Saturday, September 22, 2007
Why Hammering Pelosi And Reid From The Left Is Counterproductive
Despite the anger from the left over the Dems' inability to end the war, as long as an intractable preznut has 41 senators willing to vote w/ him in the Senate on the war, the war will not end.
The Webb amendment was the best shot to end the war. It failed - only garnering 57 votes on the cloture motion.
John Warner, the so-called moderate Repub who looks out for the military men and women, voted against it.
Instead of calling him on his bullshit, the media ignored the vote and focused on the idiotic Move On vote instead.
Reid clearly should have never let the Move On vote come up. But my point is that as long as hypocrites like John Warner and Dick Lugar are unwilling to put their votes where their war criticism is and the media is unwilling to call them on their hypocrisy, NOTHING will change.
Hammering Dems for their inability to end the war only sets up an '08 where Repubs will be in the resurgence.
Not sure why anybody who's against the war would want that, but as I watch the criticism from the anti-war left hammer Pelosi and Reid, I think that's what's going to happen.
Think the war is going to end when Rudy is president and McConnell is running the Senate?
If the left keeps bashing Dems as weak and ineffectual, we'll all find out.
POSTSCRIPT: Repubs aren't very good at running occupations, nation-building or governing here at home, but they are good at
1. Message Discipline
2. Propaganda
3. Following their leaders
As Dems and liberals eat their own over the war and the inability of Reid to get 60 senators to vote against the war in a 51/49 Senate (and remember, Holy Joe Lieberman is one of the 51), I can't help but think Dems could use just a little bit of the above skills in this battle to end the war.
The Webb amendment was the best shot to end the war. It failed - only garnering 57 votes on the cloture motion.
John Warner, the so-called moderate Repub who looks out for the military men and women, voted against it.
Instead of calling him on his bullshit, the media ignored the vote and focused on the idiotic Move On vote instead.
Reid clearly should have never let the Move On vote come up. But my point is that as long as hypocrites like John Warner and Dick Lugar are unwilling to put their votes where their war criticism is and the media is unwilling to call them on their hypocrisy, NOTHING will change.
Hammering Dems for their inability to end the war only sets up an '08 where Repubs will be in the resurgence.
Not sure why anybody who's against the war would want that, but as I watch the criticism from the anti-war left hammer Pelosi and Reid, I think that's what's going to happen.
Think the war is going to end when Rudy is president and McConnell is running the Senate?
If the left keeps bashing Dems as weak and ineffectual, we'll all find out.
POSTSCRIPT: Repubs aren't very good at running occupations, nation-building or governing here at home, but they are good at
1. Message Discipline
2. Propaganda
3. Following their leaders
As Dems and liberals eat their own over the war and the inability of Reid to get 60 senators to vote against the war in a 51/49 Senate (and remember, Holy Joe Lieberman is one of the 51), I can't help but think Dems could use just a little bit of the above skills in this battle to end the war.
Comments:
<< Home
I think the war is going to end when it runs its course, no matter who is president and who controls Congress. And I think we'll have troops in Iraq for decades.
Where it seems we differ is that I don't believe the Democrats are substantially different than the Republicans. They're two sides of the same coin. Sure, policies will be nudged slightly in one direction or the other, depending on who is in power. But to say that we have to prop up the current-day Democrats because they are our only alternative to the republicans just perpetuates the system that has brought us to were we are today.
We need fundamental change in our political system. Continuing to maintain the status quo guarantees we won't get it.
Where it seems we differ is that I don't believe the Democrats are substantially different than the Republicans. They're two sides of the same coin. Sure, policies will be nudged slightly in one direction or the other, depending on who is in power. But to say that we have to prop up the current-day Democrats because they are our only alternative to the republicans just perpetuates the system that has brought us to were we are today.
We need fundamental change in our political system. Continuing to maintain the status quo guarantees we won't get it.
# posted by 
: 1:56 PM
: 1:56 PM
I agree that troops will stay in Iraq no matter who is president.
I do believe there is a fundamental difference between the two parties, however.
Repubs will look to hit Iran next.
Guaranteed.
Rudy is George W. on steroids. He believes his own bullshit, thinks he's tougher than leather and wants to show the rest of the world just how "tough" and "crazy" he is.
Give Rudy a Repub senate and you'll really see him go apeshit.
It is VERY important that Dems maintain some semblance of electability to combat that nightmare scenario.
Also, the Supreme Court.
This last court was so wingy and w/ Stevens 86 years old, we're just one stroke away from the complete dismantling of any semblance of a liberal state by Roberts, Scalito, Scalia, et al.
I guess I'm just trying to take a long view of this.
The war is horrible. No question.
But so will be the complete repeal of abortion rights, the entire dismantling of Brown vs. the BOE etc. if another Repub gets to pick two or three Supreme Court justices.
I do believe there is a fundamental difference between the two parties, however.
Repubs will look to hit Iran next.
Guaranteed.
Rudy is George W. on steroids. He believes his own bullshit, thinks he's tougher than leather and wants to show the rest of the world just how "tough" and "crazy" he is.
Give Rudy a Repub senate and you'll really see him go apeshit.
It is VERY important that Dems maintain some semblance of electability to combat that nightmare scenario.
Also, the Supreme Court.
This last court was so wingy and w/ Stevens 86 years old, we're just one stroke away from the complete dismantling of any semblance of a liberal state by Roberts, Scalito, Scalia, et al.
I guess I'm just trying to take a long view of this.
The war is horrible. No question.
But so will be the complete repeal of abortion rights, the entire dismantling of Brown vs. the BOE etc. if another Repub gets to pick two or three Supreme Court justices.
There's no simple answer to this. And I guess I'm naive enough to believe a slimeball like Giuliani can't get the nomination. If he did, I'd have to rethink my position.
Post a Comment
# posted by : 11:08 PM
: 11:08 PM << Home
