There’s an interesting live foreign policy discussion happening in New Hampshire today. Yes, it’s Obama related, but I think the discussion might be interesting for supporters of any candidate.

Here’s the schedule as I understand it…

9:00am EST
1st Panel: Renewing American Leadership

Panelists:  John Hutson, Tony Lake, Samantha Power, Susan Rice
Moderator:  Denis McDonough

10:00am EST
2nd Panel: Restoring America’s Military After Iraq

11:00am EST
Barack Obama
A Clear Choice for America: The Obama Foreign Policy

And here’s the live video stream…

For more info on the Forum:
http://nh.barackobam…

And if you’re having trouble with the stream, you can go here instead:
http://ustream.tv/ch…

(the following is from their official press release):

MMU Peace Club determined to amplify voices of high school students against the militarization of public schools and the war in Iraq.

Jericho, VT. After just two days of petitioning their classmates at Mt. Mansfield Union High School in Jericho to denounce 'purposeful misrepresentations' and oversimplifications by military recruiters in their school, the MMU Peace Club was able to gather 171 student and faculty signatures. The petition calls upon representatives Sanders, Leahy and Welch "to represent our collective discontent with this situation and do all that is in your power to change this legislation.” The legislation they refer to is No Child Left Behind.

Emily Coon of the MMU Peace Club explains, "Section 9528 of NCLB allows recruiters invasive access to our schools and our lives. Once in our schools, recruiters use deliberate misrepresentations, to gain the trust and confidence of the students. Enough is enough.” “There is a growing voice of opposition among youth here in Vermont and across the country, as more students realize their privacy is being violated in the military recruitment process. Also, recruiters downplay what we see right before our eyes. Every day we hear about more young people, including friends and family, losing their lives in Iraq and taking the lives of innocent Iraqis. All this to fight in a war that most students find more and more useless as the years wear on. Among our friends and peers, we’re finding that more students want to take action against both pervasive military recruitment and against the war,” Emily continued.

MMU student Phoebe Pritchett adds, “we are considering what actions we can take to project the huge number of hidden youth voices against these lies and deceptions in our schools and against the lies and deception behind this totally unjust, immoral, and corporate-driven war in Iraq." This week students re-open the petitioning drive at MMU but are setting their sights higher to schools throughout Vermont and across the country, launching a new campaign: “Out of Our Schools – Out of Iraq” The 'Out of Iraq' demand “calls upon high school students to learn about and use non-violent civil disobedience to intervene directly in all institutions that are waging this war.

Now is the time for students to do this as it becomes increasingly obvious our government, our parents and our teachers will not do it for us,” Phoebe explains. The ‘Out of our Schools’ demand will include, among other things, petitioning drives to put an end the NCLB condition that attaches school funding to the requirement for mandatory recruiters in schools, and challenge recruiters on the invasion of privacy. They will also engage in the development of partnerships with teachers, parents, vets and other peace and justice groups to challenge misrepresentations and deceptions by recruiters by intensifying ongoing counter-recruitment campaigns.

The MMU Peace Club started in 2004 for students to come together and affect positive change. They have raised money for organizations such as Heifer International, the Genocide Intervention Network, and Room to Read. In addition to fundraising they have been continually working on counter-recruitment by handing out information to students about the realities of war and serving in the military. If you are a high school student, teacher, vet, or peace and justice group that wants to get involved with the ‘Out of Our Schools Out of Iraq’ campaign, contact Phoebe Pritchett (kiwilover1234@riseup.net or 802-598-6721), Emily Coon (susurro7@riseup.net or 802-373-4641), or Ben Weber (mithrilbalrog@yahoo.com).

This week, I'm leaving the current events behind and taking a look at the four names being bandied about for the Democratic nomination for Governor: Matt Dunne, John Campbell, Peter Galbraith and Anthony Pollina. I'm starting with Pollina because I think the other ones will be relatively short, but looking at a potential Pollina candidacy means practically doing a freaking research paper, and I'd rather get the heavy lifting out of the way...

 

Look, let's be honest.  A Pollina administration would be a great thing. He would (presumably) clearly promote progressive policies from health care to economics. It would be a welcome change for all us lefties.

 

It would also be a great thing for ways that the Progressive Party true believers would likely not care to see; running as a Progressive-slash-Democrat would bring the parties together in ways the dogmatic sorts in both parties would prefer it didn't. Once in office, the reality of the hardwired political process would truly come into play, as Pollina would reach out to Democrats to help run the government in a day to day way, as well as to pass progressive legislation. The independently elected nature of the chief executive would continue to do what it historically does; polarize the political battlefield into two parties – the party of the executive, and that of the opposition. The party of the executive, in this case, would inevitably become a combination of Progs and Dems, permanently and institutionally merging them (and in the process, proving once again the hardwired intractability of the two-party system – but at least bringing us a little partisan peace in the process).

 

There's no question that Pollina would be a long shot – so long, that I honestly don't see him winning. Still, anything's possible, and if he becomes the nominee, it becomes the job of the rest of us to do what we can to make the impossible, possible and get him elected.

 

Any discussion of how it might happen requires we start with what the Progs have been telling themselves for years; that Pollina could peel off Republican voters in a way that no Democrat could, based on his 2002 performance in a few counties during the three-way race for Lieutenant Governor against Brian Dubie and Peter Shumlin.

First of all, it's the Progressive mantra, repeated by UVM's Middlebury College's Eric Davis, that Pollina would have a better shot against Douglas than an Democrat would. Their reasoning is based entirely on Pollina's performance in the 2002 Lieutenant Governor's race, where he performed better than Democratic rival Peter Shumlin in 2 of 3 Northeast Kingdom counties, as well as in Lamoille County (he also outperformed Shumlin in his home County of Washington, but that doesn't capture the spirit of Progressive romanticism the way his showing in the notoriously Republican Northeast Kingdom does). The argument is that this NEK showing demonstrates that Pollina has an ability to peel off enough Republican voters that would never vote for a Democrat, to defeat Douglas.

