2010 House

By David Swanson

Pretending to end a war and occupation, while stationing 50,000 soldiers, 18,000 mercenaries, and 84,000 support contractors in massive and permanent military bases in Iraq is a far cry from what candidate Barack Obama described as ending "the mind-set that got us into war in the first place."  It fits better with Nobel Peace laureate Obama's description of war as "not only necessary but morally justified."

By David Swanson

There are lots of ways to change Congress that falsely appear easy, that would alter the rules and patterns of behavior if only Congress were already fixed and willing to make the changes, or if we owned the television networks, or if people could suddenly hear what they're paid good money never to hear. But I've got a way to change Congress that is actually easy.

Congress lacks leadership. There is a progressive caucus, but it has never fought for anything. It doesn't fund its members' campaigns. It doesn't withhold votes needed for passing bills. It just does rhetoric. There are committees, but they don't subpoena, they don't send the police to pick up witnesses, they don't fine witnesses who refuse to answer questions. Congress thinks oversight was an oversight. If asked to put future generations into debt to fund wars, Congress asks "Would you like a side of drones with that?" Congress doesn't want power.

More candidates for Congress have signed a statement opposing war spending that have signed the tea party statement against all spending.  And there is no overlap between the two lists of candidates.  Clearly the opponents of government spending who receive the most media attention do not oppose the single biggest type of government spending.  Why would that be?  They have been exposed as severely limited in their fiscal responsibility, and their cheerleaders in the media have been exposed as biased in favor of war.  But the teabaggers have also been outpaced, as their roster of candidates is smaller than that of the Coalition Against War Spending.

By David Swanson

Anna Janek is a Republican candidate for Congress from West Bloomfield, Mich. She says: "Socialism, Communism, Welfare-ism, Globalism, Fascism, Obama-ism…it's all the same: State control of the Human Spirit under the guise of benevolence."

Marcy Winograd is a Democratic candidate for Congress from Los Angeles, Calif. She promises to "establish a new federal agency to employ millions of Americans building rapid transit and repairing bridges, ports, water treatment plants and other infrastructure."

What could Janek and Winograd possibly agree on?

Winograd on healthcare, says: "We need Medicare for All – or a single-payer system that pays doctors, nurses, and other health care providers from a single fund."

Fifty-two congressional candidates and 18 activist organizations are opposing any more funding for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and inviting more candidates, incumbents, and organizations to join them.  The 52 candidates, from 21 different states, include 19 Democrats, 16 Libertarians, 15 Greens, 2 Independents, and 0 Republicans (and more may be added to the website by the time you read this).  Forty-six are candidates for the U.S. House of Representatives, and six for the Senate. 

They do not all agree with each other on many topics, including their reasons for opposing war spending.  But they all back this short statement:

To phonebank for Marcy Email Bill@Winogradforcongress.com.

Vote for her here: http://www.primariesmatter.com/elections/california

And call DFA to ask them to endorse her:
802-651-3200