Will The Bush Dogs Roll Over and Play Dead Again?
By Nicole Belle Thursday Aug 30, 2007 9:04pmSadly, it looks like the answer is "yes"
Chris Bowers pointed out that another blank check for Iraq is probably on its way. Whatever you think about funding strategies for Iraq, this is a good illustration of just how the Bush Dogs hurt us. Here's Jason Altmire, of PA-04, at a press conference upon his recent return from Iraq, on Bush's funding requests.
The president has made the decision to continue the mission at its current level, and I am never going to vote to withhold funding to our brave men and women when they are out in the field of battle serving in harm's way.
Glenn Smith nails it when he characterizes Bush as holding the troops hostage:
This is the ugly truth Congress wrestles with but will not name. Congress has been terrorized, like any family whose children are kidnapped and held hostage.
Vote to stop funding? Vote for an immediate start to withdrawal? American soldiers will die. As they have been dying. Bush knows he can blame Congress and the public's lack of "will" for the continued horror.
"They would not have died," he would say, "had the politicians in Washington not interfered with our commanders in the field."
This is Bush's threat. And everyone knows it, but few will talk about it. It is not easy to speak these truths about an American leader. But no other conclusion is possible.
The thing that these Dems don't seem to realize is that they have the numbers--both in Congress and in public support and sentiment--to REJECT the framing with which Bush pushes forward his agenda. Jeffrey Feldman:
According to the Washington Post, Harry Reid is again 'negotiating' with Senate Republicans about ways to end the nightmare on Baghdad Street often referred to as 'the war in Iraq' (i.e., it's not a 'war'--it's a burned-out military occupation). What's up for negotiation this time? You guessed it: Bush wants $50 billion more for Iraq. Apparently, Republicans are willing to sit down and talk about legislation to get out of Iraq, with just a few conditions: they refuse to use the words 'deadline' or 'timetable' or 'withdrawal.' In other words, the Republicans are happy to negotiation with Democrats about ending the war on Iraq, but refuse to allow any of the words Americans use to talk about ending a war.
Now, I ask myself: would I sit down at the negotiating table if the opposition put forward that kind of condition as their opening position? Let me think...
Nope.
Here we are, just days away from the fabled "wait until September" promise we got from Democrats...and it looks like they aren't going to do anything different from their capitulation in April. We have to ratchet up the pressure on these Democrats. You can join the campaign for updates on the Bush Dogs here.
Login or Register to post comments.
Dems = No Spine
There are still many, many progressives who are still in denial about the crop of DINO Democrats we have currently. Progressives worked hard to get several of these DINOs elected. Yet there is still a lot of hope that these DINOs will somehow magically start listening to voters, but they have no intention to do that.
It is clear.
And you can help me with my profile of 'Heath Shuler, Bush Dog Democrat'.
Leave any info you have in the comments.
Together we can persuade these 'Bush Dog Democrats' that they are very, very wrong in their politics and their....
Lack of morality.
support the troops... bring em home...
If Reid caves in on the $50 billion, he can go to hell. Every dollar he gives the Administration is blood on his hands. Every overture he makes to negotiate with these creeps prolongs the bloodfest and ensures more blood letting. Why can't fools like Reid/Pelosi see that? Why can't they see how manipulated they appear? How weak and feeble and pointless and stupid they look?
Harry, get a spine and, seriously, tell them to go to hell. The other Harry would certainly have done so! Nancy, listen up, you owe us some fireb randed leadership. Have at it. Ecrassez l'Infame, for crying out loud!
Hello again. I have a worthy article related to Iraq and the "antiwar movement." Its a good read and one may want to ponder the writings of the author. Here it is folks:
August 31, 2007
It's Time to Stop Messing Around
Why I Am Not Going to the Protest
By JEFF GIBBS
I am not going to the protest. I am tired of protests: they don't stop wars. Not protests that are mostly about sign waving and hooking up with friends and strangers and feeling the solidarity and then going back to work or school on Monday. They say the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result.
Sure it FEELS rebellious, these government-permitted, media-ignored, totally predictable rituals-but come on, going to an anti-war protest hasn't been rebellious since Abbie Hoffman coughed up a fur ball at one in 1968. And in the context of the war on our civil liberties envisioned by Clinton/Reno and executed by your nemesis George W. Bush, they are very, very happy to have you protest and take your name and number. Or force you into a field, or a waiting pen to be locked away until they decide to let you out.