 

While the numbers are compelling, and do tend to demonstrate that Pollina has the potential to be a competitive candidate, the numbers simply do not support the sweepingly optimistic conclusions arrived at by Professor Davis and the Progressives.

 

Let's take a look.

 

Here are the percentages in the 2002 Lt Gov race among the major candidates:

 

 

Pollina comes in third in Essex County, but for sake of argument, let's look at the idealized Progressive demo models only; Lamoille, Caledonia and Orleans. In this way, we're looking at the best case numbers to back up the Progs' claim. Here are the combined actual numbers:

 

 

Presumably, Davis and the Progs would point us to the same year's totals for Douglas as a baseline comparison:

 

 

In this image, the combined anti-Douglas vote in these three counties is 13252. Compare that to the combined vote of Shumlin and Pollina against Dubie, where you get a vote total of 14770. That difference of 1518, argue Progs, are Republicans and Independents voting for Pollina who would never vote for a Dem. Compare that number against Douglas's 14089 in a head-to-head comparison, and the difference is a net 681 in favor of Pollina.

 

To assume this equals a Pollina victor is obviously to assume that no more than 680 Democrats vote for another candidate (that's about 2.8%). Sketchy, that.

 

But if the suggestion is that these numbers will all be at the expense of Douglas votes, and not simply additional anti-Douglas votes, the slim margin of victory gets a bit bigger. Just how much, however, is impossible to quantify. That puts us into the land of “gut feeling”, especially given that Hogan was in the race. Mathematically and intuitively, it's likely that no more than a negligible amount came from Douglas's totals, which makes this a dicey calculus.

 

In fact, if you look at Democratic towns like Montpelier and examine how consistent the Dem statewide candidates performed, with the exception of Racine, who showed a deficit almost precisely equal to the vote totals generated by Hogan, it seems highly unlikely that Pollina pulled too many votes from the population that could cleanly be considered Douglas's at all. Those were probably Hogan voters. Specifically characterizing the Hogan voter, though, is likely a quixotic task, and if Pollina can bring them back in the fold, that's a strong argument on his behalf.

 

The “peel off the republican vote” theory continues to break down if you look elsewhere. The argument put forward by proponents is that, if Pollina can take Republican-types in the NEK, he can do it elsewhere in the state. Well – the problem with such a statement is clear: he also ran in the rest of the state in 2002, and we have those results. What do they look like, and what happens if we apply the same logic? 

 

The other statewide Republican strongholds are Bennington and Rutland Counties, where Pollina came in third. Here's the breakdown:

 

 

 

 

Sure, Pollina came in third, but note that the combination of Shumlin and Pollina are, again, greater than 50%. Here are the comparitive gubernatorial numbers.

 

 

 

Assuming the Dems all were to hold with Pollina, that is an increase over Douglas's numbers 18484 vs. 18323 (a 161 vote difference). In these counties, 2172 more voters appear in the top three ballots for Lt Gov than Gov, in this case reinforcing the Progs frequent argument that Pollina can bring in more first time, or returning voters who abandoned the process, but the numbers also work against the suggestion that the net addition of Pollina's voters with Shumlin's would come at the expense of Douglas in a Pollina vs. Douglas head-to-head. Arguably some would. Likely most would not.

 

So the other part of Pollina's backers' argument is that these numbers don't just show him as competitive in GOP strongholds, they clearly indicate he would run better in Republican areas than any potential Democratic candidate. To address that argument, let's look at how Matt Dunne did in Rutland and Bennington Counties in his head-to-head against Dubie last year.

 

Dunne brought in 12538 votes in the three combined counties of Orleans, Lamoille and Caledonia. That's not a significant amount more than Shumlin did, which adds a lot to the Progs' argument.

 

On the other hand, in the southern statewide GOP stronghold  of the combined Rutland and Bennington Counties, Dunne brought in 17107 votes, nearly 5000 votes more than Shumlin, and under 4% off of  the 18484 combination of Pollina and Shumlin.

 

What does this data mean? It makes a lot of suggestions, but few conclusions. If one assumes that all the Dem votes belong to Pollina in lieu of a Dem candidate, Pollina does look stronger in these Republican areas – although negligibly so in the south, where the limited differential is due to his ability to bring in new voters, rather than his ability to pull GOP and Independent voters. In the north, his advantage is larger, and the reason for it is more likel due to an appeal to the Hogan voter, potentially tying at least some of this phenomenon specifically to the peculiarities of 2002. In any event, the fact that this didn't translate elsewhere in the state's GOP stronghold's suggests this is more of a geographic appeal than a demographic one.

 

But that big “if” we assumed at the outset of the paragraph is a true leap of faith. As we all know painfully well, lots of weeniecrats vote for Douglas, and many of them simply will not vote for Pollina – ever. It would take polling to figure out what those numbers are, but they will likely be concentrated in these more conservative regions, simply as a reflection of the local culture. Where Pollina does batter with Republicans, there could easily be a correspondingly high drop in his votes among self-identifying Democrats or moderates, so the rosy assumptions that the Progressive model is based on is simply not likely to be based in reality.

 

So, it's a purely faith-based statement to suggest that the numbers show that Pollina would defeat Douglas in a one-to-one in conservative areas.

 

But one is on solid ground saying that he could well be quite competitive – certainly in the NEK.

 

Which brings us to the other challenge.

 

Here's the first chart showing the percentages by county in the '02 race:

 

 

 

Looks good, eh?

