Replies......

In response to the questionnaire I put forward a few days ago, Mark Wilson offers these answers. (Maria Cant be Bothered has yet to respond to ANY questions I have submitted to her or her staff):

What is your message to the Democratic voters of this state when it comes to ending the occupation of Iraq and restoring a proper balance to the Federal budget between military and social spending?

MW: I understand that casualties are not being reported accurately from the losses sustained in the tragic immoral and illegal war and occupation on Iraq. If an American soldier dies as a result of wounds received in battle in Iraq while in transport to Germany, or in Germany while receiving treatment, or even back in the United States, they are not counted as Iraq causalities. The number of American fatalities is closer to 6000 I believe.

There has been no comprehensive tally on Iraq fatalities and wounded. This is truly tragic immoral and illegal according to the Geneva Conventions. Even if we look past the lies and faulty intelligence that lead to the invasion of Iraq, and we must not, we find that the stated objectives that led us in have been accomplished. A brutal dictator has been arrested and is on trial. We determined, as was previously expected, there were no weapons of mass destruction. That Iraq, in fact, represented no credible threat to the security of the United States. And that we have helped put in place - fledging as it is - a democracy. The Iraqi people face the same challenge we do - to protect and defend it. We must begin a rational and swift end to the American military presence in Iraq. First, by announcing a pull out date we put the world on notice that our determination is to actually turn over security of Iraq to the Iraqi government. We must push for a competently trained Iraqi Army with adequate personnel. The same goes for the police force. A complete turn over of security forces and pull out of American military forces must be accomplished within six months. I will work toward that new beginning.

From there a redirection of our discretionary spending must be targeted to meeting our future energy needs while balancing our nation’s social obligations. That's why I advocate for and will sponsor a Senate Resolution that redirects one-half of complex redundant weapons spending to a National Back to Work Program. Taking the lead from President Roosevelt during World War II. He directed the vast automotive manufacturing infrastructure to begin to produce the aircraft, tanks and big guns necessary to defeat the Axis powers. Within six months this transformation was accomplished. We can and must devote the same commitment to our energy future. Rather than use our military to continue securing these assets by force.We can protect the many good jobs engaged in defense contracting in this state while shifting our focus from weapons systems to production of components of renewable energy. Using the in-place manufacturing infrastructure and highly trained workforce to make our transition to our clean energy future is critical, and will help buoy a teetering economy that has been hobbled by outsourcing. Re-evaluating NAFTA, CAFTA and WTO agreements is critical in establishing a balanced foundation for fair trade that lifts the lives of everyone.Full employment at a living wage as a minimum will stimulate the economy and put dollars into faltering social services, including social security. A Universal Health Care Program for all can be realized with the revenue generated.


What is your message to the Democratic voters in this state when it comes to tax cuts during increased military activity? Do you believe that the wealthy, who are much less likely to perform military service or take positions in the service sector, should be expected to pay more in taxes as a means of sacrifice for the country?

MW: Of course reducing revenue while increasing spending will bankrupt the nation. Those who enjoy the favor of wealth, like my opponents, should have to shoulder their fair share. Repealing the Bush Tax Cuts to the top 1% is only a beginning. What I favor is a complete tax shift (see http://www.northwestwatch.org/reforms/taxes.asp) from goods to bads. Taxing income of working people (goods) while subsidizing wealthy GlobalCorporations, (bads) -many of whom are polluting and exploitive of poor working people- who owe no special allegiance to the United States, is immoral and should be illegal. I will work to make tax shift the right fit for the future.

Do you believe that the filibuster is a proper tool for an opposition party in the Senate's advice and consent role during the nomination of a US Supreme Court Justice and would you employ this option if you believed the president's choice was too extreme for the court?

MW: The filibuster is developing rickets. If ever there was an appropriate time for its use it was in preventing Sam Alito from ascending the bench of the Supreme Court. Unfortunately, the term Democratic Leadership has become little more than an oxymoron. To have voted for cloture on the filibuster and then “no” on the nomination, as the incumbent did, is disingenuous at best. I will fully employ every legal means at my disposal to protect and defend the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The filibuster is one powerful tool that I will not hesitate to use to prevent any more Alitos.

Will you vote to confirm John Bolton to the position of US Ambassador to the UN when it comes before the Senate in 2007?

MW: In fact the "end around run" that George W. Bush employed back-dooring John Bolton into the United Nations is not surprising when a complete historic view is taken of this administration. This follows in G.W.B.'s train wreck of thought. His intent is to pirate-tize the commons and sell off the last fibers of our social fabric. Bolton is a wrench tossed into the works of an already difficult and contentious deliberative body. But, the United Nations, as imperfect an institution as it is, is our best opportunity for world wide civil discourse and to further good global citizenship. I will vote against John Bolton and fight tooth and nail to prevent him from being confirmed as Ambassador to the United Nations.

************************************************************************************

As always, Senator Cantwell is always welcome to post ANYTHING she would like to post on any subject of her choosing.

