IT COULD BE THAT THE REPUBLICANS WHO REFUSED TO GO ALONG WITH MAJORITY LEADER REID ARE, INDEED, DOING WHAT THEIR CONSTITUENTS WANT: THEY WANT THE "SURGE" IN IRAQ TO REACH IT FULL EFFECTIVENESS. CONSIDERING THAT THE EFFORT JUST BEGAN IN EARNEST, WITH THE BACKING OF CONGRESS, IT JUST MIGHT BE THE RIGHT THING TO LET IT SUCCEED. AFTER ALL, WHY ELSE DID CONGRESS APPROVE THE COMMANDING GENERAL'S APPOINTMENT? GIVE HIM A CHANCE, DEMOCRATS!
Posted by R F PHELAN at July 19, 2007 08:49 AMI like the idea that Reid can "gin up the message machine" to hammer the GOPers. If only. There is no "message machine" available to the Dems. The GOP owns the message machines and they will use them to spend the recess telling all America how the the Dems resorted to a filibuster to hurt our troops and keep the Generals on the Ground from defeating Al Qaeda. Granted there have been substantial hiccups in the message machine of late, but it's still a GOP machine. Look no further than the various headlines and talk shows telling us how the Dems were defeated in the Senate, despite getting a majority of the votes. Let Harry gin up his machine, I wish him luck.
Posted by T2 at July 19, 2007 08:52 AMSteve, I hate to say it, but Murray may be right about this, albeit in a stopped-clock way.
Reid will now not have any further debate on the 2008 Defense budget between now and the summer recess, and will let those Republicans go home and face their constituents for not doing anything to stop this war.
The problem with this is that it's an ambient, passive situation. Do people even have any idea their reps/sens are there, much less the inclination to confront them on the burning issues of the day?
It's not like life stops and bells go off when elected pols go home, particularly during summer when there are vacations to be taken and hammocks to be swung in?
Dems needed to get more out of this.
Posted by Ellie at July 19, 2007 09:04 AMR F PHELAN
Do you honestly believe that in six weeks things are going to change or turn-around? What if the "surge" doesn't work? Please tell me, then what?
Posted by Judith at July 19, 2007 09:09 AMIf the Dems really wanted to end the occupation they can cut off funding(Article I,Section 7,Clause1). If they do not originate a funding bill for the occupation then none exists for the Senate to screw around with.
Posted by JohnT at July 19, 2007 09:47 AMCONSIDERING THAT THE EFFORT JUST BEGAN IN EARNEST, WITH THE BACKING OF CONGRESS, IT JUST MIGHT BE THE RIGHT THING TO LET IT SUCCEED.
You have got be kidding, right?
Posted by phidipides at July 19, 2007 10:41 AMPHELAN, you are aware, aren't you, that this "war" started in 2003? Over four years ago. And you are saying that the combined might of the US Armed forces under the direction of George W. Bush only began trying to really win in the last few weeks? You are putting us on right?
Posted by T2 at July 19, 2007 12:06 PMYeah, the LAT had the same mindless spin in its headline this morning: "Bush Gets a Breather... ." I'm hopeful that instead of a breather, Bushmeat and his war have actualy been cut loose and set adrift as JohnT. suggests. (:>
Posted by Donald Cormac at July 19, 2007 04:04 PM"What if the "surge" doesn't work? Please tell me, then what?"
Why, then, Petraeus asks for, and gets, more troops so he can have a surge within the surge.
Posted by Shirin at July 19, 2007 04:56 PMThere is only one thing here that a progressive should make note of:
Republicans were willing to filibuster to keep the war going.
Democrats have never been willing to filibuster any of the substantial evil things Conservatives have been forcing upon this nation since 2001, most especially the starting and perpetuation of the Iraq War.
Democrats do not represent Progressive ideals and continue to be complicit in the continuing and furtherance of this administration's unacceptable ambitions.
Posted by Tampa Student at July 19, 2007 08:35 PM