 

Now here are the actual numbers:

 

 

 

Even under the rosiest scenarios, those counties just don't have enough people to put you over the top. That's why Shumlin did more than 10 points better than Pollina statewide.

 

So where does Pollina find the numbers to win?

 

Here's where a Pollina victory could come from.

 

Maximizing Democratic Votes:

 

First of all, he is absolutely correct to assume that he needs to be a dual party, “P/D” candidate. It's an indispensible way to staunch as much hemorrhaging from the Democratic center (and even plenty from the left, given the years of bad blood) as possible. The problem here is that you can only run on one primary ballot. By all accounts, Pollina will run on the Prog ballot and expect to be written in for a Dem primary.

 

He's not gonna like it, but if he's serious about winning, he needs to turn that around. He owns the P ballot, but nothing less than a full-on engagement with Democratic Primary voters will convince enough of them that he's sincere about burying the hatchet. In fact, less than that will send an ugly counter-message: that he feels entitled to Democratic Primary votes – so much so that he feels he shouldn't get his hands dirty asking for them. In fact, that message is already getting transmitted more than a little bit, as Democratic activists are still getting word of his plans by reading the papers, instead of by hearing from Pollina himself. Continuing to work through proxies such as David Zuckerman and Martha Abbott is no longer going to cut it, and feeds the sense that the same old sense of superiority is still in play.

 

In a nutshell, to maximize the Dem vote, he's going to have to start treating Dems the same way he treats members of his own party.

 

Keep on doing what you're doing in Republican areas:

 

Clearly, he's competitive in the NEK and the GOP south, in contrast to what many of us would expect. He can't lose any of that, and Douglas's positives are still extremely high. If he can continue to generate new voters, peel off a few in the north, and hold onto 80% of the Dem vote, he'll be well positioned to hold his own, if not break through.

 

Make it a ground game:

 

The very strong new voter totals generated by the Pollina crowd in '02 show that they get this, and they'll need those skills to eke out a victory. They need to question the orthodoxy of such field campaigns and do some outside-the-box thinking – including hitting the ground in a comprehensive way as early as possible.  The lack of a meaningful campaign finance regime makes that possible, as a challenger will be able to raise a LOT of money from people who would like to see Douglas retired. The $100,000-by-January number cited by Chris Pearson as a precondition for a formal entry into the race is high, but not crazy, given the current rulebook. That money should go into a serious field operation as soon as possible.

 

Mine the hell out of the interstate corridor:

 

As good as some of the numbers look for Pollina, there'll be no magic bullet or secret, working-class-hero Prog magic that will win this for him. He is going to have to maximize the left and shallow left vote in the state's most populous areas – particularly in the counties where Shumlin outperformed him; Chittenden and Windham. He was neck and neck with Shumlin in Orange, and will likely lose some ground there, as well as in Windsor. 

 

Windham, however, will open up for him without a native son in play, and he needs to mine the hell out of them for votes to offset drops elsewhere.

 

Chittenden, of course, is where all the votes are – it's also a fickle, and frequently surprisingly conservative place. Without a Dem in play, he'll be able to bump up his very strong numbers in Washington, and possibly use the Washington dynamic to convince dubious Dems in Chittenden to play ball.

 

The other two counties present unique challenges. Addison he'll take, but not as well as he should against Middlebury resident Douglas. Franklin he loses – as its unlikely that the NEK dynamic will break down the dynastic, conservative politics in play.

 

Messaging:

 

Pollina is well-positioned to play the outsider, running against both Douglas and the legislature. Whoever the opponent is will have to take this tack, but Pollina can do it convincingly. He can also offset much of the lack of political experience by packaging his Vermont Milk Company adventure as business/executive experience.

 

He's going to have to be VERY careful on the issues, though. It won't take much for many on the Democratic left to be reminded of the politically dodgy Pollina who has been aggravatingly coy about issues near and dear to leftists, while at the same time historically excoriating those leftists when they identify as Democrats. It won't take much to remind wary left-wing Dems of the way he avoided issues such as the Iraq War and Civil Unions when he thought it would play well with the conservative NEK crowd he's so eagerly courted. Environmentalists too, will be watching him closely. He's had enough sketchiness on environmental issues (such as the new creemee making machines with their disposable components that he has been promoting) that some will be prepared to be tossed aside for political expediency – something only enviros who consider themselves first and foremost to be Progs will put up with.

 

Vulnerabilities:

 

“Out of the mainstream.” “Radical.” “Bad for business.” These are no brainers. Expect Douglas to get nasty, though, as he can't help himself on that front, even when he's way out in front. Integrity will be the target, and it will start off predicated on the campaign finance/public funding debacle when Pollina trashed his own law after running afoul of it. I guarantee you, Roper already has already run through that ad in his mind about a hundred times by this time.

 

 

Thus concludes round one. Thankfully, the next three in the series will be a lot lighter on the facts, figures and charts – and by extension analysis.

 

Tomorrow, we'll try Galbraith…

Voters and the media continue to ask the presidential candidates to state whether troops will remain in Iraq should they be elected.  The candidates are also being queried about the troop level that might remain as part of other military and foreign policy objectives.

Some answers are better than others.  However, in addition to the answers so far, the question: “will there be troops in Iraq [1, 2, 4 etc.] years into your presidency?” also misses the mark.

What the candidates have not yet said, below . . . 

A gold star round of applause for the first candidate to shove the “will you keep troops” question back down Timmah Stephnopolarkeys Softballs-Matthews Blitzer's throat and who says: 

“As you know Wolf, it is not up to the President to make that decision, you need to ask Congress since the Constitution vests the power and authority to authorize the deployment of forces exclusively with the legislative branch.

“There is a false underlying assumption in the question that a President, alone, decides whether to place troops in a foreign nation.

