Thanks for covering this, Josh.

thanks josh. looking forward to hearing from cantwell's camp.

Showboaters.

Josh,
Stay on this! Give us reports by the minute. This story is all yours. No other media is on this story, and you're getting calls FROM THE SCENE.... Live! Only one journalist in town could get this story. You! This is your big break, don't blow it.

She brought it on her goddam self. She really did. The Cantwell people had better see that supporting a war that is unpopular 2-1 in her state is a bad idea.

Also, she had better get her goddam name off Rick Santorum's S. 333 bill. It's the first step to a Bush war on Iran and as such it is an outrage.

Cantwell's press people are crapping their britches because these loons are doing McGavick's work for him.

[seems like a good place for the splice of eternal return . . . .]

FNARF- take a break, you dont have to be a prick all your life.

Rich gamble is not some loony radical and the folks who lost loved ones over there as well as the member of the Abe Lincoln brigade at least have the balls to do something, and theyre expressing their disapointment with a position peacefully. You can disagree, you prick with ears, but to wish them ill just because they are protesting peacefully is fucked up, even for a centrist right mo fo like you.
Posted by SeMe - April 25, 2006 02:24 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nothing like presenting a senator running for reelection with a lose-lose situation, huh? She has already all but signed onto the Kerry plan in principle, but if she replies as such, then she looks like she's caving to a handful of protesters. On the other hand, if she has these people removed, then she looks like some pro-war, authoritarian police stater.

This is why Democrats are a minority party.
Posted by Goldy - April 25, 2006 02:33 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------

She brought it on herself by going along with Bush's rationalizations.

It's candidates like her and Kerry that have made Democrats a minority party.
Posted by Richard Jensen - April 25, 2006 02:41 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------

I totally sympathize with these folks and what they're trying to accomplish...but Dems are so close to taking back control of the Senate. If Dems are in the majority they can then launch real and legitimate investigations into pre-war intelligence, Abu Ghraib, wire tapping, White House leaks, etc.

The power to investigate the corruption and cronyism of the Republican Party will go so much further towards addressing the issues that progressives care deeply about than forcing Maria Cantwell to co-sponsor legislation that stands no chance of passing.

Posted by Bailey Kendall - April 25, 2006 02:52 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------

And, Mr. Jensen, who is your candidate, and how well have they done?
Posted by Timothy - April 25, 2006 02:53 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Goldy,

This really isn't why we're the minority party. I'd hope that they would do something similar with Mike! What'shisname. Also, she hasn't agreed with Kerry's position, she's repeated the weak kneed talking point about a year of transition. That sort of thing is much more the reason why we can't elect Dems than 6 protesters.

Josh,

Where are you getting this info?
Posted by Carl Ballard - April 25, 2006 02:55 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------

considering that we just found out that my sister's fiancee is suppose to head to iraq in december, i'm a big fan of this idea. he's a cool guy. ROTC math major. used ROTC to pay for college, thinking that things wouldn't be like this four years later. i almost did this option too, though i would have just pulled the gay card to get out of it.
Posted by konstantConsumer - April 25, 2006 02:56 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm not a prick all of the time, just most of the time. When it's richly deserved.
If you make a contribution to the betterment of the world, I'll say something nice. See the Jane Jacobs item. If you take a crap in the middle of the public discourse, I'm not so nice.
Protesters taking over offices is NOT public discourse. It's childish antics that had already lost all of their not very impressive power 30 years ago. Nothing -- NOTHING -- of interest or value has ever been accomplished by taking over the dean's office, kids.
I'm not saying I'm in love with all of Cantwell's positions, but refusing to talk to these ineffectual bozos is the right strategy here. Washington state voters almost unanimously agree with me. The constituency of these people is NO ONE. They're playing the same game that turned off all of the civilized people back when they were still protesting the war directly.
I think Gamble and the others are being robotically mind-controlled by the McGavick campaign, just as they have in the past worked tirelessly for Bush.
Posted by fnarf - April 25, 2006 03:08 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------

I prefer the more reserved approach that is being taken by the Roots Project over at www.firedoglake.com. We went to both Murray's and Cantwell's offices last week and presented a written request that they respond to the issue of preemptive use of nuclear weapons in Iran. Once we get the responses, we will forward them to Pachacutec at FDL for wide dissemination. The NY state delegation took a video of their visits to Clinton and Schumer's offices and it is presently running on the crooks and liars website.
Posted by moe99 - April 25, 2006 03:22 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Carl,
One of the 7 called me from the conference room where they're doing their sitting in.
Posted by Josh Feit - April 25, 2006 03:30 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------

All I can say is that within about my first 3 posts to the Slog ever, I had FNARF comparing me to bin Laden. If that's not taking "a crap in the middle of the public discourse", and if advocating violence against non-violent protesters (including 92 year olds) is somehow polite and reasoned speech, then I guess it's nice to know someone's shit doesn't stink...
Posted by wf - April 25, 2006 03:51 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Richard,

Really? It's candidates like Cantwell and Kerry who make the Dems a minority party?

