Congressional Democrats - stand up to Bush BEFORE he attacks Iran, not afterwards!

[BushOut06]

DO NOT make the same mistake you made with Iraq. They fed us a bunch of lies back then, telling us tall tales about Saddam's "stockpiles" of WMD, showing us his inventory of anthrax, smallpox, VX nerve gas, etc. We were told all about his nuclear ambitions, and his "yellow cake" purchases. We were told that Saddam posed an "imminent threat" to this country. And guess what? With a few exceptions, you enabled this SOB. In your rush to not appear "unpatriotic", you gave this asshole everything he wanted. Heck, you even made your own statements about how dangerous Saddam was.

DO NOT MAKE THE SAME MISTAKE AGAIN! I already see statements from some Democrats about how dangerous Iran is, how we have to prevent them from obtaining nuclear weapons. DEMAND PROOF. Don't simply fall for some ambiguous satellite photos that some CIA analyst has interpreted to support Bush's claims. DO NOT give this president authorization to use force. DO NOT simply look the other way, and then wait until after we're at war with Iran to start making your pious statements. If you enable Bush to carry out military action against Iran, you are every bit as complicit as he is. The blood of American soldiers will be on YOUR hands just as much as on *'s.

[slipslidingaway]

1. K&R NOW is the time! n/t

[old guy]

2. The Dems will never, ever stand up to * on anything.

There is no opposition party.

[Perry Logan]

4. On the contrary--the Democrats showed the highest Democratic unity score in 51 years.

"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

Don't let the media rhetoric fool you. The Democrats have acquitted themselves quite well--especially given their bare majority in both houses, and a relentlessly obstructionist Republican minority.

[BushOut06]

5. Then they should have no problem standing up to Bush on this issue, should they?

I want to see a resolution forbidding the use of force against Iraq without Congressional authorization. Not that Bush would bother listening to it, but we need to make it CLEAR that if he does so, he does so on his own.

[durablend]

7. Fat chance!

Soon as they did that they'd be scolded by the Republicans and forced to apologize

[Perry Logan]

9. Since they stood up to him at historic levels, it's irrational--and weird--to say just the opposite.

And to say it over and over with great emotion. It's bad for morale to repeat memes that are false, and to condemn a party that has done a demonstrably good job. This may be a self-esteem problem of yours rather than an exercise in political perception. But you hurt the party when you fly off the handle like that. Repetition of a falsehood doesn't make it true--except in Wingerland.

Once again:

"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

Don't let the media rhetoric fool you. The Democrats have acquitted themselves quite well--especially given their bare majority in both houses, and a relentlessly obstructionist Republican minority.

[hisownpetard]

3. K&R. Excellent post. nt

[durablend]

6. Don't hold your breath!

Better practice those "duck and cover" manuevers now

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. Another "But, we didn't know it would lead to war" moment is looming.

[slipslidingaway]

10. "Has it happened again, on Iran?" Iran Freedom Support Act

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/1029-23.htm

October 29, 2006

"Four weeks ago, Congress enacted and President Bush signed the Iran Freedom Support Act, a resolution very much in the spirit of the 1998 Iraq Liberation Act. It mandates sanctions against any country aiding Iran's nuclear programs, even those to which that country is legally entitled under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty...

The new law got virtually no coverage in the congressional rush to adjourn and amid the controversy surrounding e-mails between Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.) and teenage boys serving in the House page program. It has been overshadowed since by North Korea's explosion of a nuclear device and the world's debate about how to respond.

But if the confrontation over Iran's alleged nuclear weapons program ends in war — initiated by this administration or the next — you can bet this law will be cited as proof that Congress was onboard all along.

The congressional action isn't the only sign of déjà vu. Recent months have seen the creation of an "Iran directorate" at the Pentagon, using some of the same personnel as the Office of Special Plans, the shadowy Pentagon outfit led by former Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas J. Feith that was accused of massaging raw intelligence on Iraq to make the case for war look far more solid than in fact it was..."



H.R. 6198, Iran Freedom Support Act, to hold the current regime in Iran accountable for its threatening behavior and to support a transition to democracy in Iran

http://www.kucinichforcongress.com/floor_speeches/iran_not_threat28sep.php

Sep 28, 2006

"Speaking in opposition to H.R. 6198, the Iran Freedom Support Act, Congressman Kucinich said:

Mr. Speaker, it is important to go back a little bit in history here. The Iraq Accountability Act of 1998 was about funding a media propaganda machine which was, unfortunately, used to lay the groundwork for a war against Iraq. That act was about encouraging and funding opposition inside Iraq, unfortunately, to destabilize Iraq prior to a war.

"You could call this bill the 'Iran Accountability Act.' This act funds media propaganda machines to lay the groundwork for a war against Iran. It encourages and funds opposition inside Iran for that same purpose.

"Notwithstanding what the words are in this bill, we have been here before. This Administration is trying to create an international crisis by inflating Iran's nuclear development into an Iraq-type WMD hoax. 'Iran is not an imminent threat'; this, from Dr. Hans Blitz, former Chief U.N. Weapons Inspector, speaking to our congressional oversight subcommittee the other day."

[yodermon]

11. Except now that Val. Plame's CPD network has been assassinated,

the door is wide open for "elements" in Iran to acquire WMDs from the Khan/Cheney black market.

A false flag attack will be staged, and every red-blooded Democrat in the nation, including many on this board, will fall in line behind a retaliatory attack on Iran, perhaps nuclear.

HRC will be the symbolic leader of this attack because bush and the repuke party have been marginalized as unprofitable by the Corporations and Corporate media cartel, and she is their assumed de facto president.

Just my take.