Peace,

Chad (The Left) Shue

2006, A Year of Transition

Yesterday I sat through a dry run for my Democratic Congressman's upcoming kick-off speech for re-election to the US House. Rick Larsen from the 2nd CD has many good qualities and has accomplished some good things in Congress. Rick has done good works in his efforts on the environment. He insists he will continue the good fight to see the Wild Sky Wilderness Area become a reality. He is leading the fight to increase awareness and procure funding to fight to growing problem of Meth in our country and, especially, the more rural areas of Snohomish County. One of his proudest accomplishments is his recent victory in regulating the mail order bride industry that is operating in a big way via the internet. The murder of Anastasia King in Snohomish County in 2000 was the motivation behind Rick's efforts and the resulting legislation (a part of the Violence Against Women Act of 2006) is something he should be proud to promote. I will even give him credit for his efforts to keep Everett's Navy Homeport intact and secure from the Base Closure Commission. There would be more but the Democrats are in the minority you know.

The one area where Rick and I continue to have a serious parting of the ways however is in his approach to the issue of Iraq. In his warm up yesterday, Rick's opening salvo on Iraq was the new Democratic line: "2006 will be a year of transition in Iraq." How bold is that approach? What does it mean? One thing it does not mean is any form of an exit strategy from that foreign policy mistake. Even with the continuing "insurgency" that he acknowledges is Iraqi based (some might refer to it as a resistance to occupation), Rick clings to the notion that we should be establishing clear goals and benchmarks for our troops before we can bring them home. Congressman, we have been there three years! 2006 should be the year that we define the mission? The only real transition we will see in 2006 will be the transition from 2000 dead GIs to 3000 dead GIs. Iraq has transitioned - with our intervention - from a troubled but essentially harmless despotic regime to a festering hell hole of terrorist recruitment with American soldiers as the training targets.

I want to believe that Rick's intentions and motives are driven by a responsibility to the troops but I keep seeing politics as the driving force, not just with him, but with the majority of the Democrats seeking re-election. It's as if there is a feeling that Iraq will simply go away on its own and the less they say about it, the better off they will be. The problem with that "strategy" is that the Democrats don't control the debate. Obviously I am a "Bring them Home NOW!" guy but, at this point, I would settle for any strategy that ends the death and destruction in that country and, in the process, moves us away from Iraq as a launching pad into Iran (another post - another time). Here is a transition that Rick and some of his colleagues might want to consider:

While the Democrats ignore Iraq and continue to read the poll numbers that say they are going to sweep the House races in November, the republicans declare victory in Iraq in September/October and begin bringing the troops home. Maybe yes and maybe no but I can't help but believe it would be better for our troops (and even for the more politically motivated Democrats) if our Democratic politicians were applying at least some token pressure on the republicans to bring this about sooner rather than later.

Rick, enough innocent people have died for Bush's folly. Another dead American or Iraqi will not make our eventual departure any easier. Let's make 2006 a real year of transition by doing the right thing and bringing our troops home.

Peace,

Chad (The Left) Shue

"No Fillibuster" comes back quickly

“I am very concerned with Judge Alito’s record regarding an individual’s constitutional right to privacy. While I do not expect any judicial nominee to prejudge future cases, I do expect all nominees to make their positions clear on protecting the most basic rights of individuals and the fundamental structure and foundations of our democracy. In the end, I cannot be sure that Judge Alito would do either.
“Judge Alito has a record of concern when it comes to placing and consolidating the rights of the government over the rights of the individual and he has not provided the answers to adequately reassure the people of our nation. I must conclude that he would neither show due respect for the authority of Congress nor apply a necessary check to the reach of the executive. With great respect for the institution, I cannot vote to confirm Judge Alito to the Supreme Court of the United States.” ......

The above statement is from a press release by Senator Maria Cantwell issued on January 31, 2006. Just how concerned was/is Sen. Cantwell? Not concerned enough to stand up and be counted with Senators Kennedy, Murray, Kerry, Feingold, Clinton, and others to attempt to fillibuster the foregone conclusion of an Alito confirmation vote.

Why is this decision still in question? Have you read the news out of South Dakota? The assault on personal liberty and reproductive rights is in full frontal attack mode - heading straight to a United States Supreme Court (not even) close to you. The argument may rage as to whether any fillibuster would have been sustainable but there can never be any question as to how committed Senator Cantwell was to her own convictions that a Justice Alito would be an unacceptable risk to the Constitution.

Are we willing to reward such conviction to principle with six more years?

Peace,

Chad (The Left) Shue

IWR News

Iraq Body Count: 2/25/06
Americans Killed: 2288
Americans Wounded: 16,742
Iraqi Dead: Est.:32,119
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................

Latest Confirmed Casualties:

*Staff Sgt. Gregson G. Gourley, 38, of Salt Lake City, Utah. died in Al Hawijah, Iraq, on Feb. 22.