Gee... I thought that one of the things necessary to hold the majority is to actually HOLD OFFICE, and the last time I checked, both these two were US Senators.

Cantwell is the nominee, period, and there's nothing you or me or anyone else can do about it. The Dems have a shot at taking the Senate, and with it, the power to investigate the corrupt Bush administration, and to preempt and attempt at a preemptive war in Iran.

If you want to sacrifice that so that you can make a principled stand on the issues, that's up to you, but it plays right into the hands of the Republicans.

And this is more than just about Cantwell's seat... how she does at the top of the ticket will influence all the races down ticket, and if the Dems have to sink resources into saving her seat, they're going to pull it out of other races here and elsewhere. Democrats attacking Cantwell is just plain bad strategy.
Posted by Goldy - April 25, 2006 05:15 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------

I work for Maria Cantwell.

So I am really getting a kick out of most of these replies.

Some of you guys are very good at making it sound like you know what you are talking about.

But trust me.... You don't.

I think you just want to make yourself sound smart, when in reality you don't know what you are talking about.

This is how bad info gets passed around.

If you don't know about the topic....Don't make yourself sound like you do.

Cuz some sloggers believe anything they hear.
Posted by kraf - April 25, 2006 05:44 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hmm. Sloggers don't know anything, but you won't inform them of what errors they're making? That's lame. What's the "bad info"? Let's have it, Cantwell stooge.
Posted by wf - April 25, 2006 06:09 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Really? It's candidates like Cantwell and Kerry who make the Dems a minority party?"

Yup, that's what I said.

You're right about John Kerry being a senator. Seems like he was trying for a different job not so long ago, but I forget.

And if Cantwell and her oh-so-pragmatic tacticians and consultocrats didn't want peaceniks squatting in her office she shouldn't have taken a more skeptical stance toward handing war powers over to the Neo-Con junta.

The Dems are a minority party because they are a generation or two away from the public crises that clarified their political principles and set them in a heroic light.

There are new crises now that present new opportunities for a new beginning and some in the party recognize this (Check Conyers, Feingold, Dean, The Fighting Dems, even Darcy). Cantwell, unfortunately is not one of these. Kerry may know what's up, but he didn't act like it while he was a candidate. Same goes for Gore.

Yes, I think that's why those Democratic candidates lost, lost and lost.

All I'm saying is quit blaming citizens for the bullshit in the air when they call bullshit on bullshit politicians.
Posted by Richard Jensen - April 25, 2006 06:13 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------

. . . . .she SHOULD have taken a more skeptical. . . . . .

(Really should use that dang preview tab.)
Posted by Richard Jensen - April 25, 2006 06:17 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Richard...I ask again...which candidate is it that you support that actually is in a majority position?
Posted by Timothy - April 25, 2006 07:27 PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Timothy,

That's a red herring of a question that has little to do with my contribution to the discussion. For one thing, one doesn't really know one is in the majority until the election is over and one's candidacy has ended. Right?

In any case, I already elaborated on my views above. I offered these in response to Goldy's remark that somehow the tactics of these protesters were symptomatic of the blight that afflicts the Democratic Party.

"This is why Democrats are a minority party.
Posted by Goldy - April 25, 2006 02:33 PM"

I said that if Cantwell had taken a more skeptical stance toward the policies and tactics of the current administration (well, I said Junta) over the last six years, she wouldn't be facing these protests today.

For some baffling reason, her political calculus told her that projecting an open-mind about Bush's wars and security agenda back to her electorate at home would be of greater benefit to her than projecting herself in clear opposition to these policies.

Of course, she is not the only Democrat to make this judgement.

For my money, this explains the "minority" condition Dr. Goldy diagnosed in the Democratic party.

At this time I can't support Cantwell, not after the letters I wrote to her begging her not to give war authority to George Bush, not after begging her to filibuster against appointing Bush's architect of executive supremacy to the Supreme Court, and not after begging her to support Senator Feingold's call for the President's censure.

I believe there is a passionate spirit embedded in the Democratic Party that is committed to realizing the best of the American republic's founding ideals. I think the party is America's best hope for advancing several crucial reforms, starting of course, with a vigorous prosecution of the high crimes and misdemeanors related to the present Executive's fraudulent justifications for war, endorsement of torture and myriad illegal security practices, and rampant war-profiteering. The Party should insist on hard time for white collar war crime. Nothing less can redeem the this generation of Americans in the eyes of the world.