Personally I am tired of marching alongside people wearing masks and carrying signs about stupid Bush when we and everyone we know put together have not been smart enough to stop him. And the Bush bashing only makes the whole parade, err, protest look juvenile to the rest of the world. Here is what I propose: let's stop messing around. No more anti-war. Let's stop the war. No more protest, unless it is part of some huge thing that doesn't involve business as usual the next day. How do you stop the war? Shut 'er down. No more business as usual. The target audience: the Democrats, and the presidential candidates who can't fall over each other fast enough rattling their little Democrat saberettes. ("Bomb Iran? I can top that, let's bomb PAKISTAN! Take THAT, cowboy!")
Being anti-war is a fashion statement, a political position, not a movement. I talked to a fellow yesterday who was anti-poison but still used them on HIS lake to fight HIS weeds-weeds outta control because he and his neighbors dump tons of fertilizer on their beach hugging lawns. I personally am anti-junk food but I still eat it, anti-logging but I still use wood products, anti-fossil fuels but my work and fun still depend on them. I am anti-aging but I still age. I am against, rape, animal cruelty, torture, genetically modified food, child abuse but what am I doing to stop it? Well, being against it. In other words, nothing.
"Anti-" is easy-stopping is hard.
And stop it we must. We cannot wait 'til our hand is forced. Morally, it will mean we failed. Already the deaths of ten, or maybe hundreds of thousands of Iraqis is on our hands. Yours and mine. Mothers incinerated as they hold their children. Young men who looked like trouble. Shopkeepers standing where Saddam "might" have been. By some accounts two million refugees that we refuse to take in. Every day, more die because we are there. Sure it's a mess--so was Vietnam and the killing only stopped when we left. (Read the actual history, Mr. Bush, not the pretend history.) We are not welcome in Iraq by the people we are allegedly liberating. Most people don't appreciate being killed to be freed and surprise! EIGHTY PERCENT of the citizens of Iraq want us gone. In fact a lot of them are so overjoyed with us "liberating" them to celebrate they are killing as many young Americans as possible. They long for the good old days before we "liberated" them, and coincidentally, their oil. Why are we not gone? It's our economy, stupid. Let's get a grip: the U.S. does not have enough of it's own oil, or natural gas, and soon coal, and no time soon-maybe never-are we going to be rid of our addiction to fossil fuels until it runs out and our cold, dead hands will at last let loose of the gas pump. Without access to Middle East energy YOU would not be flying to Ohio to see your grandma or to Europe for that meeting. YOU would not be driving your Subaru up the mountainside....
Read the entire story @:
http://www.counterpunch.org/gibbs08312007.html
Why have the clever Dem leaders not insisted that Bush put Iraq war costs in the regular budget, rather than an endless emergency suplementals? That would be a way of forcing his hand while covering their butts...
Thanks for that update link. These scoundrels deserve watching, and some heat.
Japandrew @ 7 - they've talked about that, and you're right, they should force it. When he attacks their patriotism yet again, they should point out his dishonesty and incompetence.
6 Mr. XXXX
Want my idea of a serious demo?
One thousand, ten thousand or one hundred thousand people dressed in black and/or white SILENTLY marching around the White House and to the Capital Building.
No signs.
No Chants.
No spokespeople.
Utter silence.
I think the Dems see Iraq as a no win situation. If they force a withdrawal, Republican naysayers will harp on any falling out in the Middle East. No matter what path is taken, naysayers will say that the alternative path would have been better, with no way to prove it for sure.
Right now, Bush and the Republicans own this war, and I don't think the Dems want to share ownership. So long at that is the perception, count on the Dems to bellyache a lot, and do nothing. These days, the news is the individual Republicans desiring to disown this quagmire.
Meanwhile, the delusional ideologue-in-chief is maintaining we should have stayed the course - in Vietnam.
It takes some pretty warped logic to say you support people by keeping them in harms way, especially when the real purpose for imperiling their lives serves no purpose more urgent than keeping your career out of harms way.
Batocchio @ 8:
The problem is exactly as you stated; they are talking about it, but have not taken the necessary action. They have a slight majority in congress, but have a 75-25 ratio of public support. They need to stop worrying about how Bush will spin their actions, because most of the country doesn't believe a word that comes out of his mouth. They need to focus on taking this country in the right direction, and most of us agree that sending American soldiers out to slaughter in a perpetual war that breeds more extremists is not the right direction.
if they roll over this time, it's time to put them down.
when you elect a representative to represent your views and they go to the over side, then break their legs and cut off their hands. give them the same kind of screwing like they are giving their constituents.