*Sgt. Rickey E. Jones, 21, of Kokomo, Ind. died in Al Hawijah, Iraq, on Feb. 22.

*Pfc. Christopher L. Marion, 20, of Pineville, Mo. died in Al Hawijah, Iraq, on Feb. 22.

*Pfc. Allan A. Morr, 21, of Shiawassee County, Mich. died in Al Hawijah, Iraq, on Feb. 22.

Peace,

Chad (The Left) Shue

An Endorsement

Is this the time? Is Mark Wilson the right candidate? Now is the time to answer these questions and then act.......or not.

With just seven months to go until Democrats in Washington State cast their primary ballots, now is the time for Progressives to determine if we will put Mark Wilson on our shoulders and make the all-out effort to get him over the finish line. Oh sure, you can say that the effort is his alone but, as soon as you say that, you must ask why he would bother if we are not ready to help with the burden that is unseating an incumbent US Senator.

For over a year now, Mark has been visiting any group that will give him five minutes to explain why he, and not Maria Cantwell, should be going to Washington DC to represent the interests of Washington State. For the most part, it has been pretty good red meat stuff about Cantwell's votes in favor of military force in Iraq, her votes for NAFTA (while she was in the US House) and CAFTA, her votes to confirm Condi Rice and John Negroponte, and her anti-consumer voting record (for top-tier tax cuts and moving class-action lawsuits into the Federal Courts). Wilson speaks the language of "Peak Oil" and talks about shifting budget priorities from the bloated military to more socially aware purposes. However, regardless of the welcome Progressive message, there seems to be a reluctance by many to make the type of commitment to Mark Wilson that these same Progressives made to Howard Dean or Dennis Kucinich during the 2004 presidential caucuses. Yes, many will say, "I intend to vote for Mark in the primary" or, "I sent Wilson a check last week and will vote for him as a protest vote in September" but where is the networking that was the hallmark of the Dean and Kucinich campaigns? Where are the "Mark Wilson Meet-ups"? Now is not the time to be timid about the effort.

It's as if there is some sort of hesitancy here. It's almost like there is a silent (yet devastating) BUT at the end of the sentence. "I like Mark...BUT..." "We would like to endorse Mark..BUT..." "Mark is the ideal candidate...BUT..." Of course we know that the State Party will never back (or even admit that there is) a challenger to an incumbent. Would we expect them to? But does it go deeper than that? We have all heard that "Electability Crap" before. Don't bring it round my door no more! Then there is some strange concoction about support for a primary opponent costing us a seat come November. Yeah, don't buy into that either. Whatever the answer, it is time to declare your position. To be blunt, it's time to put up or shut up. If you don't have it in you to support the Progressive candidate on the ballot in September, then don't complain when you end up with a less than Progressive senator in November.

Why is it so important today? Senator Cantwell is beginning to set up shop in LDs all around the state. The new State Party Chair is making the rounds to rally the troops to the good senator's campaign. I have yet to hear of one Progressive organization declaring an endorsement for Mark Wilson in the Democratic primary. The mark of credibility for any anti-incumbent candidacy is its volunteers and grassroots support. Mark is a founding member of Veterans for Peace. Where is that endorsement? How about SNOW or any of the many environmental groups that would normally be supporting someone with Mark's Green Party associations? Is everyone waiting for someone to break the ice? OK, here it comes:

The Left Shue Blog officially endorses Mark Wilson for the Democratic nomination for US Senate from Washington State! It's your move.


Peace,

Chad (The Left) Shue

Questionnaire

To the candidates for the Democratic Party nomination for US Senate:

1. As you no doubt know, the Bush Administration led this country into an illegal and costly invasion and occupation of Iraq with no real end date in sight. In addition to the almost 2300 American lives lost in that country, some $400 BILLION has been spent to perpetuate that debacle. This is money that might have been put to better use in actually defending our ports and borders, providing emergency assistance to our own citizens during one of the worst natural disasters in our history, or any number of social programs that are now seeing the axe of the Bush budget cutters. My question is this:

What is your message to the Democratic voters of this state when it comes to ending the occupation of Iraq and restoring a proper balance to the Federal budget between military and social spending?

2. When George W Bush was awarded the Whitehouse by Supreme Court judgment, the Federal budget was headed down an historic path toward significant surpluses that would have been very useful during a time of increased militarism and intervention. Instead, Bush submitted and Congress approved two massive tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. The effect of these tax cuts has been to plunge our country into the largest deficits in our history. My question:

What is your message to the Democratic voters in this state when it comes to tax cuts during increased military activity? Do you believe that the wealthy, who are much less likely to perform military service or take positions in the service sector, should be expected to pay more in taxes as a means of sacrifice for the country?

