Thanks for this great work Jane and others at FDL! Keep up the excellent work!

The fact that in real life he’s pissing off a majority of the Democratic and Independent constituencies and no few Republicans as well is… meaningless to him.

Be grateful he’s not allowed access to the launch codes.

I took the time on every call to explain why I thought the member should vote for the supplemental. Why the perception of not supporting the troops would be political suicide and set the Liberal movement back years. Thank God for Barack Obama and Rahm Emanuel.

If nothing else, you should have called him on that outrageous revisionism. For some of us, the ‘68 Democratic primary wars, the Chicago convention, the McGovern/Kennedy/Humphrey primary battles and the driving of our Democratic President Johnson from office – by Democrats, not Republicans – are a reality we lived through…not a few pages in a high school history book.

And, of course, Democratic President Bill (and Hillary) Clinton took nearly as much hostility and criticism from Democrats as they ever did from Republicans. You may remember that.

McGovern favors ending the wars in the way wars are ended, by ceasing to fund them. But he also has a bill that reads in its entirety:

“Not later than December 31, 2009, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report outlining the United States exit strategy for United States military forces in Afghanistan participating in Operation Enduring Freedom.”

And we have already heard of at least one Congress member using cosponsorship of that bill as an excuse for voting Yes on the war supplemental.

Moveon.org and other large organizations let it be known on Monday that they planned to encourage their members on Tuesday to urge Congress members to sign onto McGovern’s bill — without saying one word about the war supplemental expected to be voted on that same day.

The exit strategy to satisfy McGovern’s well-intended bill could consist of a plan to redeploy troops to Iran in 2015. It could be anything. And MoveOn’s timing, together with other organizations in the Win Without War coalition, was telling. Because many members of these groups oppose the war and have complained about their organizations’ silence on the supplemental vote, the organizations’ leaders chose the moment of the war vote to propose something else that might at least look like a halfway step. In reality, however, it may turn out to be counterproductive — a development that would please Pelosi and Emanuel.

these developments have helped me understand better what happened with the 2007 war supplemental.

http://firedoglake.com/2007/03…..r-engines/

Thanks Jane, for exposing her as a fraud.