And we and Iraqi civilians continue to die in service to hubris and egos and greed.
Here's my comment from the "Gallows Humour" story:
-----> "#26, Edwin Says: I wouldn’t care a toss if any law
makersbreakers got shot down. Sorry, but… why should I?"Again, I stand by it.
Reid is a stale tea drinking pussy. and pelosi? where's the speaker leadership?
These negotiations with the war pigs in the senate means that we will see $50 B pay for more troops to die.
We are not doing enough...blogging can only get us so far. Time to hit the fucking streets, old school liberal way.
Want my idea of a serious demo?
40 million Americans taking a 2 week vacation on the anniversary of the invasion......no protest.....no comments......just silent witness to the slaughter of innocents.
Dick Durbin: Troops "exhausted" but he's voting for the money.
Though he said he is likely to approve the increased request -- it would accompany a pending request for an additional $147 billion in war funding -- Durbin said he would work to attach conditions to it that would require troops to begin coming home in the spring.
Want my idea of a serious demo?
30 million customers quietly cancelling there service with Telecoms that have helped spy on Americans.
My idea of a serious demo?
Quit paying income tax!
every dollar we give to the pig.....
.....is blood on our hand.
A good start for the Democrats to go on the offensive would be to start each press conference about Iraq with, "This is George Bush's war." As an Aussie I can't understand why you treat the President with such deference. The British don't treat the Queen as gingerly as you do POTUS.
If each PC is started with putting the blame on Bush, eventually the dull press will wake up to the fact that Bush needs to do some explaining, not the Democrats. You Americans have forgotten how to participate in a democracy, you've come to rest on the Constitution and the darned flag, stick up for yourselves. The rest of us are standing back laughing at you.
I cannot see this money go through without a major fight, I may be a little silly right here but I got a feeling this is gonna get ugly, the way Bush is right now I kinda question if he will make it by the end of September.
What we need is a total anti-incumbent vote drive for the next couple of election cycles. Try to clean out all the "dogs" that rolled over for Bush for the last 7 Years, as well as every freeking Republican.
The only Democrat who is running for president that has a spine is Kucinich yet the rest of them are the only ones really raking in the dough. It is not just them who are screwing this country, it is every one who donates a dime to those who continue to give this administration a free ride. The only thing any of them pay any attention to is money. It is time to start supporting Kucinich. He may be less popular than the front runners but he is the only one who is doing what the American people are demanding.
Kucinich is the only patriot amongst the bunch of them! Wake up people!
I urge everyone to reframe, rephrase and focus EVERY conversation on IMPEACHMENT before it's too late!!!!!
IMPEACH PRESIDENT BUSH AND STOP THIS WAR NOW!!
Enough is enough. It is the DUTY of every American citizen to stand up for what is right and scream at the top of your lungs: "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore!!"
IMPEACH PRESIDENT BUSH AND STOP THE WAR NOW!!!
Oh, and ALL WHISPERS OF WAR IN IRAN ARE MORE BUSHWARBUILDUP and the fact that the media outlets are parroting the White House Briefs YET AGAIN, just prove how little they care for their obligation to fair and just reporting. Remember, BUSH COULDN'T READ OR RESPOND to 'The Letter' from the President of Iran (it was too long for President Bush's puny brain and contained concepts like liberty, freedom, and democracy ... which Bush clearly has thrown out with his watered-down ice cubes from his last drink.
And for the record, the people of America are not 'too busy' worrying about Paris Hilton. The media is 'force feeding' the American people VACANT NO-TALENT TRASH WITH NO ACCOMPLISHMENTS and we are sick of that nonsense too!
*sorry for the rant* Our country has gone to hell and no one will stand up and scream "ENOUGH".
I dream of the crazy blonde woman who said "Stop The Madness!"
Wayne @ 23:
I'm about to go on a rant. but let me say this: no dscc, dccc or dlc
Goddamn it! It is past time to tell the immature idiot Bush "fuck you!"
Cut off the funds!
Bush Dogs, eh?
Each and every one of them who demonstrated a disregard for the rights of the citizenry of the United States should be voted out.