3. With the continuing shift to the right on the United States Supreme Court, there is growing concern about issues such as workers rights, corporate rule, separation of Church and State, abuse of executive power, and, obviously, freedom of reproductive choice. There is growing speculation that Justice Stevens could retire in the next couple of years, thereby awarding George Bush an unprecedented 3rd selection to the high court. My question:

Do you believe that the filibuster is a proper tool for an opposition party in the Senate's advice and consent role during the nomination of a US Supreme Court Justice and would you employ this option if you believed the president's choice was too extreme for the court?

4. In 2005, George Bush made a recess appointment of John Bolton to be US Ambassador to the United Nations. Mr. Bolton has been a controversial character who has shown great and open disdain for the United Nations in the past. Many have described his diplomatic style as "non-existent." My Question:

Will you vote to confirm John Bolton to the position of US Ambassador to the UN when it comes before the Senate in 2007?

Obviously there are many more questions that will require answers before we cast our important Primary Ballots in September and I will look forward to hearing from all the Democratic candidates between now and then. Democracy is hard work but I hope that by participating fully in the process we, as Democrats, will benefit from our efforts.

Peace,

Chad (The Left) Shue

IWR News

Iraq Body Count: 2/24/06
Americans Killed: 2287
Americans Wounded: 16,742
Iraqi Dead: Est.:32,119
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................

Latest Confirmed Casualties:

*Staff Sgt. Jay T. Collado, 31, of Columbia, S.C., died Feb. 20 near Baghdad, Iraq.

*2nd Lt. Almar L. Fitzgerald, 23, of Lexington, S.C., died Feb. 21 at Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, Germany from wounds received Feb. 18 in Al Anbar Province, Iraq.


Peace,

Chad (The Left) Shue

IWR News

Iraq Body Count: 2/22/06
Americans Killed: 2279
Americans Wounded: 16,742
Iraqi Dead: Est.:32,088
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................

Latest Confirmed Casualties:

*Sgt. Charles E. Matheny, IV, 23 of Arlington, Wash., died in Baghdad, Iraq, on Feb. 18 (44th from Washington State)

*Daniel J. Kuhlmeier, 30, of Omaha, Neb., died Feb. 20 in Baghdad, Iraq


Peace,

Chad (The Left) Shue

IWR News

Iraq Body Count: 2/21/06
Americans Killed: 2277
Americans Wounded: 16,653
Iraqi Dead: Est.:32,088
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................

Latest Confirmed Casualties:

*Lance Cpl. Matthew R. Barnes, 20, of West Monroe, La. died Feb. 14, near Al Qa’im, Iraq.

*Cpl. Rusty L. Washam, 21, of Huntsville, Tenn. died Feb. 14, near Al Qa’im, Iraq.

*Cpt. Anthony R. Garcia, 48, of Fort Worth, Texas, died in Tikrit, Iraq, on Feb. 17

*Sgt. 1st Class Amos C. Edwards, Jr., 41, of Savannah, Ga., died in Ar Rutbah, Iraq, on Feb. 17


Peace,

Chad (The Left) Shue

IWR News

Iraq Body Count: 2/16/06

Americans Killed: 2274
Americans Wounded: 16,653
Iraqi Dead: Est.:32,041
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................

Latest Confirmed Casualties


*Cpl. Andrew J. Kemple, 23, of Cambridge, Minn., died in Tikrit, Iraq on Feb. 12.

*Spc. Felipe J. Garcia Villareal, 26, of Burke, Va., died at Washington Hospital Center in Washington, D.C., on Feb. 12, of injuries sustained in Ramadi, Iraq on Feb. 9.

*Lance Cpl. Michael S. Probst, 26, of Irvine, Calif., died Feb. 14 near Abu Ghraib, Iraq.



Peace,

Chad (the Left) Shue

IWR News

Iraq Body Count: 2/15/06

Americans Killed: 2269
Americans Wounded: 16,653
Iraqi Dead: Est.:32,013
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................

Latest Confirmed Casualties:

*Cpl. Orville Gerena, 21, of Virginia Beach, Va. died Feb. 6 in Hit, Iraq.

*Lance Cpl. David S. Parr, 22, of Benson, N.C. died Feb. 6 in Hit, Iraq.

*Petty Officer 3rd Class Nicholas Wilson, 25, of Newark Valley, N.Y., died Feb. 12 in Al Anbar Province, Iraq.

Peace,

Chad (The Left) Shue

The Great Divide

Disclaimer: The following post is written with love and affection for the party of Jefferson, FDR, and Kennedy (all of them). As in any good family quarrel, we are obligated to to point out every zit, wart, and wrinkle - real or imagined - of our "siblings". Yet, should any "outsider" presume this to be a sign of weakness; they do so at their own risk. Now on to the main course:


"A primary contest between Maria Cantwell and Mark Wilson will divide the party."

"A primary for Maria's senate seat will only weaken her in the general election by dividing the party."

