Kucinich: "Yeah, I have a timetable, it's called now."

[Jcrowley]

Obama takes heat for remarks on Iraq, but insists he still wants an end to the war
Michael Roston
Published: Thursday April 12, 2007

Senator Barack Obama took heat on Tuesday night for remarks that he made earlier in the month on Congress's role in responding to President George W. Bush's request for a "clean" bill to fund the war in Iraq. But in a RAW STORY exclusive, a spokesman for Obama's campaign questioned the basis for the statements of his critics.

Competitors with Senator Obama for the Democratic nomination took aim at the Illinois Democrat in a Tuesday night candidates' forum hosted by MoveOn.org.

snip

"That's not a surprise, the degree to which people are surprised is the degree to which they've been sleeping," said Rep. Dennis Kucinich, who voted against authorizing the Iraq War in 2002 and is running for president for the second time. "He's voted to fund the war at least ten times, each time, it's like reauthorizing it all over again. If they keep voting to fund the war, it's not credible to say they are for peace."

Kucinich also questioned Obama's approach of proposing a timeline for withdrawal.

"Yeah, I have a timetable, it's called now," he quipped. "There's no reason why Democrats should give the president any money, they have the power to end the war now."

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Obama_takes_heat_for_remarks_on_0411.html

[whistle]

1. Right on Dennis!

[ixion]

2. yeah!

:applause:

[truedelphi]

3. Can you imagine the postive response that DK would get if we had a

Mainstream Media that was dedicated to the fight for Truth, Justice and the American Way?

Well, in my dreams it's that way.

[The Count]

16. or at least not in the pockets of BFEE? Just a bit of respect for relevance

would help!

[AnOhioan]

4. K&R

[CrispyQ]

5. A true patriot. -nt

[Dinger]

6. Yes, Yes, Yes!!!!!!

K & R!!!

[LWolf]

7. NOW.

What a great, powerful, word. Isn't this what Democrats have wanted for the last 7 years? Not rhetoric. Not talking points. Not complicity. Opposition to the Bush administration NOW. Opposition to the Bush agenda NOW. Opposition when it counts.

Opposition at the time of the IWR would have been appreciated. So would opposition every time a vote to fund the war came to the floor. Too late for that. Opposition to a continued presence in Iraq is appropriate NOW. Congress could set the process to bring everybody home in motion NOW.

I'm glad there is at least one Democrat who "gets" this.

[elocs]

10. This "now" cannot be in the sense that most people understand the term "now".

With far more than 100,000 troops in Iraq along with their support, there can be no "now" pullout no matter how much some want it. Even Senator Feingold is realistic in realizing that it will take some time to withdraw our troops in an orderly fashion.
There is not going to be any Vietnam bugout here. There won't.

[BeFree]

11. Yeah

But what about Obama, et al, voting TEN times to fund the war?

[LWolf]

12. Pulling out NOW can be done in an orderly fashion.

NOW means starting the process of coming home NOW. Today.

An orderly exit has to actually BEGIN at some point, instead of referred to as something that can happen "someday" or "next year."

The U.S. can begin that process NOW, if enough of congress will set aside the excuses and choose to act.

[elocs]

18. You mean "now" as in today--15 April 2007. It obviously won't happen "now".

"Now" meaning "at the present time, at once, immediately". Let's be real about this: if Congress votes and says we get out of Iraq "now" that "now" will be at some future designated date and certainly not at the present time, at once, immediately. Let's not play games with words that have plain and simple meanings and stretch and expand on their definition.

[John Q. Citizen]

21. Do we start now or later?

[elocs]

25. There will be no troop withdrawal "now". Whenever it occurs it will be later.

My own Senator Feingold knows this and although he is working on withdrawing the troops "now" he understands that it will take months. There will be no panic evacuation or bugout of our troops from Iraq. In that respect, there will be a timetable and there will be no "now" withdrawal of the troops. You cannot snap your fingers and everybody is magically home tomorrow.

[John Q. Citizen]

31. Do we start now or wait a year to start? You didn't answer my question.

But I think you knew that.

[elocs]

33. Yes I did.

We both know there have been many people working on getting the troops home long before now, not just Dennis Kucinich, but I thought you were smart enough to realize that. We also both know that the troops are not coming home "now" ("at once, immediately") but under the best of circumstances logistics would dictate that it would be months before the troops came home.

[John Q. Citizen]

34. Why? If bush vetos the bill that gives the oil companies control of Iraqi oil,

as well as funding the mercenaries and the continued occupation, all the Dems have to do is not pass another funding bill, and the occupation will end for lack of funds.

Perhaps more Americans and Iraqis dying is what you consider orderly, but I don't see why that would be more orderly than just starting to ship the troops and equipment back home.

Sure it would take awhile to pack up and ship home 160,000 thousand troops, but the sooner begun the sooner done.

Nancy Pelosi could do it by herself. Just don't schedule a vote on funding the illegal occupation.

[Jcrowley]

22. No need to play games

Here's the whole thing. Please read it in it's entirety.

Voting for an "Anti-War" that funds an illegal occupation and war is a bit Orwellian. Not to mention that support of War Crimes be it tacit or overt is a violation of international law. No gettin' around that.

