad! The supporters of this bill have set up the entire nation!!!!!
Thank you for voting NO!!!
Posted by Fed_Up_Wake_Up on October 5, 2007 at 12:10 PM
The message that Americans must hear...
Dennis Kucinich: from A to Z on PBS
It's not often with privatized media that Dennis Kucinich is given the opportunity to discuss the major domestic and international issues that are critically important to the vast majority of Americans: war, health care, the mortgage crisis, the impact of unfair trade agreements on American workers…
In this PBS interview, Dennis Kucinich gets his ideas out to the public, as Dennis Kucinich says what he believes. What you believe.
Watch the entire Dennis Kucinich interview with Judy Woodruff of PBS right here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1AhaH1ozbg
Dennis Kucinich speaks for the people: Honestly, clearly, and emphatically.
Dennis Kucinich says the things we want this nation, the White House, the Congress, and the world to hear. Dennis Kucinich is our voice, not bought or bossed by the multi-million dollar special interests that influence and control the other Democratic candidates.
If you believe in Dennis Kucinich, if you believe in your own power to change this nation and change this world, share this video with everyone you know. Let them see and hear and learn for themselves how to make this nation great again: -- And proud: And prosperous.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1AhaH1ozbg
To the best of your ability, help keep Dennis Kucinich's voice - your voice - loud and strong by making a contribution to the kind of future you want for yourselves, your children, and your grandchildren. With your help, the nation and the world will continue to hear the truth. Your support and your involvement will make a difference. Support the kind of America that you believe in. And support the only candidate who believes in you, Dennis Kucinich.
Dennis Kucinich For President of the United States
http://www.dennis4president.com
PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH OF DIPLOMACY
Posted by _MarthaA on October 5, 2007 at 01:22 PM
Democrats propose U.S. income tax surcharge to pay for Iraq war
The Associated Press
Published: October 2, 2007
WASHINGTON: Three senior House Democrats, seeking to highlight the costs of the Iraq war, proposed a U.S. income tax surcharge Tuesday to finance the approximately $150 billion (€105.8 billion) spent annually on operations in Iraq.
The plan's sponsors acknowledged the tax measure is unlikely to pass, but Democrats have been seeking in recent weeks to contrast the approximately $190 billion (€134.1 billion) cost of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars with the $23 billion (€16.2 billion) increase that Democrats want in domestic programs.
President George W. Bush has threatened to veto most of those domestic spending bills as too expensive. Those bills were largely written by committees headed by two of the tax legislation's sponsors.
The Democrats' second-ranking official in the House of Representatives, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, played down the initiative as "not a policy which the Speaker or I have signed off on," said Majority Leader Steny Hoyer.
The plan, unveiled by Reps. David Obey, John Murtha and Jim McGovern would require low-and middle-income taxpayers to add 2 percent to their tax bill. Wealthier people would add a 12 to 15 percent surcharge, Obey said.
"The war will cost future generations billions of dollars in taxes that we're shoving off on them and it is devouring money that could be used to expand their educational opportunities, expand their job training possibilities, attack our long-term energy problems and build stronger communities," Obey said.
Obey, who heads the House Appropriations Committee, also announced that Democrats will not pass a supplemental spending bill for the Iraq war until next year, when Democrats hope public pressure could force Bush to change the course of the war.
Democrats hope their chances of winning a battle with Bush on the war will be better next year as the election season heats up.
"The showdown is going to be in January or February," McGovern said.
The lawmakers said the tax surcharge was similar to policies put in place to pay for the Vietnam War and World War II.
"By putting together this bill we hope people will stop ignoring what this war is costing American taxpayers and call the president's bluff on fiscal responsibility," Obey said.
Posted by _MarthaA on October 6, 2007 at 02:05 AM
Disappearing Diplomacy
By Jim Lobe
Support for an aggressive military stance toward Iran appears to be spreading across party lines, a fact highlighted by the bipartisan backing in the Senate for a non-binding amendment to the 2008 Defense Authorization bill that called for the administration of President George W. Bush to designate Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps "a foreign terrorist organization." Among those supporting the amendment, which was co-sponsored by Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ), was Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY).
Amid growing speculation about prospects for U.S. military action against Iran, neoconservatives and other hawks won a significant—if somewhat incomplete —victory in rallying the Democratic-led Congress to its side.
In a 76-22 vote last Wednesday, senators approved a non-binding amendment to the 2008 Defense Authorization bill that called for the administration of President George W. Bush to designate Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) "a foreign terrorist organization."
Among those voting for the measure was the Democratic front-runner for the 2008 presidential election, Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York.
At the same time, the House of Representatives voted nearly unanimously—408-6—for another measure, the Iran Sanctions Enabling Act, which would force Bush to impose sweeping sanctions against foreign companies that invest more than $20 million in Iran's energy sector.
That bill, which is opposed by the Bush administration due to strong pressure from Washington's European and Asian allies and key U.S. multinational companies, is considered likely to stall in the Senate through the remainder of this year.
But its huge margin of approval, which some observers said was boosted by last week's controversial visit to New York by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, helped demonstrate once again how responsive members of both major parties are to the so-called "Israel Lobby," which has made the sanctions bill its top legislative priority this year.
Both votes took place amid an intensifying struggle within the administration over control of Iran policy, with hawks, led by Vice President Dick Cheney and his neoconservative advisers, pitted against the State Department and Pentagon chief Robert Gates and his top military brass.
The State Department, while never ruling out military action, has consistently argued for continuing diplomatic efforts to address both alleged Iranian backing for anti-U.S. Shiite militias in Iraq and Iran's rejection of UN Security Council demands that it freeze its uranium-enrichment program.