“My agenda will be to bring the troops home immediately. I recognize that the U.S. war on Iraq and occupation is the biggest foreign policy disaster in our country's history.

“Recognize the situation one of us will inherit.  George Bush is the first President to return to a war the U.S. already won and then lose it.  The only way the U.S. can and should remove the cloud of shame of the loss of an illegal Republican war of aggression in the Middle East is for the entire nation to commit to rebuilding Iraq – NOT occupying it. 

“Whether troops remain in Iraq is NOT, ultimately, the President's decision. Rather, continuing an occupation force or committing war on a non-threatening nation will ONLY depend and it will REQUIRE — at a minimum — the following:

1. The sovereign nation of Iraqi gives permission for U.S. troops to be stationed in their country;

2. The Congress expressly authorizes them to be there; and

3. There is a strategic need to keep them there.

I do not foresee any of those three criterions being in place and I cannot imagine all three criteria ever compelling the imposition of U.S. force on a non-threatening nation. 

* * * * *  Extra Credit Answer for candidates Biden, Clinton, Dodd and Obama * * * * *

Responding to the questions about long-term troop deployment, war and occupation, compels an additional answer from the four members of the U.S. Senate who are running. Biden Clinton Dodd Obama (BCDO Inc.) need to convincingly advocate this answer as well:

 

“Wolfie, I must emphasize to you and the rest of your panel of Thorazine-fed-GOP-compliant-media-whores, that the U.S. Senate can and has an obligation to end Mister Bush's ability to continue the U.S. war on Iraq.”

“By developing a 'Senate Global Peace & Security Caucus' of 41 or more of my colleagues under my leadership, this war will end because we can absolutely halt any funds and authorization to continue waging this illegal Republican led foreign policy failure.  In addition to the four of us standing here running for president, we only need 37 of our colleagues to stand with us against any further appropriations to fund the illegal U.S. war on the Iraqi people.

“As candidates for President, we have a special responsibility as spokes(wo)men for our party to lead the effort in the Senate to build and hold together the Peace & Security caucus. That is why you will see the four of us proving our leadership ability to the American people by using the power of our offices and the constitutional power Congress has to end the war. 

“It is not enough to talk about the “leadership” any us will bring to the White House.  Instead, voters expect – and I commit to proving my ability to lead – a mere 37 of my Senate colleagues to do exactly what the overwhelming majority of Americans want congress to do and want us to do.  End.The.US.WAR.On.Iraq.

     *    *    *

At this point in the primary campaign and with an Iraqi occupation sapping the U.S. of its security and standing in the world, I really do not give a rat's ass about BCDO Inc's claims about troop plans for 2009.  Talk is cheap, especially in primary campaign and especially when BCDO Inc are only promising what all of us already want. Who really cares what proposals BCDO Inc are putting forth for 2009-2013 when the ONLY relevant question is: who is taking the leading role in the Senate, today, to end the war.

I respect the fact that we need more (& better!) Democrats in Congress.  However, the “we need 2/3 of the Senate to override a veto” (or similar) arguments from BCDO Inc., ring of defeatism. These expedient rationals also minimize and ignore the (dusty) tools these leaders have at their disposal.  It also allows BCDO Inc. to skirt scrutiny of their real life leadership ability and it shifts the focus to the hypothetical “what I will prefer to do if I can” future leadership intentions.

The best test of Biden, Clinton, Dodd or Obama's leadership is how well they lead the Senators they have — not the Senators they want — into battle.  They already have public support and the constitutional home-court advantage should they choose to use it. So BCDO Inc., if you want me to take your candidacies seriously:

— take your positions as U.S. Senators seriously;

— be honest about the tools you have at hand right now; and

— stop whining about the saw and screwdriver you do not have when you are not bothering to use the hammer and shovel already collecting dust in your tool shed.

If our party's leaders, especially Sens. Clinton and Obama, want to concede the congressional battle, that undercuts the remaining members of the Democratic caucus. It also creates a narrative of inevitability that lets Republican members of Congress off the hook.

How many times do we need to hear these questions before we hear the correct answers from our party's leaders?

*    *    *

“Thanks for asking, Wolf.”

“Next question?”

We have to recognize the relationship between global warming and “global warring”. Just as dependence on foreign oil has led to wars in the Middle East, allocating an outrageous amount of our budget to the Pentagon facilitates and preserves this dependence on foreign oil. Dennis Kucinich understands this connection and so, as stated above, will slash the Pentagon budget by 15% as his first step to move away from fossil fuels and towards sustainable and renewable fuels and energy sources. This money will go to education as well as creating his Works Green Administration (WGA). The WGA will couple the EPA with NASA to develop new technologies to utilize alternative fuels and energies.

Inspired by FDR's Works Progress Administration, the WGA utilizes the Environmental Protection Agency to put millions of Americans back to work rebuilding our schools, bridges, roads, ports, water systems, and environmental systems. Not only does the bold practicality of the plan lie in putting Americans back to work by investing in the national wealth of our own infrastructure, but the plan also incorporates environmental and energy concerns to further create wealth for the country and save individual families more money. For example, not only will the public works projects stress green building and renewable energy technology, but the plan will enable homes to be retrofit with green building, solar and wind microtechnology which will save families money on their energy bills. The WGA rebuilding effort will incorporate sustainable development and renewable energy from our public infrastructure to the millions of private homes that choose to retrofit with wind and solar technologies to save on family energy costs. In fact, they will be able to sell energy back to the grid.

The role of utilities will change dramatically because it will no longer be a centralized approach toward energy production. Utility companies will have to provide support for green alternatives. They will no longer be dictating energy costs, as Kucinich will work to break up the monopolies and ensure close regulation of their activities. They will be required to go green as license conditions and shut down if they violate the Clean Air Act. We will finally have a strict and EPA.