Sorry, dude, but we really fucked it up.

Do I see Cantwell as my ally in this project?

Tactically, sort of maybe, for a squeamish minute, since I agree that the only sliver of a chance of locking up the war bandits will come from having a majority of warm Democratic Party asses plopped in those fancy antique chairs back east.

But Cantwell's politics are those of a former era. She is representative of why, in Goldy's words, "the Democrats are a minority party." I'd be most pleased if she chose to step aside and let a real antagonist to the Apocalyptic/Neo-Con agenda run in her stead.

For some reason not entirely clear to me, no one seems to acknowledge that the next election Cantwell will participate in is the Democratic primary in September. Her registered opponent there, or at least the only one I've heard of (I believe the former Black Panther Aaron Dixon is running as a Green) is Mark Wilson. He seems a little disorganized, and he has a lot of local hata's, Party people mostly (and I don't mean the fun kind) who will point out that he has run previously as a Green and Libertarian. Though it is not impossible, I grant that it is highly unlikely that he will win the nomination. Still, when I go to his website I find that I support everything posted there. Not so your dear Maria.

www.votemark.org/

Goldy,

Come on! Kerry lost! You do get that, right? That didn't somehow escape your notice, right?

You can blame the left for being on the right ***and popular*** side of the Iraq issue, but I think it's much more reasonable to blame Cantwell for having the wrong ***and UN-popular*** opinion on the issue.

This stuff about "signing on to the Kerry plan in principle" is a lot of crap. If she wants to be against the war she should come out and say "Yeah, I regret my vote to give this President and his administration of liars and incompetents the power to cunduct this war." It's just that simple. Kerry is an ineffective politician and "signing on in principle" to one of his "plans" is tantamount ot doing nothing.

She brought it on herself. Progressives have been begging her - begging her - to stop taking a position on Iraq that is wrong, UN-popular, and fails to capitalize on the Republicans' central failure - the thing that is dragging Bush down.

She thought she was smarter than us. Too bad for her.

I wash my hands of it.

kraf,

Nice attitude.

Way to represent the Senator. It's always good to make her seem MORE arrogant and detached. Yeah, you tell US we don't know what the hell we're talking about. That'll get her votes.

You moron.

Go tell your boss to shape the hell up and get smart - quick.

It's also possible that kraf doesn't work for Maria at all and posted a very amatuer, less-than-brilliant post to make Maria look bad and whip people up against her.

Having worked for several electeds myself (that's not boasting, I assure you), I can tell you that we don't ever speak on behalf of our Members (yes, that's what we call it) and we certainly don't go attacking people's opinions, no matter how we feel about them personally - it only reflects badly on our bosses. And additionally, it's still sort-of a free country (so long as you aren't Muslim, gay, live in New Orleans or want control over your own reproductive choices), so people are entitled to believe what they want.

So either this person is an intern who doesn't know better or really doesn't work there at all. And if kraf does work there, they better stay hidden, because the people that actually DO speak on behalf of the Senator (the communications and press people) will come a gunnin'.

Google "So I am really getting a kick out of most of these replies."

Oh, Teh, that's funny! I hadn't heard that one yet. I'm with the guy on one of those posts: "I really hate memes".

Hint for those too lazy to google: this post in its entirety, except for the word "Cantwell" is one of those cute little internet catch phrases, like "all your base are belong to us". Kraf is not a Cantwell staffer.

nice catch, teh grassroots. just as i had suspected...

Kurt Beckett is a fuckin' dreamboat! Yum Yum!

grassroots -- Awesonely hilarious!

dlaw, jensen -- Unintentionally hilarious!

You think Democrats can't win except by doing it your way, but ... Democrats HAD THE WHITEHOUSE in 2000 except for Nader & Co. who insisted on doing it your way.

And without Bush in the Whitehouse -- giving Rove the chance to deploy his Homeland Security nutcracker -- Democrats WIN THE SENATE in 2002 and 2004. (We probably take back the House too, but the political calculus there is less than 100% clear.)

Your way cost us the Whitehouse. It cost us the Senate. It gave us the war. Your claim to leadership hangs on a "can't win except my way" peg ... and that peg doesn't hold.

Pish Posh. If Gore had insisted on full Florida recount he won. Furthermore, Nader didn't affect the outcome in Washington State, so can we finally put that line to around here?

Place these words in the previous post to unscramble today's clue:

HAVE

REST

WOULD

Please place IF's and BUT's in the customary receptacles to unscramble the logic.

No free passes.

Pish Posh. If Gore had insisted on full Florida recount he won.

If Florida law allowed Gore to insist on a full Florida recount, I'm sure he would've inisisted. And won.