After listening to Hillary the other night, I think there are many moderate democrats who do believe that we must confront the terrorists and win now.
I believe in order for Nancy and Harry to lead, they also have to represent the Moderates in their own party. The previouz bill was just for show to please the ultra left. The next one will be more centrist.
And we should demand benchmarks. We should also hold regional governments responsible for being partners in peace.
Posted by muckdog at May 2, 2007 09:07 PMI think it is because they are basically "poll driven" politicians that never go out on a limb. they don't care who put them in power it appears.
you are spot on, why not send it back to the moron? he will steam and bluster and convince anyone that doubts it that he is the mentally ill jerk they suspect he is. let him show that he thinks half a million dead are "acceptable losses". our problem is, he has the support of the christians and muslims, and boy do these clubs like to kill. he has the support of his congressional parties too. so they like the payday for organized crime too.
funny how it is only the people that want this war over now. guess very few in congress or wall street want to stop the gravy train of death.
Posted by oldtree at May 2, 2007 09:32 PMThe congress failed to over-ride the president's veto, 222 Yea to 203 Nay, 1 present and 5 not voting
Voting Yea (against party leadership):
Walter Jones R-NC
Voting Nay (against party leadership):
John Barrow D-GA
John Marshall D-GA
Gene Taylor D-MI
Jim Matheson D-UT
Dan Boren D-OK
Lincoln Davis D-TN
Voting Present:
Dennis Kucinich D-OH
Not voting:
Lynn Westmoreland R-GA
Eliot Engel D-NY
Kirsten Gillibrand D-NY
Nicholas Lampson D-TX
Solomon Ortiz D-TX
The people who want to END THE WAR are NOT the "far left." They are in the MAJORITY in this country.
And the Viet Nam war did not end until it was de-funded.
We cannot "win" in Iraq and it's delusional to think we can.
The Dems should not cave in. SO much of our economy goes to the military. They CAN find the money to bring the troops home.
muck is just parrotting the repug party line that only a crazy ultra left nutcase would be against a valiant, bloody and expensive effort to establish a new fundamentalist Islamic republic allied with Iran. So who's crazy?
I agree with Steve. The line should be: We fully funded the troops with a bill that allowed the president to do everything he wants to do: fight terrorists, train the Iraqis and defend US interests in Iraq. What more could he want? Sure, there were some goals in there, but the administration has always had the goal, expressed by the late unlamented Donald Rumsfeld, that this is really the Iraqi's operation and we need to take the training wheels off, in his words. So the milestones stay.
In the meantime, we need to get back to the Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group recommendations. We need a diplomatic surge, because everyone including General Petraeus says that this war can't be won by military means alone. The American people expect Iraqis to exercise their sovereignty and they want our troops out of there. Let's work together to get it done.
Sign the bill we sent over.
Posted by Don Bacon at May 2, 2007 09:59 PMLook. We need a come to Jesus moment. Hold the Dems feet to the fire the same as we held the republi-cons feet to the fire. Hit the Dems hard. Make them aware that there is an electorate out here that will simply not tolerate misfeasance in this instance. Sting them. Get the constituents calling in. That's all it will take.
And we should demand benchmarks.
Idiot. In June we disband the parliament. Then the oil is ours.
Posted by phidipides at May 2, 2007 10:12 PMHe's no longer 'the decider', he's know known as I'm The Commander Guy!
Posted by Seven of Six at May 2, 2007 11:07 PMHe commands Congress right now. Getting what he wants at your expense.
Senator Boren's son, now there's a great Democrat son of a great Democrat. Where's Sam Nunn when you need him.
Nick Lampson didn't cast a vote, look what you got for Tom Delay. Sure he's gone, his Democratic replacement didn't do you any better. But he is gone...what ever happen to Ronnie Earle and his trumped up charges. No news out there, no trial?
A 'strong majority', a bunch of wimps. Great victory last November. You're in charge now, aren't ya.
Posted by peter at May 2, 2007 11:44 PMI too believe that Democrats should keep pounding away at President Bush, to put a stop to this insane occupation of Iraq and bring our troops home.
Therefore, one idea on what Democrats might include in the next Iraqi Occupation spending bill to put the squeeze on Bush and Cheney, and provide an acceptable benchmark for the Iraqis:
Link the withdrawal of our troops from Iraq with the Iraqi legislature passing the Iraqi Oil Law, with the stipulation that as soon as the Oil Law is passed, our forces will have six months in which to leave Iraq.
I believe this will box Bush and Cheney into a corner.