I would suggest that the folks who trot out this line are either in denial or just flat dishonest about their motives. If you do not recognize the existing divide in this party, you just haven't been paying attention. Let's examine some of the dividing lines:

* Mark Wilson didn't invent the invasion of Iraq, yet there it is. (By the way, Cantwell has "No Regrets")

* Mark Wilson did not invent the Bush Tax Scheme of tax cuts for the rich. (By the way, Cantwell must not have any regrets; she twice voted for these cuts)

* Mark Wilson did not invent NAFTA or CAFTA. (You guessed it, Cantwell voted for both)

The last time I checked with my Democratic associates and friends, they were pretty much opposed to the invasion and occupation of Iraq. They are largely against the policy of tax cuts for the rich while eliminating vital programs for children and the working poor. Oh yes, the folks who come from Union households or folks who have lost jobs to "off-shoring" are coming down pretty much on the opposing side of those so-call Free Trade pacts. Come to think of it, I believe you will find statements in opposition to all of these things in the Democratic Party Platform on both the national and state levels.

No, Mark Wilson is no Pied Piper; just a guy who is willing to stand up and say STOP!

In 2004, Howard Dean and Dennis Kucinich ran campaigns that challenged the status quo of the Democratic Party and asked why the Democrats had lost their way and had quit standing up for the issues that defined Democrats; support for working families, fiscal policies that addressed the needs of all Americans and not just some fortunate few, and a foreign policy that was based on international cooperation, to name a few. The messages of these two "dividers" accounted for the largest caucus and primary turnout in years. In the end, the "beltway boys" were awarded the mantle of nominee and the "divided masses" turned out to contribute to the largest vote count in history for a Democratic presidential candidate. Some divide there, huh?

I would suggest that, on the issues that matter most to Democrats (war and peace, tax fairness, domestic job creation and living wage), Mark Wilson is closer to the base than is Senator Cantwell. This isn't hard. On these issues, I am closer to the base than Cantwell is. Ignoring this creates the divide. Adhering to some "unwritten law of incumbency" does more to alienate good Democrats than embrace them. If we stand for anything Democrats should stand for Democracy.

Agree with Mark or disagree but don't deny. It is unbecoming of good Democrats!


Peace,

Chad (The Left) Shue

P.S. A short note for Mike McGavick: Golden parachutes do not make for soft landings.

IWR News

Iraq Body Count: 2/14/06

Americans Killed: 2267
Americans Wounded: 16,653
Iraqi Dead: Est.:32,013
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................

Latest Confirmed Casualties

*Lance Cpl. Steven L. Phillips, 27, of Chesapeake, Va., died Feb. 7 near Al Qaim, Iraq.

*Pfc. Javier Chavez Jr., 19, of Cutler, Calif., died Feb. 9 near Fallujah, Iraq.

*Cpl. Ross A. Smith, 21, of Wyoming, Mich., died Feb. 9 near Fallujah, Iraq.


Peace,

Chad (The Left) Shue

Save that Seat II...the Sequal

Questions about party purity, loyalty, ideology and incumbency abound as we head into the 2006 election cycle. Folks out here on the Progressive/Liberal branch of the tree are reaching for the forbidden fruit; otherwise known as a real Progressive candidate at the end of the limb while those on the DLC branches prefer the stability of remaining closer to the trunk of the tree where the incumbents sit.

The debate centers on the fact that the Democrats are the minority party in Washington DC*, how we got there and how we regain the majority. The DLC faction is quick to point out that now is not the time to challenge a Democratic incumbent because showing any sign of weakened support for the incumbent (no matter how real it is) might give aid and comfort to the republicans. Or, worse yet, we might succeed in nominating a real Progressive who couldn’t possibly win in the general election. Finding logic in this argument is like finding WMD in Iraq. The Progressives MUST vote for the incumbent rather than risk losing the seat because the “centrist Democrats” might NOT vote for a Progressive candidate regardless of the fact that he or she would be the party’s nominee.

What I (and so many of my liberal friends) find most frustrating is that many of the same people arguing about protecting the incumbent claim to have the same problems with the incumbent that I do. We have a national party that speaks about a more “internationally cooperative” foreign policy while we have incumbents who support unilateral invasion and occupation in the name of “regime change.” The party speaks about protecting the consumer while our incumbents vote to protect corporate power. Democrats, long the party of organized labor and defenders of the working man and woman are now supporting so called Free Traders who vote for NAFTA, CAFTA, and the WTO; those institutions most responsible for massive job losses in this country. However, they tell us, we shouldn’t worry about replacing those incumbents today. We should wait until we have a “safe majority”. What we are told is that we must do the hard work of building a stronger Progressive Movement and infrastructure before we start putting candidates before the public. Huh? Oh sure, there is work to do to build up a stable of candidates that can run for offices from municipal to federal but where is it written that you have to have a full magazine before you can fire the round in the chamber?

I would submit that reclaiming our party and our country will be done one race at a time. This responsibility should not be taken lightly but neither should it be abandoned because of some misguided sense of party loyalty. Democracy demands no less.


*While the republicans have more seats in Congress, the Democrats actually represent more people in the country based on the population of the various states and districts they represent.


