Democrats retreat on war's end

[illinoisprogressive]

In another sign to be absolutely pissed off, we learned today that the democrats in Washington have no spine.



http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0907/5679.html


In a strategic shift designed to win over Republican critics of the Iraq war, congressional Democrats are backing off demands for a firm withdrawal date for U.S. troops and instead are seeking a new bipartisan deal to end the military campaign.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) are calculating that it is futile to continue their months-long campaign to force an immediate end to the war, particularly after Republicans and a few Democrats returned from the summer recess intent on opposing legislation mandating a strict timetable for pulling out U.S. troops.

The change is both rhetorical and substantive. Reid and others are increasingly talking of “bipartisan compromise,” while top Democrats are reworking legislation erasing a date certain for ending the military operation. The strategic shift is certain to anger some war critics, but it reflects the reality that Democrats lack the votes to force President Bush’s hand.

“We are trying to manage expectations that we can’t end the war today or next week or next month,” said one Democrat involved in the discussions. “We have to make sure everyone understands that.

[Triana]

1. Pantywaist, spineless....I had better stop now or this'll get REALLY ugly (n/t)

[Doctor_J]

2. Maybe they're hoping to hang it around the GOP's neck next year

Playing with matches around a can of gasoline makes for either a very powerful weapon or a suicide device.

[Kolesar]

6. Run the 2006 campaign again

I wish I had a better strategy...

[enough already]

63. How can you "hang it around the GOP's neck"....

....when you're in the same bed as they are?

Gutless, spineless worms...every last one of them.

[Warren Stupidity]

3. I know, lets give them more money now and then

when they come right back in a few months and demand yet more of our money, we will do it all over again, and the three months later, more money, and then...

What a brilliant strategy.

End the funding end the war.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Dhalgren]

7. That is the way I see it, too. Stopping this brutal occupation is the

goal, not any particular politic party win. It isn't enough to say that the Democrats will butcher Iraqis more gently. The democrats do not want our votes, so I say let's not let them have them. This is how the republicans will win again and it will be the center-right Democrats' fault.

[polichick]

22. I agree with both of you...

The Dems basically piss on our votes ~ and it will be those foolish centrists who lose the election. Why vote Republican lite when you can have the real thing?

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

5. Naturally, ip links to Drudge's favorite source. And vice versa.

MKJ

[Mass]

8. Well, I guess we will see when the bill is out. Will there be a deadline or not?

[Dhalgren]

9. So do you think that this report is untrue? That would be great if it isn't true...

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

25. Politico is famous for its FAUX News style of "fair and balanced".

Other, more reputable outlets described this as a compromise, rather than "retreat".

They also included actual quotes from the Democratic leadership, rather than the "writer"'s imagination,. Now politico has quotes from unknown Democratic aides, however, one only has to look to the NYT or any other credible news outlet for Reid's, and other Senators', own words.

It's not a credible news source, and, as such, can't be used on DU in LBN.



MKJ

[jmp]

10. No, no ... this is all part of Reid & Pelosi's master plan.

They are just giving Republicans more time to squirm. Next time funding comes up, they are really going to put the screws to the GOP.

Honest.

[sampsonblk]

68. Awww man. You musta heard that joke before.

[paulk]

11. it's not a lack of spine

it's a lack of votes.

reality sure sucks for the magic wand crowd

[Mass]

12. So, instead of staying on our positions and may be lose the vote, we

propose a bill that does NOTHING but will win?

Not sure why it is better, but, if you like it.

[paulk]

17. stand our ground and lose the vote

or compromise with the "anti-war" Republicans and pass a meaningless bill - that could still be vetoed... for many on this board, the Democrats are damned if they do and damned if they don't...

I don't know if it's the right thing, but passing something might be at least force a crack in the Repuke armor.


-----------------------


It seems like the Rebublicans believe that their only hope going into 2008 is to play the national security card again. The last thing the (R) leadership wants is to be seen blinking. The Democrats are in a tough position - they will be accused of playing politics with the war no matter what, when it's really the Republicans that are playing politics.