Further, Kucinich will finally committ the U.S. to the provisions of the Kyoto Protocol, as well as incorporating a carbon tax to create disincentives for using carbon-based energies. However, he believes this isn’t enough; simply punishing those people who are using carbons is not the answer. Rather, Kucinich wants to put the emphasis first on the government supporting renewable technologies, to move the country toward a renewable portfolio standard of at least 30% by 2020.

Kucinich will create a cooperative and synergistic relationship between all departments and administrations within the government for the purpose of greening America. Whether it's the Small Business Administration, or the Housing and Urban Development Department, or the Department of Agriculture, or the Department of Labor, each would incorporate green goals into its policies.

Internationally, as President, Kucinich will work with the leaders of China and India and other nations to promote an environmental consciousness and sustainable economies. After withdrawing from NAFTA, the new trade agreements will include requirements for protecting the air and the water and the land of all the countries we do business with.

Dennis Kucinich has a long history and strong committment of fighting for the environment. He was active in helping draft the first environmental law protecting the air, as a member of the Cleveland City Council 30 years ago and led the effort in Ohio challenging nuclear power as being unsafe, unreliable, and unsustainable. Internationally he attended the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, advocating a plan with Mikhail Gorbachev for a Global Green Deal that would enable the introduction of $50 billion of new solar projects around the world.

Support Dennis Kucinich and make America a leader in protecting our environment and creating a sustainable future.

I'm sitting in Filene Auditorium at Dartmouth, waiting for the festivities to begin.  The Impeach Bush & Cheney banner has been hung, and the room is rumbling with the sound of excited people.

Dan DeWalt, Adrienne Kinne, and John Nichols have arrived. The Kucinch folks are everywhere. Tim Carpenter of Progressive Democrats of America is handing out stickers and flyers. 

I'll try to keep up with the speakers and will likely do multiple updates over the evening, so I won't lose everything if the connection drops. 

All the meat will appear in the extended text.

(Note: will fix typos later)

TV Crews have set up in the back of the room, the space is nearly full and people are still filing in. THe fun starts in just a couple of minutes.

I’ll see if I can get a couple of pictures to post later.

ALL OF THE FOLLOWING IS PARAPHRASED. I can’t type that fast.

Dan’s opening remarks:
Northeast Impeachment Coalition, PDA, Women Making a Difference, Code Pink, After Downing Street are sponsors for tonight.

Dartmouth College maintains non-partisan stance and does not co-sponsor events.

Will present what’s happening in NE now, then onto featured speakers. Livestreaming courtesy of Kucinich.

Founded in July 07, as result of groups throughout NE. Has grown quickly. NJ, NY, and even places not in the Northeast. Bring back constitutional rule is going to be the role of the citizen, since congress has decided not to do its duty. If we have candidates in office who will not stand up and defend the constitution, we’ll have to run our own people against them.  Introduced CT and ME candidates.  Stated that there will be a candidate against Peter Welch.

John K., Maine Lawyers for Democracy. Founded in 2005 to protect civil rights and civil liberties. Detailed position paper on web. Covers impeachment in its historical context.
(and )Maine Campaign to impeach
Collect sigs around Maine to demonstrate that Mainers are serious about impeachment – 15,000 sigs. Used as springboard to get legitimacy with congresspeople and decision-makers.  Sept 25 & 26 people went to Cong offices. Mike M. is deliberating, voted against tabling Kucinich bill.

Days of Nixon were the last time. Oct. 1973, 28% of Americans said Nixon should be impeached and removed, after full summer of Watergate hearings. Rose to 55% the day before he resigned. After all the investigations and hearings, that was the high water mark.

Let’s look at today. First 64% say Pres has abused is power. 55% say Pres has committed impeachable offenses. Of those 55%, MANY GO FURTHER AND say he should be removed from office right not.

We have in this country people having the wisdom that our congress and media do not have right now. We have people who have the wisdom to recognize what’s going on, even before hearings and media coverage. It’s time to join the people in supporting impeachment.

John Nuremberg is introduced to a standing ovation.

Betty Hall, NH House of Reps:
I was in the house back in the 70’s. We had a legislator who introduced one of the 1st impeachment resolutions in a state legislature. Introduced it, gave a fiery speech, got exactly 11  votes. i was not one of those votes. I have regretted that every day of my life since. I’m not going to wait to next fal, I decided to introduce last Spring. I spoke to the rules committee, made my case, they voted not to let me introduce the resolution. I asked for a suspension of the rules and did it anyway. I got 40 votes. But it’s not enough. We need to learn and understand about impeachment. I didn’t have an inkling of it during the Nixon vote. We need to have more of this kind of meeting, to learn throughout the state, and maybe a teach-in for the NH legislature.

In any case, it will come to the legislature in January. I hope you all come to the public hearings and make sure the leg understands impeachment before they have to vote on it.

Q: Do you need co-sponsors?
Betty: It’s too late for it. But please talk to your legislators.

Tim Carpenter, President of PDA:
There’s no president at PDA, a citizen lobby group.

We were founded the last day the Democrats met when they nominated John Kerry. We believed at the end of the convention that 80% of those who believed we should end the war and redeploy our troops, never got the vote we wanted.
Grassroots democrats could organize around the country to repeal patriot act, end the war, fair & transparent elections. It’s our belief that grassroots activists can make the change.

When the Democrats were the minority, John C. held hearings in the basement of the House, began hearings in Washington on Oversight and Accountability that we believed would lead to impeachment. We believe in working with legislators on the inside and grassroots democrats like Dan D. Many of us were excited when the democrats won. We did not get a majority of progressive democrats, we got democrats who still need to hear from the grassroots.