Peace,

Chad (The Left) Shue

IWR News

Iraq Body Count: 2/10/06

Americans Killed: 2267
Americans Wounded: 16,549
Iraqi Dead: Est.:32,013
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................

Latest Confirmed Casualties:

*Spc. Roberto L. Martinez Salazar, 21, of Long Beach, Calif., died in Mosul, Iraq on Feb. 4

*Cpl. Brandon S. Schuck, 21, of Safford, Ariz., died Feb. 6 in Baghdadi, Iraq.

*Pfc. Jacob D. Spann, 21, of Columbus, Ohio, died Feb. 6 Hit, Iraq.

*Lance Cpl. Steven L. Phillips, 27, of Chesapeake, Va., died Feb. 7 near Al Qaim, Iraq


Peace,

Chad (The Left) Shue

IWR News

Iraq Body Count: 2/09/06
Americans Killed: 2264
Americans Wounded: 16,549
Iraqi Dead: Est.:32,013
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................

Latest Confirmed Casualties:

*Spc. Patrick W. Herried, 29, of Sioux Falls, S.D., died in Rawah, Iraq, Feb. 6


Peace,

Chad (The Left) Shue

Public Financing takes Baby Step

From a post at Washblog:


HB 6221: Public financing, at least locally
By emmettoconnellThu Feb 09, 2006 at 08:04:48 AM PST Section: Diary Topic: Election Reform
Cross posted to Better Donkey.
It is'nt a wide ranging bill as has been passed in Maine or as the Republicans are trying to get rid of in Arizona, but HB 6221 passed the Senate yesterday, which would allow local governments to fund election campaigns. This bill is essentially recreates the rules regarding public financing that were in place prior to the election system reforms in 1993.
As in Arizona, Republicans in Washington aren't exactly supporting this bill either:


Conservative Republicans like Sen. Don Benton of Vancouver blasted thebill as an unconstitutional, illegal and even unethical misuse ofpublic money.
..."The argument againstis, you can't take taxpayer money and give it to candidates," Bentonsaid. "Legally and ethically, you can't do it. ... It sets up a means forlocal governments to dole out taxpayer dollars to their favoritecandidates. It's just plain wrong."
I'm not sure how "favorite" would translate into "anyone that would want to follow the rules," but also as in Arizona, it has been Republicans that have had a hard time following the new money rules.

Go figure.

A wider version of this system, where the state offers financing for legislative candidats that can display wide support (through a certain number of small donations) opens up the politcal process to folks that could never have afforded or had the rich friends to get into elective politics. In the same way that Dan Swecker's full time legislature would have allowed a wider range of people to serve, public financing allows a wide range of people to run in the first place.

*************************************************************************************
This bill passed through the Senate Committee on Government Operations & Elections, where the 38th LD's Jean Berkey in Vice-chair. Jean actually offered an amendement to the original bill that requires a referendum or other process to require a vote of the people before a city or county may begin public financing of elections. This is a baby step in the process of putting the elections back into the hands of the citizens and we should thank the Senator who voted for this bill.

However, we must now get to work to determine what the process is in our cities and in Snohomish County to get this ball rolling.

Peace,

Chad (The Left) Shue

IWR News

Iraq Body Count: 2/08/06

Americans Killed: 2260
Americans Wounded: 16,549
Iraqi Dead: Est.:31,900
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................

Latest Confirmed Casualties

*Spc. Sergio A. Mercedes Saez, 23, of New York, N.Y., died in Baghdad, Iraq on Feb. 5,

*Staff Sgt. Christopher R. Morningstar, 27, of San Antonio, Texas died in Al Husayniyah, Iraq on Feb. 5

*Sgt. Jeremiah J. Boehmer, 22, of Parkston, S.D. died in Al Husayniyah, Iraq on Feb. 5


Peace,

Chad (The Left) Shue

IWR News

Iraq Body Count: 2/07/06

Americans Killed: 2257
Americans Wounded: 16,549
Iraqi Dead: Est.:31,900
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................

Latest Confirmed Casualty:

*Spc. William S. Hayes III, 23, of St. Tammany, La., died in Baghdad, Iraq, on Feb. 5


Peace,

Chad (The Left) Shue

IWR News

Iraq Body Count: 2/06/06
Americans Killed: 2252
Americans Wounded: 16,549
Iraqi Dead: Est.:31,900
http://icasualties.org/oif/
*******************************

Latest Confirmed Casualties

*Spc. Walter B. Howard, II, 35, of Rochester, Mich., died in Balad, Iraq, on Feb. 2

*1st. Lt. Simon T. Cox, Jr., 30, of Texas, died in Taji, Iraq, on Feb. 2

*Sgt. 1st Class Lance S. Cornett, 33, of London, Ky., died in the vicinity of Ar Ramadi, Iraq, on Feb. 3

*Spc. Jesse M. Zamora, 22, of Las Cruces, N.M., died in Bayji, Iraq, on Feb. 3


************************************************************************************
NY Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/06/opinion/06chart.html
31 Days in Iraq

By ADRIANA LINS de ALBUQUERQUE and ALICIA CHENG
Published: February 6, 2006

In January more than 800 people — soldiers, security officers and civilians — were killed as a result of the insurgency in Iraq.