These are the elements of the Kucinich 12-Point Plan for Iraq:
Download PDF

1. The US announces it will end the occupation, close military bases and withdraw. The insurgency has been fueled by the occupation and the prospect of a long-term presence as indicated by the building of permanent bases. A US declaration of an intention to withdraw troops and close bases will help dampen the insurgency which has been inspired to resist colonization and fight invaders and those who have supported US policy. Furthermore this will provide an opening where parties within Iraq and in the region can set the stage for negotiations towards peaceful settlement.

2. US announces that it will use existing funds to bring the troops and necessary equipment home. Congress appropriated $70 billion in bridge funds on October 1st for the war. Money from this and other DOD accounts can be used to fund the troops in the field over the next few months, and to pay for the cost of the return of the troops, (which has been estimated at between $5 and $7 billion dollars) while a political settlement is being negotiated and preparations are made for a transition to an international security and peacekeeping force.

3. Order a simultaneous return of all US contractors to the United States and turn over all contracting work to the Iraqi government. The contracting process has been rife with world-class corruption, with contractors stealing from the US Government and cheating the Iraqi people, taking large contracts and giving 5% or so to Iraqi subcontractors.

<snip>

http://kucinich.us/iraqplan

[elocs]

26. This does not sound like "now".

It sounds like a process that will take months, much like Senator Feingold's plan of, I think, August 2005. I don't think that Bush will ever withdraw the troops, but however it is done there will most like be a date when the troops are started to be withdrawn and a date when they will be out. A timetable.

[Jcrowley]

27. Of course

You couldn't move a few hundred thousand people and a few million tons worth of equipment down the road "Now" so of course it doesn't mean everyone home by Monday.

[LWolf]

37. The reality is that

Congress could decide NOW, today, to start the process of bringing the troops home. Since they cannot come home without that action, NOW means that Congress should act NOW. Instead of pontificating about plans that might be decided on next year, or not.

[elocs]

8. self delete--double post

[porphyrian]

9. He's right. - n/t

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

13. He has a timetable, and I have a candidate. Go Dennis!

[Laughing Mirror]

14. Any candidate who does not pledge to end war now is wasting your time

and should not be campaigning on Democratic party ticket.

[The Count]

15. And that's why the man is invisible - we can't be outraged that 60 Minutes,

People Magazine, AP covered his words "not quite right".
They don't want the debate to be about ending the war...
The candidates allowed in the limelight merely dispute strategies, intelligence - not the immorality of this war!

[WinkyDink]

17. I love DK (my initials, also. :) ). He is a man of integrity and honor.

He shows there is no need for DEMOCRATS to seek a third-party candidate.

[Prophet 451]

19. Cheers Dennis

I love this guy more and more. I agree with him on almost everything and what I don't agree with isn't so egregious as to make me run for the hills. In the event Al Gore doesn't run (and I'm increasingly convinced he won't), this guy should be the Dem candidate and if the race can be framed in terms of issues instead of personalities, he could win too.

[Prophet 451]

20. self-delete, dupe

[mmonk]

23. Ha!

Great "timetable".

[ooglymoogly]

24. A big kalooooo kalay for Dennis

This fine human being always gets it right...my bet is he starts climbing in the polls even though the msm won't notice him until he takes back our airwaves and apportions them fairly.

[Warren DeMontague]

28. That's a good line.

WTG, DK!

[Annces]

29. Come on Democrats

Cut the funds.

[Cobalt Violet]

30. Now!

:patriot:

[Jcrowley]

32. In touch

with the majority of Americans.

[gravity]

35. How?

There needs to be a plan in place to get the troops out, and set up a stable government in Iraq so there can be a peaceful transition.

"Now" isn't a policy or a plan. It's just empty political rhetoric.

[Jcrowley]

40. Go here

Here's the whole thing. Please read it in it's entirety.

Voting for an "Anti-War" that funds an illegal occupation and war is a bit Orwellian. Not to mention that support of War Crimes be it tacit or overt is a violation of international law. No gettin' around that.

These are the elements of the Kucinich 12-Point Plan for Iraq:
Download PDF

1. The US announces it will end the occupation, close military bases and withdraw. The insurgency has been fueled by the occupation and the prospect of a long-term presence as indicated by the building of permanent bases. A US declaration of an intention to withdraw troops and close bases will help dampen the insurgency which has been inspired to resist colonization and fight invaders and those who have supported US policy. Furthermore this will provide an opening where parties within Iraq and in the region can set the stage for negotiations towards peaceful settlement.

2. US announces that it will use existing funds to bring the troops and necessary equipment home. Congress appropriated $70 billion in bridge funds on October 1st for the war. Money from this and other DOD accounts can be used to fund the troops in the field over the next few months, and to pay for the cost of the return of the troops, (which has been estimated at between $5 and $7 billion dollars) while a political settlement is being negotiated and preparations are made for a transition to an international security and peacekeeping force.

3. Order a simultaneous return of all US contractors to the United States and turn over all contracting work to the Iraqi government. The contracting process has been rife with world-class corruption, with contractors stealing from the US Government and cheating the Iraqi people, taking large contracts and giving 5% or so to Iraqi subcontractors.

<snip>

http://kucinich.us/iraqplan

This has been out there for quite some time.

[nam78_two]

36. K&R.nt

[bdamomma]

38. Dennis the only person who comes right out and tells the truth.

[nealmhughes]

39. Dennis, I'll bring my scissors, you the Adidas.

Once again, The Hon. Mr. Kucinich reminds us of what the Democratic Party should look like.

[lonestarnot]

41. Now!