We’re here tonight to ask you to continue to support the members of Congress who work for impeachment.

 

Be visible about your support of impeachment. Wear buttons, use bumper stickers, slip your dinner guests “impeach mints.”

We need to challenge incumbents!

Dann D:
Last swpring we did a tour with John Nichols, Cindy Sheehan, and 3 veterans. Adrienne Kinne is now seeing another side of war at the VA.

Adrienne:
I am here because I am a veteran, was active 1994 – 1998, was an interpreter. Things drastically and dramatically changed for the worst. Never would we have considered spying on an American citizen. Never. I remember an American’s name showed up, and we removed every single trace.

After 9/11, everything changed. We were intercepting phone communications from a whole swath. In the beginning it made sense, as we were learning the new equipment. Suddenly we started noticing that these were American citizens, just ordinary citizens: red cross, journalists, aid organizations. You started to question why we were doing this. We were told we were given permission to listen to Americans “just in case.” The constitution and our constitutional rights should not be waived “just in case.”  Not just comms in the middle east, but also their conversations home. Just kind of forget what the people in the United states had to say, report on the part that originates in the Middle East. They had waived law in the US to make this legal.

I came to realize the significance of our oath to protect the constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, when going into the service and what it means. IVAW has grown tremendously over the last 10 months – more than tripled our members.

The fact that Congress does not want to listen to the people does not absolve us of our duty to protect the constitution.

Raids on houses, abducting Iraqis at any time for no reason, killing people driving up to checkpoints. This happens not because of indiv soldiers, but because these are policies our government has forced upon our soldiers.

Dan:
This war will not end under this President.
Mayor Kucinich was plowing the airport because it was the only way to get the job done. I’m really honored to be able to introduce you to the one person in Congress who has supported the constitution, has stood tall above all others.

Denis Kucinich:
Thank you for your commitment to the principles of democratic government. The very idea that prayer for gov of by and for the poeple is for each generation.

When I read the declaration of independence. I am struck by founders who pledged their unity. We understand that it is all oon the line today. Our very demoracy is in danger.  As a member of congress I have seen this systematic destruction of our democratic principles. you can look at the bill of rights, you can see chapter and verse destruction. Giving the gov right to reach deeply into people’s personal lives. This fear of personhood, privacy, which is essential to ensure each of us is free of government intrusion.

You find that Home Grown Terrorism act, only 6 voted against. Once again I voted against it because I read it. 1603 of Defense bill broke down the Posse Commitatus act. We are at a moment in time when we realize that our democracy is on the line.

Why after introducing 333 in April did I find it nec. to come forward with 799 a coupld of weeks ago. What changed?

no hearing son 333, despite growing approval of on the bill. Submitted as priv resolution. Defense budget calls for spending 10 mil to retrofit B2 stealth bombers to carry 30k bombs (massive ordinance penetrators). Analysts all said will be used to drop on nuke research labs in Iran. Tremendous energy release, high up into the atmosphere, radioactive fallout, thousands of miles across the continent.

I had no choice by to bring this through under privileged resolution. Resonated with art 3 of 333 and VP beting drums of war against Iran.

Impeachment is the one remedy for this administration to stay the trip down the warpath. By taking it off the table, they (democratic leadership) are licensing the violation of the constitution and international law by pres and VP.  Neither leadership nor any other member of congress has the right to not do their constitutional duty.

When I hear: “We have more important things to do.”
I say “What?”
I hear “They’ll be gone in 14 months.”
I say: “They can do a lot of damage in that time. It doesn’t take long to attack a country that has no capacity to attack us.”

Each one of us has the responsibility and the honor to restore our nation.

John Nichols:
I don’t know what unnatural quirk of the planetary order has occured that would have me speaking after someone who should be the pres of the united states, but I will take it as an illustration of our democratic principles in this country that the president is second only to a citizen.

There are so many friends and comrades allies in this audience.

None of this happens without Dan DeWalt.

Liza Earle is a baker and day care provider, she had never gone to town meeting before. Came to some of our events, rustled up the courage to go to her town meeting to submit articles of impeachment

When we toured VT we thought New Englanders might not want to listen to out-of-staters, we suggested tht they should. This country would be tremendouasly well served to have aknowing and caring veteran to represent us in the Congress.

One of the other vets was Matt Howard.
Recently Matt went to Australia. The pres was there as well. Pres had gone to thank John Howard who was the Prime Minister of the time. He turned to prime minister and said “Thank you for sending the Austrian troops to Iraq.”

John Haward has been thrown out.

Matt told story of his service in Iraq. they went out of Kuwait city, after 1/2 hr of training. A young marine jumped out, raised his arm with a fist to say halt. Car stopped, father with children wife, relatives. Gave sign of solidarity (raised arm clenched fist. Pulled forward. Marines shot everyone in the car. Soldiers slept in the truck that night. Stirred in his sleep screaming. Matt said, “It’s ok, bad things happen in a war.”
Bad things don’t happen in a war, bad things happen when you send them unprepared, untrained.

120 soldiers a week now commit suicide.

When I hear stories like that, I despair.

When I hear our presendent speak and talk of more surge.

When I hear V{P casually discuss launching a more dangerous and deadly war against the more powerful and connected state of Iran.

When I see congress fail to uphold the end of the war.

When I see people come out from across New England in a rainy night. I realize I do not have the privilege.

Courage patriots, the rep is in danger, const is under attack, democracy itself undermined. We are teh descendants of those who fought a revolution against a king named George.

I say to you my name is JohnNichols and I want to impeach the pres and vp of US.

I want to impach for their attack on this cost of US. When they shred the const, undermine separation of powers. When they lied to congress,
because
they have spied on the american people.
because the const of the us gives us freedom in our homes from intervention

because they have sanctioned torture and extaord rendition.