Peace,

Chad (The Left) Shue

Iraq war is costing $100,000 per minute

How much longer will this inept and deceitful administration be allowed to squander the blood and money of this nation while Congress either stands idly by or, indeed, enables them in the process? The following headline and article in the Seattle Times (February 3, 2006) should be a slap in the face to any concerned and patriotic American:

Iraq war is costing $100,000 per minute
By Mark Mazzetti and Joel Havemann
Los Angeles Times

WASHINGTON — The White House said Thursday that it plans to ask Congress for an additional $70 billion to pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, driving the cost of military operations in the two countries to $120 billion this year, the highest ever....

...The additional spending, along with other war funding the Bush administration will seek separately in its regular budget next week, would push the price tag for combat and nation-building since Sept. 11, 2001, to nearly a half-trillion dollars (Emphasis added, TLS), approaching the inflation-adjusted cost of the 13-year Vietnam War...

The magnitude of this story should, in itself, be stunning. Yet, when taken in the context of a non-binding Senate Resolution requesting future war funding requests be placed on budget (passed by strong bi-partisan vote during the September, 2005 budget process) it should set off many alarms:

From Senate Amendment 464 to H.R. 1268, making emergency supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2005:

(2) The budget for fiscal year 2006 submitted to Congress by the President on February 7, 2005, requests no funds for fiscal year 2006 for ongoing military operations in Iraq or Afghanistan. (Emphasis added, TLS)

(3) According to the Congressional Research Service, there exists historical precedent for including the cost of ongoing military operations in the annual budget requests of the President following initial funding for such operations by emergency or supplemental appropriations Acts, including--

(A) funds for Operation Noble Eagle, beginning in the budget request of President George W. Bush for fiscal year 2005;

(B) funds for operations in Kosovo, beginning in the budget request of President George W. Bush for fiscal year 2001;

(C) funds for operations in Bosnia, beginning in budget request of President Clinton for fiscal year 1997;

(D) funds for operations in Southwest Asia, beginning in the budget request of President Clinton for fiscal year 1997;

(E) funds for operations in Vietnam, beginning in the budget request of President Johnson for fiscal year 1966; and

(F) funds for World War II, beginning in the budget request of President Roosevelt for fiscal year 1943.

Even when confronted with this information from a bi-partisan majority of the U.S. Senate, the Bush Administration still has no idea of military planning. But there is more evidence of their incompetence. In an open letter to George Bush and his administration, Rep. John Murtha points out the following:

“This March will mark the beginning of the 4th year of the war in Iraq. In contrast, U.S. involvement in WWI came to an end after 19 months. Victory in Europe was declared in WWII after 3 years 5 months. In the Korean War, a cease-fire was signed after 3 years and 1 month. But after more than three and a half years into the war in Iraq, your administration finally produced what is called a "Plan for Victory" in Iraq.”

In other words, an administration, equipped with the most modern and lethal military in the history of the world, has sent over 2250 American troops off to their deaths in a country that had been so decimated by previous military conflict and draconian economic sanctions that they never posed any serious military threat to the region nor, especially, the United States; all of this with the continued blessing of the United States Congress. Further, they have yet to produce an exit strategy that has any bearing in real world terms.

It is long past time for the congress to begin exercising their responsibility to the American people and start holding this administration accountable for their lack of planning and execution in this war of choice. Even those who hold the belief that this war was justified based on the information they were given should, by now, be recognizing that this administration has no clue about what they are doing and our troops should not be the ones who continue to pay the ultimate price for this incompetence.

Peace,

Chad (The Left) Shue

IWR News

Iraq Body Count: 2/04/06

Americans Killed: 2250
Americans Wounded: 16,549
Iraqi Dead: Est.:31,900
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................

Most Current Confirmed Casualties

* Spc. Matthew C. Frantz, 23, of Lafayette, Ind. died in Al Huwijah, Iraq on Jan. 20

*Cpl. Carlos Arrelanopandura, 22, of Los Angeles, Calif. died Jan. 20 in Haqlaniyah, Iraq

*Lance Cpl. Brandon Dewey, 20, of San Joaquin, Calif. died Jan. 20 in Haqlaniyah, Iraq

*Pvt. Lewis T. D. Calapini, 21, of Waipahu, Hawaii died Jan. 23 near Al Taqaddum, Iraq

*Lance Cpl. Joshua A. Scott, 24, of Tunnel Hill, Ga. died Jan. 23 near Al Taqaddum, Iraq

*Sgt. Matthew D. Hunter, 31, of Valley Grove, W.Va., died in Baghdad, Iraq, on Jan. 23