I only hope that our Dem. Senators, working behind the scenes, can convince enough Republicans to put the needs of this country before the needs of their party. It's not going to be easy, and perhaps the only thing they have to use as an argument is the threat of an overwhelming defeat in 2008.

Bush wants to play out the string - and I don't really see any way around him, unless he's abandoned by his party. This war could easily go on right through the next election. I just want to be sure to lay the blame for that, if it happens, at the feet of the Republicans, where it belongs.

[jmp]

20. "... Republicans to put the needs of this country before the needs of their party."

You expect more from Republicans than you do from Democrats???

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[paulk]

64. you seem to specialize in non sequiturs

and strawmen.

So, tell me, jmp, when did you stop beating your wife?

[Name removed]

66. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Demeter]

36. The Only Thing Congress Should Pass Is Gas

[sandnsea]

26. Did Kerry not say this was propaganda??

Maybe I misunderstood, but I thought his traipsing around the internet yesterday was to head off this stuff and get people to understand that Democrats are still fighting to get the right policy and that Republicans are more on the fence then they let on.

I thought he specifically said to NOT fall for this stuff. Right??

[karynnj]

58. That he did!

But for many it is more emotionally satisfying to read the propaganda and to attack the Democrats.

We need to instead thank those going the right way and beg them to continue and push those on the fence to the correct side. It's hard work getting a country to really accept that what was done needs to change. This is not a foot ball game, America is not a team, and there is NOTHING there to "win".

[jmp]

14. 1 vote stops the war.

Don't schedule a vote for the funding bill ... it is over.

[paulk]

18. that is not going to happen, it's not supported by the majority

of Americans.

it's another magic wand, and it wouldn't stop the war anyway.

Bush would find the money somewhere.

[jmp]

21. No, it won't happen.

It won't happen because Pelosi has no spine. It won't happen because these guys lied when they said that they were going to end the war.

We were played for suckers. Again.

[Raster]

39. Talk about a magic wand. "Bush would find the money somewhere."

And yes, cheney/bush* could try, which would open their illegal war to even more scrutiny.

If we continue down the appease and apologize pathway, NOTHING is done. There is no discovery. No evidence is presented. No action is taken. "Sorry, we can't do the right thing because we don't have the votes." Is that what we should teach our children? Only do the right thing if it proves to be profitable or advantageous? Only do the right thing if you have "the votes." What about doing the right thing because IT IS THE RIGHT THING? Can you not give the American public the benefit of the doubt?

[karynnj]

60. exactly - although he would SAY that

we were willing to leave the soldiers stranded penniless in Iraq.

[sampsonblk]

67. Where's your positive attitude? They are screwed, not us!

Continuing the war with a blank check for Bush is also not supported by the majority. But the GOP won't cave in, as you advocate for us. In fact, if you ask the public do they think we should give Bush $X billion with no strings attached, they will overwhelmingly say no way! But Bush and the GOP won't give an inch, as you advocate for our side to do.

We are not the ones in a weak position with the public, BUSH and the GOP are. And they know it. Which (in my opinion) is why they are constantly laughing at how weak and politically incompetent our party has been over the past 6-8 years. And your type of thinking is what they have been laughing about.

All is lost for them. They are screwed, and have no credibility left to fight us with. And after all that, every option to stand up against them is referred to as a 'magic wand' by you. No wonder they are laughing!

Final point: Some here seem obsessed with where the polls are today. I have an idea: Since we know we're right, let's take our case to the public and start moving those poll numbers in our favor. It'll take some courageous public statements from some courageous elected officials. Few seem to be willing to take a stand anywhere outside of what's already popular. That's not leadership.

[paulk]

74. I've never advocated giving Bush a blank check for his war

this thread is about the Democrats having no "spine". I don't think that's true. The Democrats are being thwarted in their efforts by a Republican party that, as you point out, won't listen to the American people. And as long as the Republicans refuse to listen, then there are not enough votes in the Senate to stop this war.

It's hard enough for the Dems when they have a lying media against them, a media willing to do the work of the Bush admin, without having so called supporters also constantly attacking them . I don't think the efforts and attitude of the OP and many of the posters in this thread are helpful... blaming the Democrats for this impasse gets us nowhere.

[sampsonblk]

77. What impasse?

The 'impasse' is not real. As the majority party, we have a boatload of tools at our disposal. We need only use them. Not using them is spineless.

The fact is, we are in a big fight. And the GOP is willing to fight us for every inch. And we either take them up on it and do likewise, or else we throw our hands up and call that an 'impasse.'

[paulk]

78. our "majority" is not actually a majority on this issue

You've got Lieberman, for starters, who on Iraq may as well be a Republican. You've also got the blue dogs, who are siding with Bush so far. There's no "we". That's not being spineless, that's just facing the facts and trying to come up with a strategy that deals with the reality of the situation.

That means working with the anti-war Republicans and, yes, the blue dogs. At least it's a start. A bipartisan coalition will at least be a start. It will isolate the pro-war crowd. And who knows what's going on behind the scenes? Maybe the position of the pro-war crowd isn't as strong as they would like people to believe.

There's more than one way to win this fight.

[sampsonblk]

80. Their position is absolutely untenable

But they fight on, knowning that every pro-war word they utter is another pct or two for their next opponent. Those devils on the other side will risk everything (ask Santorum) to beat us in this present struggle. That's why they see victory where we see 'impasse.'

Look at the hopeless position the GOP is in. Its an awful place to be. But they kicked our asses (on the funding) this spring. And they are all set to kick our asses again.

I say again that how you fight today affects the fights you end up in tomorrow. We conceded for no reason in the spring. Now they know we won't fight.

[illinoisprogressive]

15. No wand. I am a realist but, you can take a stand for principle. Our party

has become weak and frightened of the gop. How it happened and why I am still trying to find out but, you don't have to cave on everything. Even with lack of votes you can still have principles.

[paulk]

19. they're not frightened of the GOP

they're frightened of the voters - the one's who put Bush in office. Along with a Republican majority for six years.

[Raster]

40. Horse pucky! cheney/bush*'s numbers are in the toilet. Most Americans

want this nightmare over. Now. Over 30% believe in impeachment TOMORROW with no conditions. How many more will rise to the occasion once they see someone taking a stand?

[Major Hogwash]

46. Yet that doesn't stop the Republican Congressmen from blocking the Democrats, does it?

Doesn't matter what the people want, the Republican Congressmen aren't going along with what their own constituents want them to do.

Unless there is a sea change in who those people vote for next year, the Republicans will continue to be obstructionists, blocking any real progress in Congress.

Just look at Tom Davis, Representative from Virginia. He no longer gives a shit what his constituents want from him, his latest poll numbers are below double digits, at 5% approval rating. Yet, he is among the loudest Republicans blocking anything getting done by this Congress. He even went so far as to claim that Valerie Plame Wilson was not a covert CIA officer when Robert D. Novak outed her as one in his newspaper article of July 14, 2003 even after the Director of the CIA said she was!!

[Raster]

49. The Democraps haven't needed anyone to block them. They've been highly

ineffectual all by themselves. THEY HAVEN'T EVEN TRIED!

[Major Hogwash]

62. Because Raster says so?

No, they did try to bring back the troops, Bush vetoed that bill.
They tried to pass a bill to tie the funds to a timeline, the Republicans in Congress blocked that bill.

Typing in caps is not going to get me to believe you anymore than listening to Rush Limbaugh convince me that the Democrats are to blame for this mess.

"THEY HAVEN'T EVEN TRIED" - either you weren't paying attention or you're just one of those fantasy football players that has dreams thinking what real life is while you are awake.

[illinoisprogressive]

13. The democrats these days are blind, spineless sheep and I have become

so ashamed of what has happened to my party. I keep thinking if we had FDR these days, he would have outfoxed the gop and Bush in a very elegant and fun way and never give in to them or to something as wrong as this war.

[Kolesar]

24. wtf does anything you said have to do with FDR?

[stillcool]

16. I guess they think it will be different this time...

The war for the Soviets was an unparalleled disaster. In 1988 the 115,000 Soviet soldiers begin to withdraw after losing an estimated 15,000 troops in ten years

excerpts from the book
War Made Easy
How presidents and pundits keep spinning us to death
by Norman Solomon
John Wiley and Sons, 2005, pape
p39
On April 25, 1972, the White House taping recorded this noontime dialogue among President Nixon, White House press secretary Ron Ziegler, and Henry Kissinger
President: "How many did we kill in Laos?"
Ziegler: "Maybe ten thousand-fifteen?"
Kissinger: "In the Laotian thing, we killed about ten, fifteen. . .
President: "See, the attack in the North that we have in mind... power plants, whatever's left-POL , the docks .... And I still think we ought to take the dikes out now. Will that drown people?"
Kissinger: "About two hundred thousand people."
President: "No, no, no... I'd rather use the nuclear bomb. Have ' you got that, Henry?"
Kissinger: "That, I think, would just be too much."
President: "The nuclear bomb, does that bother you? ... I just want you to think big, Henry, for Christsakes."

Nine days later, while conferring with Kissinger, Al Haig, and John Connally, the president said:
"I'll see that the United States does not lose. I'm putting it quite bluntly. I'll be quite precise. South Vietnam may lose. But the United States cannot lose. Which means, basically, I have made the decision. Whatever happens to South Vietnam, we are going to cream North Vietnam .... For once, we've got to use the maximum power of this country ... against this shit-ass little country: to win the war...
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Norman_Solomon/War_Made_Easy.html

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

27. I'm kicking and recommending because of your post.

MKJ

:kick:

[tom_paine]

28. Yeah, "manage those expectations". Why should the Imperial Subjects of Amerika expect

to be treated by their aristocratic and detatched rulers, as if they/we were Free People.

We aren't. Not at all.

[cascadiance]

33. Amerika! Amerika!

[derby378]

29. I'm sorry - I thought Congress was no longer under Republican control

"New Direction for America," my ass. George W. Bush must be impeached. "Bipartian compromise" with neo-fascism is not an option. George W. Bush must be impeached.

[stimbox]

30. Press conference photo

[Cha]

31. Yeah, whatever..Who's going to

be the last person to die in buSHITS' Misbegotten War On IRAQ?

Certainly not these insiderbeltways.

[cascadiance]

32. We need to get out of this nightmare!...

[rodeodance]

34. ok folks GET ON THE PHONES NOW!

[rodeodance]

35. “A lot is going to depend if we pick up some Republican support, some bipartisan support,” he added

Said another aide involved in the process: “Despite the months of debate, and all the votes, and all the ads and everything, we have not been able to break the Republicans. They are still with Bush, and that’s the reality here.”

The new approach is something of a preemptive strike for Democrats. They anticipate snippets of good news from Army Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, and U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker, when the two officials issue their much-anticipated status report to Congress next week. Democrats are also worried that they may be losing their political edge on the war, especially as a few congressional Democrats have publicly noted the signs of progress after returning from trips to Iraq.

Reid and other top Senate Democrats will focus, for now, on a revised proposal by Sens. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and Jack Reed (D-R.I.) that calls for the United States to begin withdrawing troops within 120 days of passage, but sets no firm date for having all forces out of Iraq.

Designed to attract support from Republican moderates who have so far continued to back Bush’s Iraq policy, the bill sets a “goal” of having the majority of American combat units out of Iraq by early 2008. Levin and Reed had proposed a withdrawal date of April 30, 2008, but Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he and Reed are revising their bill.

“The question is what changes, if anything, in our previous approach could gain some Republican support and whether such changes would be acceptable” to other Democrats, Levin said. “That’s up in the air.”

“A lot is going to depend if we pick up some Republican support, some bipartisan support,” he added.

[ananda]

37. Caving as far and as fast as a..

.. Minnesota bridge.

[Usrename]

38. If Reid and Pelosi loved this war, what would they do differently?

Their behavior does not show any displeasure at all with Bush's war.

In fact, they couldn't really do much more to support him, could they?

Just what could they possibly do that would be better for Bush and his whole agenda.

If they openly supported him, that wouldn't be nearly as effective for making sure his policies are implemented.

It's much better to pretend to be appalled with his ideas, then make sure that the parliamentary tactics are always used to his favor.

[jgraz]

41. They probably wouldn't fundraise on their heroic efforts to stop the war

other than that, pretty much nothing.

[wisteria]

42. Don't believe all the spin. Stop complaining and doing nothing else.

If you are concerned about Democrats buckling then contact them and let them know why it would be a bad idea to give in.

[Usrename]

43. Good idea.

That worked so well last time.. and the time before that.. and the time before that...

[Kolesar]

47. Why don't you put your compendium of cogent letters to Congress up for all of us to see?

Or why not--because you don't have any?

[Usrename]

65. I've posted a couple here before.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=4610792
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=4610776

But I quit wasting the effort after the Alito debacle.

Maybe you have a good explanation.

41 votes were needed to stop his nomination.

42 senators voted that he is not fit for the job.

There he sits.

[OneBlueSky]

44. I think it's pretty clear by now that the Democratic leadership -- . . .

by which I mean Democratic Members of Congress and Senators -- by and large support the long-term U.S. occupation of Iraq . . . and that their protestations to the contrary are merely to mollify the party's rank and file who oppose a permanent U.S. presence there . . .

if they really wanted us out of Iraq, they would have done something to halt the construction of the world's largest embassy in Baghdad . . .

if they really wanted us out of Iraq, they would have aggressively gone after and prosecuted the corporations and individuals who have literally stolen hundreds of billions of dollars from the U.S. Treasury in Iraq . . . and prevented them from continuing to receive even more contracts . . . (many of these same corporations and individuals no doubt contibute generously to their campaign funds) . . .

if they really wanted us out of Iraq, they would have told BushCo that the funding was cut off until a firm plan and date for ending the U.S. occupation was in place . . .

they have done none of these . . . and the only conclusion I can draw is that the vast majority are okay with BushCo's approach, and with the U.S. establishing a permanent presence in Iraq to serve as a regional headquarters for ongoing U.S. operations -- in Iraq, in Iran, in Syria, and throughout the region . . .

their words mean absolutely nothing to me anymore . . . it's only their actions that count, and their actions tell me that their words are generally complete bullshit . . .

[2rth2pwr]

45. Sorry to say it, but you may be right. nt

[Kolesar]

48. Because the public would not support it

if they really wanted us out of Iraq, they would have told BushCo that the funding was cut off until a firm plan and date for ending the U.S. occupation was in place . . .

And this part of your divisive diatribe is just pure bullshit projection:

they have done none of these . . . and the only conclusion I can draw is that the vast majority are okay with BushCo's approach, and with the U.S. establishing a permanent presence in Iraq to serve as a regional headquarters for ongoing U.S. operations -- in Iraq, in Iran, in Syria, and throughout the region . . .

[Raster]

50. pure bullshit projection? What, pray tell, would you infer from this?

If not acceptance, what would you call it?

[Kolesar]

55. You didn't write anything

On a message board, you are supposed to present a thesis of a concept that you advocate for.

[Raster]

61. Message board 101? I think not. Take your digital sneer elsewhere.

[ShortnFiery]

51. It makes sense to me and I'm far from alone.

Suggestion: Vote Out Incumbents for Democracy: http://voidnow.org

The only way we can CHANGE our Beloved Democratic Party to truly represent the people is to VOTE OUT THE WAR-MONGERS and GUTLESS WONDERS! ;)

[Baby Snooks]

52. DINO is as DINO does...

And the DINOs apparently like the war is for the political advantage they claim it gives the party - the only advantage seems to be to highlight their total disconnect from their own party.

DINO is also short for dinosaur. Let's hope some Democrats challenge them and send them off to exinction at the polls.

As for Madame Speaker, well, why wait for an election? Visualize impeachment. Starting with her.

[Kolesar]

54. Impeach Pelosi. I think I have found the pinnacle of Mount Dumbfuckatude today

[ShortnFiery]

57. How lovely.

:eyes:

[Kolesar]

53. Wow. There must have been twenty or thirty people visiting that website

Btw, when are you running for office? I'll sign your petition so you can get on the ballot.

[ShortnFiery]

56. So you prefer to bide your time and believe that "the people" will vote for Incumbents?

There's going to be some shocking results in the 2008 elections, both primary and general.

Trust me, this small group of dedicated people are to be respected, NOT scoffed at.

The ground-swell of profound DISGUST in the existing composition of our Democratic Leadership is in the early processes of emerging - and - when it surfaces ... stand clear! ;)

[trashcanistanista]

79. Yes, if they won't, we CAN do it ourselves.

Primary the Motherf@cker war mongers OUT! Let's organize this and start the ball rolling immediately.:mad:

[Larkspur]

59. This is why I'll support MoveOn.org's proposal to primary spineless and Bush Dog Dems

It's also a major reason why I will not send money to the DCCC and DSCC.

[Perry Logan]

69. The Democrats in Congress are more united in opposing the President than they've been in 50 years.

And that's with only a marginal majority in both houses of Congress. So why all these hissy-snits?

"President Bush's success rating in the Democratic-controlled House has fallen this year to a half-century low, and he prevailed on only 14 percent of the 76 roll call votes on which he took a clear position.

"So far this year, Democrats have backed the majority position of their caucus 91 percent of the time on average on such votes. That marks the highest Democratic unity score in 51 years."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1728952&mesg_id=1728952
http://public.cq.com/docs/cqt/news110-000002576765.html

[polichick]

70. Democrats might as well retreat on their own existence...

...and officially become Republicans.

[Perry Logan]

71. Here's another capitulation. Those swine!

Senate yesterday defied a White House veto threat and overturned “a long-standing ban on U.S. funding for overseas family planning groups that support abortion.” Seven Republicans joined 44 Democrats in reversing the ban, which was first implemented by President Ronald Reagan. President Clinton rescinded it, but it was then reinstated by Bush.
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/09/07/senate-okays-aid-to-overseas-groups-that-support-abortion/

[jmp]

75. Cool! Maybe next they can ...

Look after the interests of Americans.

[polichick]

82. What a novel idea! :) nt

[polichick]

81. They shouldn't even be concerned with such things while...

...we're in this mess. They have real problems to solve ~ like our kids getting their brains blown out, and preventing a new war in Iran. This stuff is just more distraction.

[killbotfactory]

72. The republicans are running down the clock

They know Iraq is fucked, they just want to wait it out until there is a democrat in the Oval Office to blame for all their fuck-up.

[cleveramerican]

73. This is where the ACTUAL solution lies.

You want to end the war? Convince enough republicans your right and it'll happen.
By making it a consensus bill you immunize Democratic candidates against attack in the "cut and run" vein.


This is the direction we should be going in. Kudos to congressional leaders for NOT pandering and just getting on with it.

[jmp]

76. How are you going to convince Republicans to switch ...

When the surge is working? Obviously the surge is working ... otherwise why would the Democratic Congress continue to fund it?

The only thing this so called strategy is going to "solve" is the Democratic majority. Democrats were voted into office to end this mess ... and Nov '08 is fast approaching with no result to show for it. If this war is not ended before then, the Dems will be back out on their keisters.

[LWolf]

83. I'm glad that there were people in the past

who did not think it was futile to attempt to end slavery, to give women the vote, to end "separate but equal," to end the viet nam war. Those are the true heroes. The people who stand firm for what is right and best, those who don't give up because the path is steep or their are obstacles along the way.

There is one Democrat in the primary race who fits this profile, and he will get my vote.

[Visigoth1]

84. Ever notice the media is resembling Officer Barbrady from South Park?

"Move along nothing to see here!"