Each and every one of them who suppressed the minority party in Congress and the Senate of the United States should be voted out.
Each and every one of them, who advocated the overthrow of the constitution should be voted out.
Each and every one of them who advocated for a corporation over a citizen should be voted out.
Each and every one of them who voted against the men and women who they sent to Iraq on the basis of a lie should be voted out.
If they support the war, they should be voted out.
If they voted for a cut in Veteran's benefits, they should be voted out.
If they voted to force a religion on the people of the United States that is not their chosen religion, they should be voted out.
If they voted to change the rules to support political corruption, they should be voted out.
If they voted for CAFTA, they should be voted out.
If they voted for the Patriot Act, they should be voted out.
If they supported the end of the filibuster, they should be voted out.
If they supported the tax cuts for the wealthy and the bankrupting of the government, they should be voted out.
If they supported cuts in programs that help the poor, the elderly, the infirm, they should be voted out.
If they supported an end to social security, they should be voted out.
If they supported the destruction of the environment, they should be voted out.
If they voted for Roberts, they should be voted out.
If they voted for Alito, they should be voted out.
If they support Boosh, they should be voted out.
I don't care which party they belong to.
Anyone who is even remotely surprised that Bush will receive (and continue to do so for the rest of his dictatorship!) anything he wants is sadly, tragically and perhaps even dangerously naive!
What are senior and leading Democrats doing to keep these Bush Dogs on a leash? Senior Democrats should get a warning too, so they'll stop making it easy for Bush Dogs to be media darlings for criticizing the party. Every time trusted and respected senior Democrats water down Democratic messages, they make it easy for a Lieberman type to grab camera time to repeat the Republican party line.
VitaMind @ 25:
I did this already.
1) I wrote a "letter to the editor" that appeared in the November 2004 Issue of Popular Mechanics insisting that the war be stopped. Why did I write PM magazine? Their previous issue had an article about how great our high tech SuperPower was at fighting the Iraqis. PM is pro-bush and pro-war. It's just a techno conservative rag.
2) I wrote a letter to the editor in our local paper in 2005 about Bush and the war. Wrote another one last year about war and oil.
3) A month ago I wrote to Senator Barbara Mikulski and demanded impeachment. I also wrote my Congressman, Steny Hoyer and demanded an end to the war. Mikulski actually wrote back and said there wouldn't be enough votes to oust the President. Hoyer just said "Thank you for writing"
4) I turned my American flag upside down in protest of George Bush and the war. As a result I received a threatening note from the Homeowners Association demanding I turn it right-side up. My neighbors complained that I had the flag upside down and say I have no respect for the country and the little neighborhood kids keep telling me the flag isn't the right way. My wife and kids are embarrased by it. On the positive side since I had the flag upside down both Rove and Gonzo resigned.
5) I drive an electric powered Ford Escort plastered with anti-oil, anti-bush and anti-war stickers.
And with all that, none of my efforts have amounted to anything to Impeach the bastards.
I'm hoarse from yelling, VitaMind.
While Reid is capitulating...uh, sorry, "negotiating" on Iraq, rumor has it Feinstein and Schumer are prepared to abandon the investigations into the DOJ attorney firings if they get a promise from the Shrub that the next AG will be a swell guy.
Behind-closed-door-deals, indeed. Trying to hide their cowardice and capitulation to the GOP from their base.
With friends like these, who needs enemies?
Chip @ 31:
You should ask them if they know what an upside-down flag means. I don't think they have a clue.
Otay @ 32:
these people are called collaboraters, a term the nazis knew well
Otay @ 33:
You're right, they don't. An upside down flag means "distress". What I try to explain is this country is in Constitutional distress. We have an administration who circumvents the Constitution to get what they want. They have given themselves the authority to spy on us. Of course I don't have to explain to anyone here what's going on but half the Americans in this country haven't got a clue. Bush and his compatriates can accuse any of us of being enemy combatitants. Although this hasn't happened yet to my knowledge, people who publicly protest are being indicted by local authorities for harmless acts of civil disobedience. American citizens didn't fly airplanes into those buildings. It was Saudi and Egyptian citizens for crying out loud.
It's gone too far and I agree that these idiots need to be thrown out of office. And these clueless Americans need to wake up.
We've been "six months from turning the corner" in Iraq for four and a half years now.