*Staff Sgt. Lance M. Chase, 32, of Oklahoma City, Okla. died in Baghdad, Iraq on Jan. 23

*Pfc. Peter D. Wagler, 18, of Partridge, Kan. died in Baghdad, Iraq on Jan. 23

*Sgt. Sean H. Miles, 28, of Midlothian, Va., was killed in action Jan. 24 in Al Karmah, Iraq

*Sgt. Joshua A. Johnson, 24, of Richford, Vt., died in Ramadi, Iraq on Jan. 25

*Staff Sgt. Jerry M. Durbin Jr., 26, of Spring, Texas, died in Baghdad, Iraq on Jan. 25

*Lance Cpl. Hugo R. Lopezlopez, 20, of La Habra, Calif., died Jan. 27 from wounds sustained in Rawah, Iraq on Nov. 20, 2005

*Cpl. Felipe C. Barbosa, 21, of High Point, N.C., died Jan. 28 in Fallujah, Iraq.

*Pfc. Sean T. Cardelli, 20, of Downers Grove, Ill., died Feb. 1 near Fallujah, Iraq.

*Spc. Anthony C. Owens, 21, of Conway, S.C., died in Baghdad, Iraq, on Feb. 1

*1st Lt. Garrison C. Avery, 23, of Lincoln, Neb. died in Baghdad, Iraq, on Feb. 1

*Spc. Marlon A. Bustamante, 25, of Corona, N.Y. died in Baghdad, Iraq, on Feb. 1

*Pfc. Caesar S. Viglienzone, 21, of Santa Rosa, Calif. died in Baghdad, Iraq, on Feb. 1

*Spc. Walter B. Howard, II, 35, of Rochester, Mich., died in Balad, Iraq, on Feb. 2

IWR News

Iraq Body Count: 2/03/06

Americans Killed: 2248
Americans Wounded: 16,549
Iraqi Dead: Est.:31,900
http://icasualties.org/oif/
.......................................................

Most Current Confirmed Causualties

* Spc. Matthew C. Frantz, 23, of Lafayette, Ind. died in Al Huwijah, Iraq on Jan. 20

*Cpl. Carlos Arrelanopandura, 22, of Los Angeles, Calif. died Jan. 20 in Haqlaniyah, Iraq

*Lance Cpl. Brandon Dewey, 20, of San Joaquin, Calif. died Jan. 20 in Haqlaniyah, Iraq

*Pvt. Lewis T. D. Calapini, 21, of Waipahu, Hawaii died Jan. 23 near Al Taqaddum, Iraq

*Lance Cpl. Joshua A. Scott, 24, of Tunnel Hill, Ga. died Jan. 23 near Al Taqaddum, Iraq

*Sgt. Matthew D. Hunter, 31, of Valley Grove, W.Va., died in Baghdad, Iraq, on Jan. 23

*Staff Sgt. Lance M. Chase, 32, of Oklahoma City, Okla. died in Baghdad, Iraq on Jan. 23

*Pfc. Peter D. Wagler, 18, of Partridge, Kan. died in Baghdad, Iraq on Jan. 23

*Sgt. Sean H. Miles, 28, of Midlothian, Va., was killed in action Jan. 24 in Al Karmah, Iraq

*Sgt. Joshua A. Johnson, 24, of Richford, Vt., died in Ramadi, Iraq on Jan. 25

*Staff Sgt. Jerry M. Durbin Jr., 26, of Spring, Texas, died in Baghdad, Iraq on Jan. 25

*Lance Cpl. Hugo R. Lopezlopez, 20, of La Habra, Calif., died Jan. 27 from wounds sustained in Rawah, Iraq on Nov. 20, 2005

*Cpl. Felipe C. Barbosa, 21, of High Point, N.C., died Jan. 28 in Fallujah, Iraq.

Peace,

Chad (The Left) Shue

Woolsey Statement regarding Cindy Sheehan

Statement By Representative Lynn Woolsey
Wednesday 01 February 2006

Washington, DC - US Representative Lynn Woolsey (D-Petaluma) today issued the following statement regarding Cindy Sheehan's arrest in the gallery of the House of Representatives before the State of the Union address. Mrs. Sheehan was Rep. Lynn Woolsey's guest to the President's State of the Union address.

"Since when is free speech conditional on whether you agree with the President? Cindy Sheehan, who gave her own flesh and blood for this disastrous war, did not violate any rules of the House of Representatives. She merely wore a shirt that highlighted the human cost of the Iraq war and expressed a view different than that of the President. Free speech and the First Amendment exist to protect dissenting statements like Ms. Sheehan's last night."

"Stifling the truth will not blind Americans to the immorality of sending young Americans to die in an unnecessary war, against a nation that posed no threat to our security. The President's speech last night was yet another attempt to distort history, as he suggested - once again - that the 9/11 terrorists came from Iraq. Everyone knows this is not true. We must not be afraid to say that the emperor has no clothes. It's time to bring our troops home."