Geneva conventions, but we don’t have to go to the gc, we have only to go to the 8th amendment.  When cheny authorizes, he commits and impeachable offense.

because what did to Wilson and Plame.
3rd article was for use of office to punish political foes.

When they used their office to punish Joe Wilson for speaking out, they committed impeachable offense.

I didn’t come up with these ideas myself. I read the notes to the const convention.

George Mason, author, wrote: No instrument in this document is more important than the power to impeach, for if we cede our power to impeach, we cede the ability to hold the president accountable. If we do not have power to impeach, we make him a king for 4 years.

Jefferson: without impeachment, we have a monarch for 4 years, with no difference between him and a king.

Oh, but it is a time of war, we must support the troops. We do support the troops. But keep in mind, Mason said: War is the true wet nurse of executive aggrandizement, to empty the treasury of resources …, destroy even the freedoms that the war was supposedly launched to defend.

Wars waged illegally and immorally are the highest of high crimes.

****This is a quote I need to get from prepared text. Very compelling, but couldn’t keep up.***

James K. Polk started the Mexican American war, claiming an attack by Mexico on America. A young congressman was elected from the Midwest, and went to Washington. He offended party the leaders.
He said from the well to the President: Show me the spot on which a single Mexican shed a single drop of American blood. If you cannot, then show me why you should not be removed from your office. When Polk did not do answer, congress censured James K Polk, we honor the troops but not the one who sent them to an immoral war.

You cannot attack the pres in a time of war. Cong replied: allow pres to invade a nation when he claims to see a potential for an attack, if you can fix any limit to his power in this respect, 

[need to get the rest of this quote….]

I was not elected to serve a king.

Abraham Lincoln.

Q: How do we change the mind of Peter Welch?
A (Kucinich): The people of Vermont can do that. Continue to talk to him.
A (Nichols): The force you use on this issue IS having an impact. The media will not tell you that.

Q: Why off the table?
A (Kucinich): it seems that the political calculus is that the more offenses pile up on this administration, the more republican loyalty will be brought to a lower and lower level.  I think it’s a cold calculating attempt in the way the democrats put ads on tv then turned around to fund the war.

Duplicity the word that was made for this moment.  The word duplicity has found its hour. We cannot permit this to count as governance.

It’s just incompetence.

Q: Welch voted for 1955:
In response: “The law doesn’t criminalize any activity.”
A: Trying to criminlaize thought.
Break down thought, word, deed, free speech. When you start to criminalize thought.

How did 400 congressman, after they read that bill pass it?

A: People don’t read these bills. You get a dozen bills, some a few pages, some a hundred. Comes from your side, and vote for it. It was a democrat’s bill – Jane Harmon’s bill. They don’t read the bill, they look at the title.

This is what we’re faced with.

You see gymnastics that are olympian, but pathetic in their implications.

A: Most of the pathologies in the patriot act. It was much harder to vote against the patriot act.

You now hear Chris Dodd talking about how much he loves the constitution. Then why didn’t he love it enough to vote against the patriot act. It mattered at the time when the votes happened.

Q: (missed this one)

Q: Many speakers have given reasons to impeach. We need to start thinking about them as the steps a government takes … towards dictatorship. It’s abd enough our pres tortures people. Once it starts moving from people in other countries, it’s going to creep toward us. Once that happens, nobody is going to stand up when people start being afraid of being tortured. We are the ones who are the victims, because our rights are at stake. It is to stop the next war, the current war, and preserve our constitution. We have to work so hard to build the movement, so we don’t go further down this path toward dictatorship (not a questin)

Q: Republicans were going to vote against tabling to embarass democrats. I was very confused. Looked into it. What could be embarrassing baout that?  When you investigate Cheney the people who should be embarrassed about it would be the republicans. I looked into it and came up with PACs, the big pacs are oil & gas. Wanted to expose the democrats as listening to the PACs that fund them instead of listening to the people, and embarrass the democrats in the eyes of their constituents.

I am not going to be afraid to be called a name for telling the democratic leadership to stop listening to the PACs, and start listening to us.

A: We are facing a culture of intimidation – torture, wire tapping to deprive people of civiol rights and liberties to make us apprehensive about speaking out for the constitution, civil liberties and this country. We don’t have the luxury of despair or of being intimidated.

A: In interviewed Bernstein: no question they should be impeached. Different now, the Congress is dramatically more bought than in the 1970s. But more serious is our media. Media is invested in power. On bendend knee media that does the work of the powerful. Reinforces those in power. They’ve played the media brilliantly.

Believe me, amazing things are happening.

The only thing that worries me, is our media.  We can roll over Congress. Our media is in a crisis media.

I don’t hear candidates talk about media reform.

It’s not just Fox and Murdoch and CBS and NBC. Recently I (Dan) spoke with public media head (alan ?). Let’s have a program about it.

No, it’s not an issue.

A: (Tim:) Visit AfterDowningStreet.org
Invite people like John N., David Swanson, and others to meetings like this. Begin those kitchen table conversations.

Ask you congress member to call for hearings in judiciary on HRes 333.

Q: Had an epiphany, had copies of sample resolution for impeachment. Fill in your town’s name, go to your town, and put it in for town meeting. Talked with Secretary for town: warrants closed. Guess what, they weren’t.

You have to stay on it, want to have it happen. Before I went to the 1st places, I was afraid of what people would say. When I sat with 500 people, I knew our Republic wasa bout done. It’s a very simple concept – we were separating ourselves from the monarchies. We would not kneel to a king and be strung up for asking why.

  In a republic, you are the sovereign, I am the sovereign. We don’t get down on our knees. We shouldn’t feel that someone else is going to do this for us.