I wish they would just stand up and not worry about the "serious" pundit class
Geez, don't you get it?! It doesn't matter what decision you make, because the troops will never see one cent of the funding, because Halliburton's ripping them off!
They would not have died, if they weren't put in a dangerous situation by those same commanders.
I don't care about semantics. Let them call it whatever they want, as long as we end this debacle. The Repugs can re-write history all they want, but they can't hide the messes they left behind at home and abroad. The thing about 'Nam was it a failure on the part of the Dems, but Iraq will always be associated with the other party.
If it were me, I drop MOAB's on all of them & let GOD sort out the innocet
There is really no other choice here but to cut off funding. The benchmarks were set and the Iraqis failed to measure up to the level of what could be considered "progress"...so the line was drawn in the sand.
That's enough political cover for Reid and Pelosi to start playing hardball here and making sure Bush isn't allowed to pawn off his war on whoever wins in 2008. Better yet, it ensures that THIS CONGRESS isn't allowed to pawn off it's responsibility on someone else either!
The time has come.
I would not count on it. These people have more money and power to continue down this dirty road, until they pass out or go broke, which ever one may come first and I tend to think they may pass out before they go broke as they are made sure of that
For Christ's sake, IT ISN'T TRUE. Why can't the Democrats just take apart Bush's arguments on "troops will die"? It's so ridiculous. They're frightened of a chimera.
Rove is GONE. Snow is GONE. Rumsfeld's GONE. Gonzalez is GONE. Where's the boogeyman?
Forgot Cheney.
Now I am upset. I posted the same things 6mos ago. That Bush is holding the troops hostage as blackmail to get the funding he asks for. It's like he's saying, "give me the funding I ask for or I'll leave the troops out there to die.
"I am never going to vote to withhold funding to our brave men and women when they are out in the field of battle serving in harm’s way." Jason Atmire has got his head up his ass. He should try framing it the right way like, ...there is a great need to protect the troops who are being "forced" to fight and die by this president just to police or referee a civil war. The ONLY way to protect these brave men and women is to get them out of harms way by withholding the funding from a president too obsessed with being right in Iraq that he is willing to sacrifice these soldiers for a failed policy. Just as our president is "forcing " these brave men and women to fight and die, Bush must be forced to see the light because he will not withdraw troops until he is forced to and the only way to force him to is to withhold the funding.
Why is it that Reid always plays victim...wah..."we(senate democrats) can't get enough votes to withdraw the troops from Iraq"... when it should be seen that..."Republicans can't get enough votes in the senate to continue funding this occupation." Dems have what Bush wants...not the other way around. If Bush wants to get what dems have then he better start compromising...NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND. Reid is already playing victim here.
***btw***the extra $50billion that Bush is requesting is to cover the initial cost of attacking IRAN. That's why Gates, who is Sec. of Defense, didn't know about it (and if it were needed he would have known about it because it's his budget). He couldn't very well budget in $50 Billion to attack Iran with now could he?
When will these Bush dog dummies ever get it straight that Republicans want them to appear weak by not standing up to Bush on the funding. That's why Dems in congress have such a low approval rating. Dems are cutting their own throats politically by siding with Bush for whatever reason they give. Quit playing victim. The public backs you saying no to Bush. Dems have all the Aces. Learn that supporting the troops means protecting them, not throwing them into a civil war and saying try not to get shot. They will fight hard wherever we tell them to but they expect us to protect them and not get them killed needlessly. Quit buying into the old...Bush gets them killed and then points at you and says "see what 'you' made me do". The public is smarter than that, why aren't you? Hell with congressional repubs...Hell with bush and his war supporting media. Say no to the funding, because if you don't prepare for another round of preventable mass murder of innocent men, women and children just like the nearly 1million dead Iraqis only it will be Iranians this time, because you funded it, Reid.
When will Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the enablers learn that you don't negotiate with terrorists?
Bush has been terrorizing this nation for years now with nonsense that if we don't fight them there, they will follow us home. We have been fighting somebody there, and more than doubled the 9/11 casualty numbers. If al qaeda wants to attack us here at home, Iraq would have nothing to do with it, and that nonsense that bush has kept us from getting attacked at home (at the cost of $ hundreds of billions), Bill Clinton kept us safe for 8 years, till bush f'd up and didn't heed warnings.
sulphurdunn @ 11:
Sounds impeachable or recallable to my simple brain here.
