I know some will be fine with sitting on their hands as Democrats press Iraq withdrawal again

[bigtree]

. . . especially the folks who've been insisting that nothing short of impeachment will move Bush . . . on anything.

However, there is going to be a new round of legislation coming up in the weeks ahead which deserves the support of those who express so much concern about the occupation and the recent escalation. As far as I'm concerned, any compromise which intends to pressure Bush to begin to bring troops home is worth my support.

There are several strategies and proposals which have been recommended - from both inside and outside of Congress - but have failed to get the amount of support needed to advance them into action; from refusing to vote for funding, to using an impeachment to force Bush to withdraw. Those proposals have been heard and deliberated by our legislators when *they caucused. It should be understood that our Democratic leaders decide their course of action under the guidance of their caucuses. They only move forward when they have enough of a consensus among our Democratic majority to proceed.

The Iraq legislation and amendments which will come to the floor of each body in the weeks ahead will represent efforts which have demonstrated enough initial support in our Democratic majority to at least give them a reasonable chance of advancing. They are, in effect, the only game in town.

This next push to force republicans to join our party in challenging Bush to end his occupation should not be dismissed and left to chance. Pining away with apathy, musing endlessly on yet unsupported proposals, while refusing to give support to other efforts underway, is negligent and antithetic to the cause of withdrawal that we all say we want to see happen as soon as possible.

I wouldn't take comfort in the fig leaf that I supported some other proposal, strategy, or initiative as I watched this next important push for a withdrawal struggle against the republican opposition all of our initiatives and efforts are ultimately subject to. We can continue to advocate for whatever we want and still challenge the republicans and the White House to recognize and respond to as much congressional resistance that we can muster.

With our support for the legislation Our Democratic leadership manages to bring enough legislators together to advance to Bush's desk, we can ensure that Bush and the nation recognizes that we stand united against his occupation.


http://journals.democraticunderground.com/bigtree

[Dhalgren]

1. Thanks for the advice...

[bigtree]

3. I always pass on good advice.

It is the only thing to do with it. It is never of any use to oneself. -Wilde

[Horse with no Name]

2. I think your big broad brush is offensive

NOBODY here would NOT want them to get out of Iraq.
BUT UNLESS there is a veto-proof majority, it isn't happening.
One Republican here or there does not the end of the war make.
Those calling for impeachment (of which I am one) do so BECAUSE we don't have enough Republicans on our side and are not likely to get any.
Pity those who trust a Republican. They will ALWAYS line up to the side of the party when push comes to shove. The only ones who will cross the aisle are those who are in political trouble with their constituents. But make no mistake, there will not be ENOUGH of them to make the difference that is needed.

[bigtree]

4. I'm offended by folks who cling to unsupported proposals

as an excuse for not pressing existing Democratic action.

We NEVER used the justification that there would be republican resistance as an excuse for not supporting advancing legislation by pressing legislators with phone calls, e-mails, and other appeals. It seems that, in the majority, a self-defeating apathy has settled in.

[Horse with no Name]

5. You're wrong

But why pass up on a chance at a holier-than-thou moment.
Oh I bow to you Bigtree...you're a better Democrat...a better citizen than I.:sarcasm::puke:

[bigtree]

6. I remember a frenzy here to get Senators to filibuster Alito when we were in the minority

legislation which emerged from our party when we were in the minority wasn't at all assured of even a vote, but that didn't stop us from advocating whatever our leadership could manage enough support for. The only difference here is that we are a breath away from peeling away Bush's republican armor.

Just because a pet proposal, strategy, or action hasn't gained the necessary amount of support to advance it into action shouldn't stop us from pressing Bush and the republicans to accept whatever our majority has managed enough support to advance.

I regret all of the personal offense you've taken to that proposition. I just don't see how folks can justify sitting on their hands and doing nothing but knocking down everything the leadership manages to get support for which falls short of what they personally want to see happen, and then have the gall to tell us how ineffective the effort was. My question to that criticism would be, 'Where were you when we were confronting Bush with the Iraq withdrawal legislation we advanced to his desk? Were you among the constant critics of our party, or did you spend your time pressing the White House and republicans to accept the Democratic legislation which intended to end the occupation and bring the troops home by a date certain?

[Horse with no Name]

7. I've written-snail and email

I've called.
Perhaps you don't know how USELESS it is because my Congressional Reps are Ralph Hall, Kay Bailey Hutchison and John Cornyn.
Needless to say I haven't held my breath at all that they even read my letters.
But that didn't stop me from writing them.
YOU aren't the ONLY one who has done everything they can and the fact that you ACT like you are is totally repugnant.

[bigtree]

8. nowhere have I ever said the things you are accusing me of

good for you for doing essentially what I propose: Maintaining your position while advocating for legislation which manages to gain enough support to advance, but may fall short of your idea of perfection.

But, I don't know why the camping out in offices and staging of hunger strikes which have been directed at our Democrats can't be used against these republican fossils, especially the ones around the country who are facing reelection.


About 50% of the sitting Republican senators face re-election
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2120740,00.html

[BeFree]

9. United?

Why not unite behind impeachment then? If what you say has any bearing on what we do, then why not go a complete press on impeach?

Instead what I see is counter to what you say here. Having trouble making up your mind?

[bigtree]

10. can you manage a coalition in Congress right now for impeachment?

I don't see one. But there is a prospect of pressuring enough republicans into uniting with Democrats on legislation demanding an end to the occupation. To not recognize the difference between gaining enough support for impeachment and plucking off the 11 or so republicans we need for a veto-proof bill would be a tragedy. One ambition doesn't have to trump the other. But, the Iraq measures are pending this week. The majority of Democrats are already behind legislation containing timetables for withdrawal. That supported effort (in our party) shouldn't be brushed aside just because you might think impeachment is the better course. The Iraq matter will be our most immediate challenge. We can't just brush it aside and then have any credibility harping on its ineffectiveness later.


Advocate what you want, for as long as you want, but whatever you propose has to gain enough support in this Congress if it intends to advance into action. Build.

[BeFree]

11. Imagine? Or just prospecting?

One can do both, if one has the mind too.

So I wonder... why diss one?

To be or not to be, that is the question.

Anyhoo, cries for unity while trashing a unifying object seems disingenious at best.

Lead, follow, or get the hell outta the way. Don't you think?

[bigtree]

12. I think that the tendency of proponents right now is to ignore anything short of impeachment

I don't understand why you can't advocate for impeachment and still help our Democrats pass this important legislation.

Democrats in Congress are already united against the occupation. They just need our help in pressuring republicans to put their votes where their crocodile tears over the occupation are. That's the unified response I'm talking about. It's the impeachment or bust folks who are angling for divisions when they advocate for impeachment to the exclusion of everything else which falls short.

The argument is for supporting the legislation which is proceeding. To refuse to get behind that effort and just spend the period of time these bills are presented grousing over their reluctance to impeach, is self-defeating and counterproductive. The desire to impeach can still stand while pressuring Bush to recognize whatever our Democrats manage to advance on an Iraq withdrawal.

You don't have a leg to stand on acting like the drive to impeach will somehow go away if you give this withdrawal effort the same unified support Democrats in Congress have demonstrated in their efforts to pass legislation containing timetables. They shouldn't have to stand alone pressing their case while folks are just satisfied to stand on the outside hollering about impeachment.