Will they veto a bill that provides funding for our continued occupation of Iraq, and which also prods the Iraqi legislature into passing the Oil Law, the one law in occupied Iraq that is the top priority of the Bush administration and all the Western oil companies intent upon reaping Iraqi oil profits for decades to come?
On the other hand, if they don't veto this next spending bill, then I bet the Iraqi legislature will convene immediately and pass the much-desired-by Bush and Cheney Oil Law, since passage will be directly linked to the promise that all U.S. forces will be gone from their homeland in six months time, which is what a vast majority of Iraqis desire.
Anyway, I believe Democrats should give this a shot. I know it's a gamble. But all participants will be gambling, including the Western oil companies (and their Bush administration front) that once our forces are gone from Iraq, the Iraqi Oil Law will still be in effect and honored by whatever Iraqi government is in place. Of course, the Iraqis (once our troops are gone) might decide to scrap the Bush/Cheney-pushed Oil Law and contract elsewhere.
Unless, of course, the Bush/Cheney plan for Iraq's oil wealth is to get the Oil Law in place and keep our soldiers in Iraq to make sure the Oil Law is honored, for many, many, many years to come.
If this is the case, then I'd like to see Bush and Cheney veto a spending bill with this stipulation in it linking the Oil Law with our departure, and explain what they are really doing and what their real plans are for Iraq.
Thus, this provision would back Bush and Cheney into a corner. Either they'd have to put up or shut up.
Posted by The Oracle at May 3, 2007 02:33 AMSo the Democrats blinked and the war goes on.
President Bush and Congressional leaders began negotiating a second war funding bill yesterday, with Democrats offering the first major concession: an agreement to drop their demand for a timeline to bring troops home from Iraq.
Leadership? In a pig's eye.
Posted by Christopher at May 3, 2007 04:30 AMWhat is so difficult about cutting the funding? I hoped I was wrong about the Dems but it now appears they are on board with the Repugs. How can Reid negotiate with a creep like McConnell?
Posted by JohnT at May 3, 2007 05:37 AMBsh smmtn f Dms' ntcs, "rrspnsbl", ws pttng t lghtly. Jprdzng th lvs f r trps fr pltcl lvrg vr th Wht Hs whl dsrgrdng th rl wrld cnsqncs f bndnng th ntr Mddl st t ctclysmc chs s nthng bttr thn dspcbl btryl.
[Editor: ignore=off]I just read Russ Feingold's post on HuffPO. He makes sense and should be Majority Leader.
Posted by JohnT at May 3, 2007 06:01 AMBoth Pelosi and Reid are cowards.
If they can't stand up to this 5'9" dimestore Texas cowboy, then they're not worthy to lead the party and should step aside.
Posted by Christopher at May 3, 2007 06:01 AMJohnT is correct.
Reid should be replaced by Russ Feingold and Pelosi by John Murtha.
Posted by Christopher at May 3, 2007 06:03 AMSenator Boren's son, now there's a great Democrat son of a great Democrat.
DINO, and dumb as a rock. Absolutely the single most lackluster Dem on the planet.
You're in charge now, aren't ya.
When we get the Dem president, I hope it's like you guys did. Rubber stamp anything the idiot wants. And then idiots like you can come along and crow about it being a rubber stamp Congress.
the real world consequences of abandoning the entire Middle East to cataclysmic chaos is nothing better than despicable betrayal.
Or the despicable betrayal of a "for profit" war
run by corporate cronies, all of them bible-thumping conservatives, and who are so clueless about the Middle East they were yelling "Mission Accomlished" four years ago.
You see, the big problem has been allowing people like you to get control of this country. That can never be allowed to happen again.
When people like you run things you get torture, murder, rape, pillaging...and funny little things like walled-in portions of cities where certain people must live (Polish Ghettos anyone).
With people like you in charge we get wars of aggression to grab resources trumped-up as "wars to save us". Either you can't tell the difference, in which case you are the bleakest moron to ever crawl out your mothers birth canal, or you are nothing more than a jesus-baiting Nazi. I think the two phenomena are operating concurrently in your instance.
Posted by phidipides at May 3, 2007 06:10 AMThe Media has already branded the Dems as losers in this battle. Forget the 60% of the people who support their attempts. I think they should just say...we sent a bill up that gave the president all the money he wanted and he rejected it. We are done. Too bad they won't.
Posted by T2 at May 3, 2007 06:20 AMPass 60 days of no strings money with the increased military health care funds and Katrina rebuilding. Then prepare the way to rescind the AUMF and defund the occupation in Sept. Anything else is a cave-in to Bush.
With the current authoritarian make-up of the Repub party in the WH and Congress, it's clear that the constitution no longer can be the basis of a functioning government, and certainly not the basis of a democracy.