EJG @ 24:
Also Kucinich is possibly one of the handful of Sens. and Reps. with clean hands and without large pocketfuls of lobbyist cash.
This is depressing. We all seem to be in agreement that neither Reid nor Pelosi has the strength or courage to put up a fight. We all seem to agree that the best, the most "real" candidate is an unelectable guy by the name of Kucinich. What's left to do? We'll all vote again, but with realistically low expectations that it will make any difference.
I haven't been this depressed since Nixon beat the pants off McGovern in '72. But at least McGovern stood for something. He lost because his campaign was a shambles and because the Dem machine really offered him up sacrificially, conceding Nixon the election before the damned Conventions were over. But even so, McGovern stood for something. Does Hillary? Does Reid? Does Pelosi?
I gotta go. I have a date with a bottle. Dammit, this is depressing. We gave the Dems a giant and they put a mouse's brain inside its head. I just re-read the Iron Heel -- damn insightful novel. Where's jack London when you need him? We need him.
Would the Republicans accept words such as "re-deployment". or "de-occupation" ?
homer www.altara.blogspot.com
Nicole seems to be assuming that they actually want to reject that framing and those policies. I've long since rejected that assumption. This supposed fear of being called names is just the lamo-o excuse they use to justify their complicity in these ongoing high crimes and felonies ("misdemeanors" really understates the case, doesn't it?).
We need to face up to a cold, hard truth. The Dems are in on it. They're not "capitulating". They're cooperating. t's all a big ol' good-cop/bad-cop routine that's being played on us. INader, it pains me to say, is right.
PutschCo are about one inch from "Dolchstoss", the famous "knife thrust to the back," of the troops made famous so effectively by Nazis. One could in fact make the argument that we have already crossed that line, at least inside the Beltway and among the Base.
Be afraid.
Be very afraid.
What would be our stance now if the Capitol had been hit on September 11? Or does the "anthrax attacks" incident serve as an analog?
I heard that somewhere. It fits now.
Mellifluous @ 50:
that knife would be blackwater
"The president has made the decision to continue the mission at its current level, and I am never going to vote to withhold funding to our brave men and women when they are out in the field of battle serving in harm’s way."
Jackass. Cutting the funding is the method for getting troops OUT of harm's way.
Democrats need to know four things:
1 -- The Bush administration will ALWAYS say "we're making progress. Just give us six more months."
2 -- The Bush administration will ALWAYS say that support for the Bush administration equals support for the troops -- unless Democrats give Bush what he wants, service members will be killed.
3 -- Bush's Iraq policy was based on lies and is an utter failure. When it is finally halted, Bush and his Republican clones WILL BLAME DEMOCRATS, because being a Republican means never acknowledging error and never accepting responsibility.
4 -- When the next terrorist attack inside the US happens (and it will happen, because we can't catch them all before they strike), Republicans WILL BLAME DEMOCRATS. If only we had given Bush the powers of a dictator, if only we hadn't tied his hands, if only we hadn't hamstrung the efforts ow law enforcement, the Dear Leader, who only has our best interests at heart, could have saved everyone.
Knowing that the Bush administration is a failure in every respect, and knowing that Republicans will blame Democrats for Bush and Republican failures, why should Democrats give Bush and the Republicans anything? It won't stop Republicans from blaming Democrats, so Democrats have nothing to gain by continuing to cave in.
And then there's THIS jackass opinion
"But he said he's willing to negotiate the details of withdrawal within that framework, both with the generals at the Pentagon and with his Republican colleagues.
"We need to get their input, because without their buy-in, we'll be stuck with the president's veto, because it will always be sustained," McNerney said in an interview."
I'm tired of being told how many members of Congress it takes to pass legislation and how many to override a veto -- I KNOW HOW TO COUNT. Here's how it should work -- pass the legislation. If the President vetoes it, pass it again. And again, and again.
It should be obvious that making Republicans expend considerable effort to get their way will make them change their course or negotiate a compromise. In addition, every bit of energy they have to expend on passing their Iraq funding is energy they can't expend on some other misguided, corrupt, thieving scheme.
In addition, Democrats seem to be under the mistaken belief that legislating is all about running the government. Republicans understand the value of symbolic votes that have no practical effect, but can be used to create a record that shows up in negative ads during campaigns. Democrats should learn from that example and seek every chance to put Republicans on the record as favoring the war so that they can't run away from their own failure.
