It's amazing how the Republicans use exactly the same words over and over again for years, and it still works to cow dems.
How about "Bush isn't getting a rubber stamp from Congress. This President has taken us into a failed war, and we would be shirking out duty to the soldiers if we didn't try to save them from Bush's disastrous decisions. The Republicans are willing to sacrifice American lives to avoid acknowledging that Bush made a mistake. Who hates the troops?"

Or how about "We've had 4 years of the Republicans "supporting" the troops by making slogans at home, while failing to provide for their basic armor needs in Iraq. For the troops' sake, we can't continue to do nothing.

Well soccerdad, you raise a very, very good point.

How many times have we read posters who say we can't impeach Bush because there aren't enough votes in the House?

How many times have we read posters who say Bush is unstoppable -- the Congress' hands are tied.

It's as though we have been out of power for so long and beaten down by the GOP time and time again, that no one has the courage to take on the monsters and right the ship.

It's remarkable.

Whatever happened to balance of power? Why are we having this problem with a president abusing power, and we are apparently unable to stop or defend against these abuses?

We, really had better find a way to fix this problem fast. As, this is really disconcerting in a supposed democracy, where we are now under the reign of one man's judgememt, or lack thereof.

-Mark Robert Gates

Happy Valentine's Day

Please my blogs:

Loki Epona Phoenix' Phases
Democratic Party Idealog'
Wellness Empowered

This war is Bush's war. It is over---America lost. The Repug game right now, as Reid well knows, is to get the Dems to cut funding so they can use the Wurlitzer to blame the source of all evil, stupidity, poverty, ignorance, depravity, etc.-- the Democratic party, of course. Feingold doesn't have enough votes anyway to stop funding. The Democrats look OK to me right now. Don't give Rove any way he can blame the whole disaster on the Dems. Soon we'll have to get out of Iraq anyway, because of lack of troops and bankruptcy.

According to Bill Richardson and others we can de-authorize the war, revoke or revise the original authorization. Which would breeze through the House but the Repugs would filibuster of course. But we would hold their feet to the fire.

Repubs and Dems hand-in-hand got U.S. into this war in Iraq. And, let's not forget Afghanistan. War is good for business, including businesses that support Democrats. Almost all of our politicians were enthusiastic to give Mr. Bush the authorization to go to war. Previously, President Clinton conducted the Sanctions against Iraq the during his terms at a human cost estimated at a half-million plus Iraqi lives. It is wonderful to see so many hopeful comments from Americans who believe the loyal opposition is doing everything in it's power to stop the war, but perhaps they have not been paying attention. The pols and the media types all damn well understood that Iraq poised no threat in March 2003--that didn't stop the rush to war and neither will the clear message sent by the Electorate last November.

Well, it's good to know that even with our new majority in the U.S. House, the Repukes spent the day debating Madam Pelosi's big airplane and never mentioned Iraq, Iran, Bush's budget, Social Security, education, or national security.

Just Pelosi's big air plane. Yeah, being in the Majority is terrific.

I guess hope springs eternal!

I really like reading this blog but I cant for the life of me understand how smart people like the ones that frequesnt this blog (and those who contribute articles)just dont get it....
There is so much ink spilled on how the recent election and the new democratic Congress would be the savior of the republic that is truly mindboggling.
Look people, read and understand the history of American foreign policy.....there is no war, fraccas, rebellion, coup d'tat, uprising that this country didnt like or become embroiled in in the past 100 years. Do you really believe that Democrats are going to grow any balls, courage or authentic patriotism so they can stop the current war, or any future wars for that matter? Republican, Democrat, who cares? The system is rotten and broken...there is no one on the national stage that has the courage and backing of the American people to stand up to those controlling the strings whether they be corporations, military-industrial complex, the wealthy with connections and power, corrupt and lying politicians?
Oh yeah, backing of the American people.....maybe if they can get turn their heads away from American Idol for a few seconds...
In the meantime, the poor are getting poorer, the middle class is dissintegrating, the health care system is a joke, education is the shits...I can go on and on.

ok, just pile on me for being negative...

a reasonable comparison could be "congress is like a small dog. when it meets something big and scary, it urinates in fear" the term "nervous pisser" might apply to just about everyone in our government. everyone

"Look, the only way that Democrats will be able to stop this war is by cutting off funding for it.
Pro-war pols and pundits will always blame the Democrats for “taking monies away from the troops.”
"But what the Democrats would really be doing is taking away Bush’s wherewithal to wage this foolish war, Bush’s wherewithal to get more U.S. troops killed."

Soccerdad is right. The Democrats have allowed this pResident and the GOP to frame the issue as "taking money away from the troops." If the Democrats had any, they would have hit hard against this and reframed the issue.

The Democrats have allowed this pResident and the GOP to frame the issue as "taking money away from the troops."

Ka-Ching!

If the Democrats were interested in the troops (and not running for president in 2008) they would stop funding the war and the troops would have to be withdrawn from Iraq.

the courage the senate needs to find will come from stating the obvious:

president bush has repeatedly used the american soldiers he has ordered to iraq as a shield!!

stating this simply and clearly and repeatedly in public forums is the way to cut thru bush’s sophistry on our soldiers' well-beingand, and, at the same time, collapse the current right-wing republican congressional resistance.

from march 2003 on, president bush has used american soldiers as a shield against either criticism of, or political action in opposition to, his unnecessary, immensely destructive, and antithetical-to-american-interests attack on iraq.

why haven't national opinion leaders (like, say, democratic senators, journalists and editorialists, and web log sites) criticized this misue of troops

such criticism is a simple, powerful, and effective antidote to bush’s claim, made in perpetuity, that any criticism of his or his administration’s plans for the iraq invasion are “attacks on” or “failures to support” u.s. troops.

bush’s claim is transparently self-serving, transparently false, and transparently manipulative of ordinary americans’ emotions regarding our soldiers.

SECOND UNNECESSARY REMINDER: american troops are in iraq because president bush ordered them there. (and keeps rotating them - national guard and “regular” troops - into and out of iraq, over and over again.)

are solderers who had been ordered into iraq once (and perhaps again for the second or third time) “not supported” when critics of pres bush and his administration voice “no confidence” in the invasion and he ordered and the incompetent prosecution of war that has followed?

of course not.

and we all know that some of those troops will be killed, many more maimed, and many more still emotionally scarred for life.

(and then there is iraqi life and society - which obviously don’t count at all in the president’s thinking.)

pres bush is not protecting american troops he condemns to iraq;

he is using them in a vain effort to protect his historical reputation (and cover his past bad judgments).

the president is like a high-stakes gambler on a bad losing streak who cannot accept his loses.

in this case he keeps borrowing,

borrowing solder’s lives to use as chips in a frantic effort try to break even against his losses.

our soldiers lives as gambling chips.

that is all that needs to be said in the current debate over iraq policy until it has become available for all americans to consider.

so who is going to do that?

Looks like the Dimwits are already on board. They can't leave Iraq because they would have to give up on Aramco II (Iraq-Aramco).