Q: On media and impeachment, when Dennis Kucinich filed HRes 333, there was a blackout. Begged for a lawsuit against media. Overwhelming evidence of 911 being fixed. John N., please look at this and start writing about and publishing.

Prince Bandar says he warned Bush.

Q: How do we impart the passion we feel to the young people at the universities?
A: Get this question on every issue. Young people make a realistic choice not to be engaged in the political process because they see nothing come of it. SOmething you can do: Stop being PUNDITS. Biggest disease going: electability, how to succeed, no idealism. Young people respond to idealism – a promise that something real can happen. The candidate that has touched most young people: Ron Paul. When he stared Giuliani down and said there are reasons this country was attacked and 9/11 occurred, and people, young peple were watching and said “yeah! you’re right.”

Voting your conscience, acting upon your conscience, and making real the idealistic options. Young people look at older folks and see older folks compromising. If we don’t hold up higher ideals, we won’t get young people to believe that this is a savable political process. You will find that young people will be what you want them to be if you are what they want you to be.

A: At ISO, There were kids responding to what our country has never been and should be.

When we have actions not governed by “What won’t offend anybody” but by what do we need to do, the kids like it and get engaged.  They’re not so afraid of offending someone for a decent cause. I don’t think we’re going to pull this off without more kids. We have a long way to go. We need to stop limiting ourselves.

Q: Believe we need to be calling on a higher power and invoke the martyrs (Kennedy, Wellstone, etc.) who have given their lives, and we must honor them, because they really are with us.

A: We will only succeed if we truly believe that we will succeed and move forward and believe that we will succeed.

Q: I am a confused citizen. In any movement it’s important to understand the position of those who do not support the position in order to get them to change their position. Our democratic legislators seem to be sitting on the sidelines. Can you comment on the rationale for the dems to not stand up.

A: Too much money and not enough courage. I don’t know why my colleagues don’t think the way I do. I  got arrested and put in jail because I didn’t move. They asked all the questions – did she do this or that wrong? Answer was no.

Q: What are they afraid of?
A: The smear machine that kicks in when you stand up. Also have to face possibility that they’re members of the same team, but wearing different coat.
A: I do a lot of right-wing talk radio shows willingly for sheer sport of talking to conservatives. I talk about impeachment. I thin it’s relevant to this. I know you believe GB is touched by God. I believe he’s been touched as well. I know you believe he’ll do the right thing, but do you really want to hand those powers over to president Hillary Clinton. I’m always amused by the reaction.

I am afraid both like power, and like it so much, they don’t enjoy a discussion about disempowering the president because they’re afraid that we’ll start discussing disempowering others, too.

Jefferson envisioned the president becoming corrupted, the congress becoming corrupted, and even the media becoming corrupted. It is for that reason we rested all power in the people.

You’re the leaders, you guys have to do it.

A: In my darker moments I wonder what they might be afraid of: wiretapping, Sr. members of Democratic party were briefed on wiretapping.

Won’t be able to elect a democratic president because they won’t have Bush to kick around anymore.

We can’t address it by focusing on fear, we must address it on protecting the constitution, and handing down to the next gen a country they can be proud of like was handed to us.

Q: The 120 soldiers committing suicide per week: do those include returned or in-field?
A: Returned. Not all Iraq vets, there’s a dramatic surge in suicide. It’s the reason the administration and VA at fed level are not keeping unified set of stats.

I’ve interviewed returning troops – you can pluck someone off the battlefield who would have died, but the tragedy is survival in horrific condition. Part is because of that, but part is the mental agony from war.

Every single day we don’t just doom someone to die, we doom hundreds of young men and women to a future in which suicide will be a logical option. I counsel urgency because there are young men who will be ruined today, tomorrow, and every day we go forward. And that doesn’t count the innocent Iraqis.

A: Twice as many Vietnam vets have killed selves as were killed in the war.

A: I have worked with vets on PTSD. It’s no PTSD, it’s having a conscience. When they are asked to commit war crimes and atrocities, when they come home and suffer guilt, then to be told that they have a disorder, there’s something wrong. It’s when you have leaders who send you to commit these atrocities – that’s the disorder. 

Q: (John who’s walking to Pelosi’s office) MarchInMyName.org, give me pictures of you and your family to bring to Nancy Pelosi.

Q: My brother committed suicide on my birthday 2 years ago. We are all one. The thoughts and feelings are energy that permeates all of existence. Everyone who has lost loved one can understand that. I want people to realize that this world is terrifying the sensitive souls which exist here. They don’t want to express it in front of others because it “shows weakness.” I’m a radio operator, my call letters: W1JSB. I get on 80 meters, 40 meters, 20 meters, to share with people.

Dan: Nancy (?) put this together.

Q: Tired of writing letters and emails to Congress. I think of other countries and when the get organized, they take to the streets. What’s it going to take for us to make a showing and be heard.

A: Original sin of this whole moment: when they were not going to count the votes in Florida. People went into the streets about that in other countries. We have another election coming and a horrible election coming up. We invite all the sins that flow from the moment they steal an election.

Q: to John Kaminsky
Parsed linear things (articles of impeachment). there must have been information on 9/11 – how were they discarded from the impeachment articles?
A: Didn’t know a lot about the questions til the last 3 – 4 months. I had been looking at so much other evidence and focused on putting together strong supportable case that took advantage of the evidence before us now.

We don’t have a lot of evidence in hanabout what really happened 9/11. My concern is a concern of urgency. We need to move forward now, with the case we have in our hands. I don’t mean to diminish the arguments on 9/11, I fear there would not be enough time during this administration’s time in office to accomplish a complete investigation of 9/11. I would hope next pres will appoint special prosecuter.

Q: Right of Revolution is in NH constitution (article 10) listed on back of tonight’s program. NH is the only state with the right of revolution.