I must have gotten something wrong with creating the link on my previous post. I'll do better in the future. But my points are still the same...
When will Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the enablers learn that you don’t negotiate with terrorists?
That's funny. I guess as soon as they realize who real terrorists are i.e. Syria. Good luck with that one.
I've said it before, brothers, the Blue Dogs are as good as you're going to get in many regions. If we didn't have Heath Shuler in NC 11, you'd have a rabid Republican. What's the difference you say? Well, how about a majority in Congress. Don't be fools and try to unseat these guys for what you would term a true Liberal. It ain't gonna happen.
Patience, people, patience. It's not even a year since we won the majority and the pullout can't be immediate, lest we risk the lives of the Iraqi's. It's our responsibility to make sure we don't harm any more civilians and innocents than we already have.
Mr. XXXX @ 6:
I'm glad someone else is posting these ideas...I guess I'm a forward thinker ahead of my time...I hope the world takes him seriously...as it stands I was told I was stupid, immature, naiive, ill-informed and not rooted in reality by practically every fellow blogsurfer for saying the above myself. Or, I was never replied to by almost every politcal website I submitted my opinions and ideas to.
Actually, no, there was one website owner that agreed with me but was rightly concerned about being "eliminated" if s/he were to post such ideas, and circulate such information. S/he was the only person out of the dozens of high profile "liberal" websites to respond to my letters. And yes, I am bitter about it!
Imagine how soon this war would be over if Bush told his supporters that he would have to take back his tax breaks to pay for it.
Q. If the Dems cannot stop this now, how do they expect us to believe they will stop it after the 2008 election?
A. They will not stop it.
LBJ restarted the draft. Ironic how a Dem president may be the next one to restart it also. Unless we nominate and elect Dennis Kucinich, the war will continue. Through all the hype and debates, no candidate other than Kucinich has even attempted to outline a plan for the complete withdrawal of our troops from Iraq. All the others intend to stay in some form or another.
I think the time for waiting is over.Make them Democrats that,do not back the Anti-War agenda pay.Get on the Peace Train,or get the hell out of the way.
Reid, Pelosi and all the other corpororatist have gotta go.
Verdillac @ 56:
Thanks for projecting your percieved motivations (the same ones heavily promoted the last 10 years by the right-media movement) on a dedicated core of anti-war activists. Yeah, they're pretty much all out there for no reason, and should probably stay inside to make sure the anti-war movement has no visible front.
If you don't want to protest, then don't. If you have inventive new strategies to combat the destruction of the Constitution (for the love of God, do not say "power of the purse" or I'll drop-kick you in effigy), then put them forward. However, when you tear down the grassroots, local exposure (yes, most protests are covered locally) efforts for a movement, you set off bullshit alarms for a lot of people.
"Going back to work or school on Monday" is what responsible, hardworking Americans have to do, to secure their future in the dwindling middle class. What you are seeing right now are the "Reserves", serving their country one weekend a month, several holidays a year, waiting for the next outbreak of Democracy in this country. Nobody knows the hour and the minute that the draft will be reinstated, but these brave men and women will be ready: and leading a much larger force.
Pre-revision history will tell which of us testifies the truth in this matter.
milquetoast @ 20:
At last someone else said it. Like honey on my rock.
In fact, whatever gov't agencies count on our funding, if enough of us do it en masse` it will get their attention. Not for just one day either. We could start for one day and escalate from there til it catches on. I'm sure the coming few years will give us plenty of inspiration and passion to do just that.
For example, a next stolen election. Just for openers. I plan to go berserk at the prospect of 4 more years of a puke in the WH., the reaction will be ripe for Part One of the new Revolution.
Why do we say that the democrats hold the majority in the House Of Representatives. When you look at the voting record of the blue dog republicans it very clear that the republicans have the majority when the voting counts for Cheney's policies.
When Cheney and Bush needs their support the blue dogs are there. Bush called the Blue Dog republicans into his office for a PRIVATE MEETING right after the 2006 election.
Some of the blue dogs are more republican then the republicans that gave their true party when they ran for office....
I think if a million or more folks showed up together in DC in a couple of weekends (say September 15), it might get some attention in time to buck up the weak-spirited Congress. If folks demonstrated together in the capital it would be much harder to ignore than the smaller, isolated events scattered around the country.
Login or Register to post comments.