The downward spiral of the country continues, and, based on what we're seeing, it's unlikely that future elections will have any effect in reversing it. Our system of government is failing.
The Repubs are evading the results of a clear national election and demonstrating to the world that our democracy is a fraud. How long will it be before we figure this out for ourselves?
Posted by euzoius at May 3, 2007 06:54 AM
You're right, Steve--just let the veto stand.
Charles
Posted by charles moore at May 3, 2007 07:05 AMGrab a rifle Bendito and take your cowardly ass to Baghdad. Dear Leader needs you.
Posted by Steve Soto at May 3, 2007 09:17 AMTell McConnell and Boehner "we funded the troops and you rejected it. Now go find the votes yourselves, and Mitch, if the bill doesn't have any strings in it at all, you better find 60 votes for your bill. Until then, it's on you."
Absolutely the correct approarch!
Posted by Johnny Lib at May 3, 2007 09:22 AMThe Democrats should stop playing games with the corporate media and criminal republicans. The Democrats should recind the authorization for this occupation. Congress never authorized an occupation.
Posted by smooth at May 3, 2007 09:37 AMYou can't negotiate with deranged republicans. Read the deranged comments on this thread. The corporate media and the deranged republicans will always support the lies told to support this oil grab and bigoted religious occupation. The bigots want to occupy Iraq and steal their oil because of their ethnicity and religion. If there weren’t so many bigots in the U.S. this story would be dead on arrival.
Posted by smooth at May 3, 2007 09:45 AMSomething fishy about this.
with Democrats offering the first major concession
This follows the Broder line that for consensus and bipartisanship to emerge Dems must cave
Democrats backed off after the House failed, on a vote of 222 to 203
When did they back off? Weisman admits that in 2 weeks there's going to be another vote on this when the defense policy measure comes to the floor.
Beyond that, Democrats remain deeply divided over how far to give in to the White House.
Considering they only lost eleven votes which still would not have been enough to overturn the veto, I'd say that's a far cry from deeply divided.
Already, liberal Democrats think that public opinion and circumstances in Iraq are on their side
THINK? Doesn't he even read his own paper?
This smell like the wharf.
Posted by Daryl at May 3, 2007 11:07 AM
What you folks fail to remember...it took 33 different bills to get us out of Vietnam to cut the funding. Many years of work, painstakingly hard work to have Americans declared losers in Vietnam. It wasn't a presto chango and we pulled out. Each piece built upon the previous legislation. The "insta..." generation doesn't have the patience for this kind of work. The antiwar groups often commenting here doesn't have the patience. We lost over 10,000 troops during this period and spent a lot of our defense budget too. After 1970, they never had a 60 vote senate. In fact, Democrats have seen their numbers falling from the height of the 89th Congress, 68 Senators and 295 House members. Lucky for me, that's never going to happen again.
But, Phid, didn't you hear what the 'people' said by their vote in November? "They wanted divided government." You want the WH, got to give up Congress. That's what the 'people' said by their vote, period.
Posted by peter at May 3, 2007 01:02 PM"...it is our troops who are dying while the Iraqis dawdle...."
Dawdle? Hell, I wish they were only dawdling--they're going on vacation!
'Tell McConnell and Boehner "we funded the troops and you rejected it. Now go find the votes yourselves, and Mitch, if the bill doesn't have any strings in it at all, you better find 60 votes for your bill. Until then, it's on you."'
Yes, yes, a billion times YES to what Steve said!!
Posted by bartcopfan at May 3, 2007 02:02 PMYou want the WH, got to give up Congress. That's what the 'people' said by their vote, period.
No. Voters said republi-cons are base cowards who hide behind mere slogans and are so corrupt they would sell their own republi-con children to donkey acts in Tijuana for a buck. Voters were correct on all three counts.
"Mission Accomplished!" What a pack of drooling morons you people are. The adults are about to give you a long time-out.
Posted by phidipides at May 3, 2007 06:06 PMI think Steve's plan is as good as any I heard. It actually reflects the reality of the House and Senate, in that the Dems won't stick together for another resubmission of the last bill to Bush.
So, if the so-called blue dogs or moderates want to give in to Bush, let them join with the Repubs on a Republican bill - so the Dems clearly are not accepting responsibility for the war.
The real Dems should vote against any watered down Repub bill, leaving it up to the Repubs to try to get a filibuster proof bill in the Senate and a majority in the House (which probably would be much easier).
I like this plan, but I don't expect it to be tried.
Posted by JimPortlandOR at May 3, 2007 11:35 PM