For the past two months—since the last time the U.S. and Iranian ambassadors met in Baghdad—the struggle appears to have reached an impasse.
In late July, Bush agreed in principle to a proposal by Cheney for cross-border military strikes against IRGC targets that have allegedly been involved in training and supplying Iraqi Shiite militias, according to Philip Giraldi, a former military intelligence and CIA officer, writing recently in the American Conservative.
But the Pentagon brass, which has become increasingly outspoken about the overextension of U.S. ground forces in Iraq and the uncertainty about how Iran would react, countered with a more cautious strategy of building a new military base and extending patrolling along suspected smuggling routes, according to knowledgeable sources.
Similarly, the diplomatic dialogue between the U.S. and Iranian ambassadors in Baghdad over stabilizing Iraq—originally launched last May—has not resumed since their second and last meeting in late July when Amb. Ryan Crocker publicly complained about Tehran's alleged increase in support, via the IRGC, for Shiite militias that were attacking U.S. troops.
In testimony in Washington, DC, two weeks ago, Crocker said he "found no readiness on the Iranians' side at all to engage seriously on these issues," while Gen. David Petraeus, Washington's top military commander in Iraq, charged that Tehran was engaged in a "proxy war" against the United States in Iraq.
Last month, the Washington Post reported that the administration had decided in principle to designate the IRGC, which, in addition to its military role, controls a number of large businesses that could be subject to sanctions, but had yet to determine whether it would name the entire organization or only its elite unit, the Quds Force. That no announcement has yet been made is indicative of the continuing infighting around Bush.
The continuing paralysis, however, appears to have favored the hawks, who have pressed their campaign for cross-border military action against Iran in the opinion pages of such neoconservative publications as the Weekly Standard, the National Review, and the Wall Street Journal.
Their calls for action became so intense that the commander of the U.S. Central Command and Petraeus' superior, Adm. William Fallon, who has been trying to get authorization to negotiate an "incidents at sea" agreement with Iran, complained publicly that "this constant drumbeat of conflict is ... not helpful and not useful.
"It is not a good idea to be in a state of war. We ought to try and to do our utmost to create different conditions," he told al-Jazeera.
In fact, the first call for cross-border attacks on Iranian targets was made by the Senate's "independent" Democrat, Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-CT), who is regarded as particularly close to the powerful American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).
It was Lieberman and Republican Sen. John Kyl (R-AZ)—the honorary co-chairs of the pro-Likud Committee on the Present Danger (CPD) —who cosponsored the Senate amendment naming the IRGC as a terrorist group in an effort clearly designed to help tilt the internal balance within the administration.
As introduced, the amendment, which, according to several Capitol Hill sources, was drafted by AIPAC, actually went considerably further, deploying language that some senators argued could be interpreted as authorizing war against Iran.
Among other provisions, it called for the United States to "combat, contain, and roll back the violent activities and destabilizing influence inside Iraq of the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran ... and its indigenous Iraqi proxies" and "the prudent and calibrated use of all instruments of United States national power in Iraq, including ... military instruments, in support of [that] policy."
But those paragraphs were deleted after Democratic Sen. Jim Webb of Virginia delivered a passionate speech in which he charged that the amendment "is Dick Cheney's fondest pipe dream" and "could be read as tantamount to a declaration of war."
In a further softening, the drafters changed one policy statement that claimed it was a "vital [U.S.] national interest" to prevent Iran from turning Shiite militias in Iraq into its proxies to saying it was a "critical national interest." The previous wording generally connotes an interest over which the United States would be prepared to go to war.
Still, the fact that the amendment was approved by a significant margin—and with the support of key Democrats, including Clinton and Majority Leader Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada —is certain to be used by hawks within the administration as an indication of bipartisan support for a more aggressive policy toward Iran.
Jim Lobe is the Washington bureau chief for the Inter Press Service and a contributor to Right Web (http://rightweb.irc-online.org/).
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/rw/4603
Posted by _MarthaA on October 6, 2007 at 03:23 AM
Why hasnt Bush been impeached?
Posted by Truck on October 6, 2007 at 06:16 PM
Gov. Dean, how about also blasting Sen. Reid for agreeing to not send this bill to the floor for a vote? The Republicans lost the Senate because of Bush's lies about the Iraq war and because of corruption. Do you think the Democrats will retain power by continuing the war without a reasonable explanation (not just you don't have the votes; you don't need votes to NOT pass a funding bill) and also by bowing to the same big money interests as the Republicans?
Posted by Bart on October 9, 2007 at 04:52 PM
Gov.Dean,
Thanks for being on top of these useless republicans who blood is green, how dose the President of the United States veto's a bill
for th welfare of our kids. Is he really the devil
WHO IS HE AND WHAT IS HE TO US..........
Posted by kweekes on October 10, 2007 at 04:54 PM
Mr Dean's statement that President Bush is willing to deny our nation's children health care is untrue. We already fund healthcare premiums for the 6.5 million of only 6.o million kids without hearlth insurance. The bill that the President vetoed would allow families making over $80,000.00, most of whom have health care coverage, to cancel their existing coverage and collect from the government. I suggest that if Mr. Dean wants to lead the party, he should examine the truth before making public statements.
Posted by Wboyce on October 11, 2007 at 02:09 PM
More people riding in the cart than pulling it. If you make over 65,000 a year ,take care of your own health insurance.
Posted by jlmunn on October 11, 2007 at 10:20 PM
« Hide Comments
Comments are now closed for this entry.







