Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reid Clears the Record on Iraq

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-20-06 01:48 PM
Original message
Reid Clears the Record on Iraq
From Taylor Marsh:

Snip…

From Senators Jack Reed, Kennedy and Clinton to many faithful Democrats, we all let Senator Harry Reid know he'd said something that just wasn't going to fly. It's been corrected. Many likely want me to leave it at that but I simply cannot.

When Senators Kerry and Feingold put forth their plan in the Senate to get out of Iraq by July 2007, Reid scheduled the debate after sunset. He wanted no part of redeployment timelines and neither did many other Democrats. Now don't get me wrong, Reid is a smart, dedicated leader who knows what he's doing, but he's not been for a timeline at any point until his post yesterday. What Reid voted for was reports on progress: To clarify and recommend changes to the policy of the United States on Iraq and to require reports on certain matters relating to Iraq. That's very different, which is why so many people took Reid's statement on Sunday exactly as it was spoken.

When speaking about the Iraq war in the middle of Bush's mismanaged disaster it's important, even critical, to say exactly what you mean the first time. When people are dying at alarming rates that continue to escalate it's not too much to ask that everyone mean what they say and say what they mean. Of course, that doesn't always happen, but when you get it wrong a correction or clarification is warranted.

Senator Hillary Clinton recently made a very bold change in her rhetoric on the war.

Majority leader Reid says he now believes we should redeploy in 4-6 months. That's entirely different from the Levin-Reed plan he supported, which called for 2006 to be a time of “significant transition to full Iraqi sovereignty, with Iraqi security forces taking the lead for the security of a free and sovereign Iraq, thereby creating the conditions for the phased redeployment of United States forces from Iraq.”

The shifts we're hearing in Democratic leaders are real and noteworthy, especially since they are now noting timelines, along with their rejection of prior "yea" votes on authorization.

more…


This leaves no doubt where the clarity has been all along: Kerry-Feingold.

Democrats are moving in the right direction and others, including Bill Richardson and Joe Sestak, have now come out strongly for definite timetable.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-20-06 02:07 PM
Response to Original message
1. Seems the Dems might just be able to get on the same page yet;
if there's any issue that screams for unity, it's getting out of Iraq ASAP, and for the blivet to hear them loud and clear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-20-06 02:12 PM
Response to Original message
2. How about petitioning Reid to resubmit Kerry-Feingold withdrawal plan in January?
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-20-06 08:14 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. There is
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clarkie1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-20-06 09:38 PM
Response to Original message
4. And Bush will follow the timeline the senate announces (If they do) because..???? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-20-06 09:43 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Because Congress is a
separate co-equal branch with all the money!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brer cat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-20-06 10:44 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. I think that's the key--stop the money.
Edited on Wed Dec-20-06 10:45 PM by brer cat
* will NEVER listen to any opinion that differs from his "decider" one. The only way out that I can see is to stop the money flowing to fuel/enable this god-forsaken war.

edit to ad "enable." To many dems are co-dependents on this war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren Stupidity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-20-06 10:55 PM
Response to Reply #4
10. Because step 2 is to tie funding to withdrawal.
And step 3 is to cut all funding if the administration refuse to comply, with a 3-6 month window to get the troops out. (Although as I have stated elsewhere I believe that we could BUG OUT in weeks not months.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
femrap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-20-06 10:27 PM
Response to Original message
6. I am beginning to think that China, not
Congress controls the money for this war.

* is going to bankrupt our nation. I pray the Dems will have their collective spines come 1/4/07 and will be able to stand up for Diplomacy instead of more deaths.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Joad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-20-06 10:33 PM
Response to Original message
7. Fuckin timetable should make clear Troops OUT NOW! Not a year from now,
not two years... Now. In months, not years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Joad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-20-06 10:35 PM
Response to Original message
8. Reports on Progress people, and the "benchmarks for success" people
in congress really are screwin up those who want to end this illegal, immoral military aggression.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calimary Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-21-06 01:58 AM
Response to Original message
11. Could that mean SOME of them are hearing us?
My first line when I call my reps: being okay with one more "surge" in Iraq? THAT'S NOT WHAT I VOTED FOR!!!!!

Sounds like nagging works sometimes. But we can't let down our guard. Now is when we have to get insistent. I voted to have the war STOPPED. NOW.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 03:34 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC