If they’re not careful, the Democrats could have a Great White Fleet on their hands. I think they should move on and dismantle the Patriot [sic] Act. They still want to, don’t they?
Trading blood and treasure for an uncertain future political gain is morally bankrupt. Let’s assume a Democratic president starts withdrawing troops at the beginning of Feb. 2009 – that’s 20 months away, multipled by the current 100 soldiers dead per month, multiplied by 5 casualties per death (a conservative figure) = 2000 dead soldiers, 10,000 wounded. Of course, this assumes the situation in Iraq stays around the same and doesn’t instead grow steadily worse and worse as it has been.
Yes, yes, we’ve heard this enough. The fact that the Dems fail miserably at, you know, leading, and doing message control and explaining away the propaganda to the near 70% of the population who support getting out of Iraq is…pathetic.
HA! Fat chance! I’m sure they’ll be quite comfortable with all these expanded privileges of the “Unitary Executive.”
It’s goddamn pathetic and indefensible. The Democrats had a chance to be the check and balance on a Presidency which is seemingly out of control, and they blew it. This was a huge mistake which I believe will cost them politically. IRL I’ve already heard people claim “see, the Democrats were just doing a political stunt - they knew that our President was right all along!” I guess now we’re due for another meaningless and safe “distraction,” like Assault Weapons Ban 2 (Electric Booglaoo), or something about SUVs, or smoking, or midnight basketball. Yeah. No way that they’d try to do something meaningful, like restore lost civil liberties, fix the broken and unsafe airline system we have, or end the new quasi-gulag system we have for “teh terrorists.”
And Moveon.org had better stop their wishy-washy “we might, possibly, potentially, maybe, if we need to, hold Democrats’ feet to the fire over removing the timeline” shit I heard on TV the other day. Otherwise, they’re selling out as well.
I don’t see how this could be read as anything other than a complete failure on the part of democratic party leadership. Recall the high and mighty promises they rode in on? Months later and we haven’t seen what they promised for the first 100 hours. Reformers who keep the status quo aren’t going to keep their supporters energized for the next election.
Moveon has been sending out emails urging folks to contact their congresscritters since yesterday. I’ve emailed mine three time in two days.
That’s another thing. I appreciate their work so far on Gonzogate but, maybe I don’t quite understand the machinations of their ability to investigate, what about the other 1000 scandals of the Bush administration? Why aren’t we holding major hearings, right now, over pre-war intellignece? War profiteering? Extraordinary rendition? Warrentless wiretapping? Election fraud? Katrina? I don’t know know how much they can stack on the tray at once but come on…
Does this make you feel better?
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/05/24/iraq.missed.warnings.ap/index.html
Well…I have to say that, politically speaking, it was probably the only move the Dem’s realistically had. I know that this isn’t what the faithful wanted to hear…but I just don’t think the country has moved as far as some of you seem to think it has. I think by and large the American people are getting sick of this war hanging from our necks…and would support actions by the Dem’s to push for time tables and even troop withdrawls. Certainly they would love to see some kind of positive change. But defunding troops in the field? Leaving aside the very real political fact that I don’t think the Dem’s COULD have gotten it through if they toed the line and stayed the course (and the pure fantasy that Bush would have flinched), I think this would have backfired on them.
As it is, except for the faithful, I think the Dem’s MAY actually come out of this in better shape with the majority of American’s…especially if they build on this ‘cave in’ in a positive fashion and keep the pressure on Bush for timetables.
YMMV of course, but I really think some of you are being unfair to the Dem’s…you are asking them to do something they just don’t have the raw power to DO. Yet.
-XT
Good.
It’s not like all this was a mystery, of course. It’s well documented in countless books and documentaries. But it’s still nice to have it in a nice, fat book with a shiny Congressional seal of approval on it. I just wish it as publicized as the Attorney scandal hearings. People need to be called on the mat for this.
Heh, I wonder how many Americans still think Saddam Hussein had a hand in 9/11. Probably not 65%.
xtisme:
First, cutting off funding doesn’t require any votes. They wouldn’t have to have played nice with the GOP or Bush. All they had to do is sit on their ass and after a certain date, no more cash. No positive action needed.
But OK, let’s say I agree with you that they couldn’t do that and it’d be a bad idea. They still could’ve fought so much harder and have made a public spectacle out of it. As it is, they basically threw the fight at the start of the second round (if you consider the first veto a round).
The title reference is to a collection of B.C. cartoons: Having a Cave-In. The cover showed a cave with several pairs of eyes looking out. This was from the '60s or '70s, when there were political “sit-ins” and cultural “be-ins,” inspiring the title of the comedy show Laugh-In.
Right?
Congress is planning to vote on the “compromise” bill in secret. We won’t even know who voted for it.
Clinton and Obama won’t say how they’ll vote on it.
I think you can safely delete the question mark.
Well…they COULD have, sure. But I don’t think that would have been wise. As it is, they got it in the news, got people thinking about it…and they know that Bush would have vetoed. So…what this hinges on, IMHO, is, what are the Dem’s going to do as a follow up to this? If indeed they roll over and do nothing from here on out ( :dubious: ) then I will be the first to call them all the names you would wish. Start a pit thread and I’ll be at the barricades with you. However…if they keep hammering away, a bit at a time…well, then they may achieve something more than a symbolic but brave defeat would have gotten them if they had done what the faithful wanted here.
JMHO…YMMV.
-XT
I had a wierd thought (“Oh, 'luc had a wierd thought! Well, there’s a surprise!” Bite me.)
I wonder if the secrecy of the vote might not be a cover for the Pubbies who want to vote against this crap, but don’t know whether to shit or go bowling. Who want a chance to vote their conscience, but don’t want to explain it to their Trog Right base.
Never mind, the vote is in, details here.
Roll call on the Iraq vote is HERE. Eighty-six Democrats joined 194 Republicans and voted for the bill. Not secret.
(HERE being http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll425.xml)
Once again, I urge the creation of a SDMB “puking yer guts out” smilie.
I still vote for the tin foil smilie myself…
-XT
Yes. Definitely. Spineless.
I can only hope the Dems have plans for payback in other ways. Ginning up the investigations and subpoenas even more would be a start.
Republicans are getting nervous, that’s for sure. But I don’t think their nervousness will cause them to seriously turn on the President. They’ll talk tough about how frustrated they are and wring their hands, but when push comes to shove they’ll sustain the veto.
They may yet turn, but it won’t be in September. They will have to stick with Bush at least until they win their primaries because “the base” won’t have it any other way. Then, after they win the primaries, they will turn on Bush in order to win the general election.
I don’t know about that. I think Petraeus’ report in September may well be a tipping point. By the time the primaries come around, Republicans against the war could be the new base.
The Senate is voting as I post. They’ve got it on CSPAN2 . No word on the voting yet.
Olbermann is reporting a pass. Nothing from CSPAN yet. Stupid move by the Congress.
Obama just voted NO.