Yes absolutely, the D's "breadth is actually its strength" (Very nicely said!). Our leaders are smart to stop wimping out when we have, I'd like to believe, shown that we wish to choose our electeds according to whom will represent that breadth, and with sincerity, conviction - informed by, but NOT defined by, strategy and polling.

Pelosi did a good thing recently when she stated her own position on the draft, w/o needlessly marginalizing the position of Rangel. She recognized him as a leader in social justice and the value of a draft option to any policy debate about the class and race FAIRNESS of our war policy.

She recognized the value of a colleague who shared her values and goals making this proposal. Even when it she didn't support the proposal itself, she reinforced the goals.

This is a smart strategy because it embraces the goals as common D goals. Unites rather than divides. We just can't let these jerks portray her respectful disagreement with the fix as "out of touch," or "weak." We ought to talk about that what she's really saying - like Rangel - that it's important to make sure that our war policy strives to protect body and property of Americans equally, without regard to class or race.

It's definitely not doing that now...

When are we all really going to get down to business and really start thinking about whether we intend to continue to support the filling of the ranks of USA war casualties from the latest generation of young and not-so-young men and women for a war we all agree now is based on lies? Are we really going to be suckered into believing people like KISSENGER who are being dragged out to tell us that "all is lost" really means "more troops are necessary?" Up is down and black is white and love is hate and life is death?

HELLO? The resulting impact upon geopolitical politics of our military withdrawal from that country is NOT more important the goal of protecting body and property of Americans equally, without regard to class or race. I'm not just talking about who is fighting, but why and for whose interest. Sorry, I simply fucking won't buy that our mission there is so critical bs. FUCK - I wrote my 10th grade paper about the bs of the domino theory and gulf of tonkin incident. I was 15. Why the hell can they get away using that same old playbook?

Already, our hospitals, shelters, and streets all filled with war casualties from past wars that we've betrayed. We all see them every day. We know this.

Knowing this simple fact of the forgotten soldiers already all around us and recognizing the responsibility implicit in asking people to serve their country, then the question of whether planning a damn timetable will "make it worse in Iraq or in the world generally" (this is a bullshit claim I think, but I'll save it for another rant) should be a secondary concern. If Iraq and the importance to blah, blah, blah is NOT secondary to the goal of protecting body and property of Americans equally, without regard to class or race, then in my mind it is a war policy that is little more than a meat grinder fed people to fulfill some other purpose. How can it possibly be okay for any more of our troops to die, when we KNOW that they are making that sacrifice without any commitment from our government in return to the goals we have as a nation nor any commitment to them as soldiers making unfathomable sacrifices that will impact generations to come and continue to fill past brimming (can you "fill past brimming?") our hospitals, our shelters, and our streets?

We also have these things called elections and we get over them, unlike the losers in the Red House.

Face it, we're the Bigger Tent.

The mainstream media is obsessed with childish ideas. Dissension is BAD! Someone must be entirely right so that someone else can be entirely wrong! What an asinine concept - but it's much easier to encapsulate in the approximately 45 seconds they give each non-tabloid story than an actual discussion of complex ideas and multiple options.