Posted on 03/31/2007 9:37:56 AM PDT by bnelson44
Marc Danziger is raising money to fight retreatist politicians:
I'm a liberal Democrat (pro-gay marriage, pro-choice, pro-progressive taxation, pro-equal rights, pro-environmental regulation, pro-public schools) who supported and supports the war in Iraq. As I tell my liberal friends "Did I miss the part where it was progressive not to fight medieval religious fascists?" I've been waiting for four years for the White House to start really explaining the war to the American people, and to do anything sensible at all to maintain the political capital necessary to keep America in the fight - to keep us from withdrawing because the war is too messy, or too long, or just plain makes us feel bad.
During that time I was blogging about the war and issues around it at Winds of Change.NET, felt I was doing my part, and hoped that the leadership of the country would wake up and realize that public support for hard things - like wars - must be earned and maintained.
I've given up, and decided that it's up to each of us to start doing more. To that end, I've decided to start a PAC that will offer support to Congressional candidates of either party who support a foreign policy that doesn't involve wishing problems away. Not necessarily support for the invasion of Iraq, or blind allegiance to White House policies - but some plan that's better than taking our ball and going home, leaving the country to become a bloodbath. All I ask is that they have some clue as to what we should do about violent radicalism in the Islamic world other than surrender, withdraw, and hope for the best.
Here in California, defeated Gubernatorial candidate Phil Angelides (who I used to work for, by the way...) has decided to raise $10,000 to "send President Bush a message" - among other things he's threatened to use the funds to run ads in districts where anti-withdrawal Members of Congress sit.
I plan to try and raise $30,000 over the next week - it will have to be pledges right now, since I don't have a PAC yet - $10,000 for third-party legal and accounting for the next year (to set the PAC up and do the accounting necessary to make sure that we're in compliance with election laws), and $20,000 to counter Angelides' ads. If we can succeed at that, we'll take it a step further and see if we can raise enough money to rattle some cages in this election cycle.
What we'll be doing is - among other things - running short videos that I'll be getting from friends in Iraq - I've asked them to simply film a message they would send in responses to Americans who want to withdraw right now.
Watch the first video and pledge here. http://www.victorypac.org/index.php
The Arab Socialist Baath Party (also spelled Ba'th or Ba'ath; Arabic: حزب البعث العربي الاشتراكي Ḥizb al-Ba`ṯ al-`Arabī al-IÃÂtirāki) was founded in 1947 as a radical, secular Arab nationalist political party. It functioned as a pan-Arab party with branches in different Arab countries (Yemen, Lebanon, Sudan), but was strongest in Syria and Iraq, coming to power in both countries in 1963. In 1966 the Syrian and Iraqi parties split into two rival organizations. Both Baath parties retained the same name, and maintain parallel structures in the Arab world.
The Baath Party came to power in Syria on 8 March 1963 and attained a monopoly of political power later that year. The Baathists ruled Iraq briefly in 1963, and then from July 1968 until 2003. After the overthrow of President Saddam Hussein's Baathist regime in the course of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the occupying authorities banned the Iraqi Baath Party on May 16, 2003...
One could expect there are a percentage of liberals that do understand the stakes are high in the ME. Sadly as many of us have pointed out from day one, and really needs no pointing out, the blithering fools will cut their fingers off before giving any support to this POTUS regarding the GWOT.
He was neither rightwing or leftwing. He was simply a murdering, megalomaniac dictator. He wasn't the first, and he won't be the last.
Lots of luck.
Oh, now he's just a dictator without a set of bathist socialist "ideals". Didn't you claim in your other post he was a fascist?
And try not to take 2 days responding to posts if you really want a debate.
My original point was not to let a lib put Saddam into the "ultra-conservative" political spectrum. He and his party followed an Arab brand of socialism.
Oh, and he was a dictator. Duh.
I stand by my previous statements. The Nazi Party was originally some sort of socialist party too. Hitler changed it into the Hitler Party. Hussein did pretty much the same thing to the Baath Party. How's that for a quick (and LAST!!!) response?
That is similar to the same position of Ron Silver, another liberal who supported Bush.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.