![]() |
|
|
June 2, 2007 at 01:11:21
Iraq, Democrats and the Art of the Possible by Bennet Kelley Page 1 of 1 page(s) |
|
|
(From Huffington Post) It is often said that politics is the art of the possible. Yet, the current torrent of rage over last week's compromise on Iraq funding ironically blames the Democrats for seizing the possible at the expense of the impossible in a classic example of making the perfect the enemy of the good. In their fury, anti-war critics mistakenly equate a tactical retreat with total capitulation and fail to recognize the substantial progress Democrats have made in their five months in power. The starting point for any assessment of this compromise should be June 22, 2006 when the Senate rejected a resolution on troop withdrawal in what was the only vote on Iraq policy in either house that year. In fact, except for attacking Democrats for wanting to "cut and run," the Republican Congress was essentially silent on Iraq last year. In contrast, there have been at least the 14 votes on Iraq (including the passage and subsequent veto of the Iraq Accountability Act setting a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq) during the first five months of the Democratic Congress. With each vote, Congressional Republicans are forced to choose between defending the President and their own political viability; which may explain why they have abandoned their "stay the course" rhetoric and are now marching to the White House warning the President that time is running out. As Sun Tzu explains in the Art of War, to achieve victory a general must choose his battles carefully. "One defends when his strength is inadequate; he attacks when it is abundant." While they may have public opinion on their side in seeking a timetable, the reality is that, since they are 68 votes shy of a veto-proof majority in the House and 15 votes in the Senate, the Democrats simply lack the ability to impose a timetable for withdrawal at this time. Although the compromise's lack of a timetable may be a tactical retreat, it is far from a blank check for the President as critics contend since, as Senate Majority Leader Reid noted, it begins "the process of holding this President and the Iraqis accountable." Specifically, in exchange for an additional four months of funding for Iraq operations the compromise requires the President to report on 18 separate benchmarks for the Iraqi government and redeploy U.S. troops should the Iraqi government conclude our presence is no longer desired, prohibits torture of detainees, and contains substantial increases in funding for Katrina relief and homeland security plus the first increase in the minimum wage in ten years. By requiring the Bush administration to report on progress on key benchmarks, Democrats have framed the debate for the next round of Iraq funding in September. Coincidentally, this is about the time when both General Petraeus indicated that the surge's effectiveness could be assessed and leading Republicans have set as a deadline for improvement in Iraq before seeking a "Plan B." Absent some dramatic reversal of conditions in Iraq, Democrats will be in a much stronger position to impose conditions for withdrawal at that time since Republican defections will be certain to increase as the debate shifts to "Plan B". What supporters of the compromise and their critics each fail to recognize is the extent to which each side is right. Anti-war critics must remember that by denouncing Democrats as "cowards" or even "evil," they are falling victim to the same myopia which bought into Ralph Nader's claim in 2000 that there was no difference between Al Gore and George Bush that helped "elect" Bush in the first place. In this case, I seriously doubt that the 7.3 million working Americans who will now have an additional $4,368 per year to spend on necessities view their benefactors as either "cowards" or "evil." In addition, if anti-war critics are to be relevant in this debate they must deal in the realm of the possible and recognize what Edmund Burke noted over two centuries ago - "[a]ll government, indeed every human benefit and enjoyment, every virtue, and every prudent act, is founded on compromise and barter." While some anti-war critics have responded to the compromise by embracing Rep. Kucinich as a moral giant amongst Democratic dwarves, the fact is that even if every Democrat followed Kucinich's lead they would still lack the votes to impose a timetable for withdrawal. Anti-war critics must recognize that it is patience and compromise, not ideological purity, which ultimately will win the additional votes needed to extricate our troops from this disaster. At the same time, Democrats must recognize the extent to which they are still judged for their pusillanimous record over the past six years, as a search of leading newspapers yields 94 articles over the past three years in which "Democrats" and "backbone" were used in the same sentence. With approximately two-thirds of Americans supporting linking Iraq funding to meeting certain benchmarks, anti-war critics are justified in expecting bold action from the Democrats -- particularly against a President with such dismal approval ratings. While courage and leadership alone will not make the impossible suddenly possible, the fact remains that the impossible can never be achieved without it. Biden said during a meeting with Des Moines Register reporters and editors on Tuesday that he voted for the funding bill largely because it contained funding for new armored vehicles that will better resist roadside bombs. He said 70 percent of U.S. deaths and casualties are caused by these explosive devices, and the new vehicles could reduce that by two-thirds. "I find it absolutely unconscionable that I would delay, to make a point, a week to two to a month, the construction of these vehicles," he said. Biden said, "I knew the right political move. I didn't have any doubt about the right political vote, but there are some things worth losing elections over, for gosh sakes. I could not remotely, in good conscience," vote to delay production of the vehicles.
www.bennetkelley.com
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
View Authors' Articles |
|
| 39 comments |
|
The perfect the enemy of the good?
This is a sad apologia for an almost total rout of the Dem leadership by Bush and Co. on the war. The pernicious phrase 'making the perfect the enemy of the good' is invoked here to tar the antiwar movement once again, as if supporting international law and the constitution was some kind of call for perfection. If you mother is killed and the perpetrator is allowed to go free, your insistence that justice be done is not a matter of calling for the perfect; it is a matter of simple, elementary human rights. It's easy to sit in front of a computer and pontificate about war critics going too far, heaven forbid. Calling for an end to a war of aggression and torture and gross violations of the Constitution by this administration is no more than a call to return to civilized behavior. If we are supposed to compromise about this, we're lost. Where's the outrage here? Edmund Burke's conservatism, by the way, was about preserving habits and customs which survived the test of time, things like habeas corpus. It's the Bush administration which is radical and destructive here. It's the Bush administration which seeks an outrageous perfection, one of unaccountable power. Why this piece is the lead article on OpEd News is beyond me. by Kuzminski (6 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 93 comments) on Saturday, Jun 2, 2007 at 7:23:21 AM
|
|
Reply: For the most part, I agree
by John R Moffett (89 articles, 18 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 697 comments [14 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jun 2, 2007 at 8:40:20 AM
|
|
War is Peace
"Tactical retreat"? Is that what we voted for? Maybe I'm just not educated enough to understand all the nuances involved with politics, war and governance. I'm just a simple person that can't quite understand how adding more troops to a conflict that I view as a crime against all known charters and treaties as a blatant crime of aggression and is costing us our fortune, honor and the lives of the best we have. Perhaps I'm not just smart enough to grasp how with a vast majority of the people behind them and with a president with a popularity no higher than fresh-cut grass why a congress denied the will of their constituents and instead of putting pressure to end this crime against humanity and place those responsible for all the destruction, war-profiteering and the murder of nearly one-million people on trial and instead did just the opposite. Yeah, maybe we're as Kissinger once said, that this is too important to leave up to the people to decide. Or maybe this is just more apologist, vacillating, bullshit we're suppose to believe and that we're to think black is white and up is down and as long as they keep dangling that carrot in front of our faces we'll be lead into the peace we seek just as soon as we win this war. I realize the forces we face are powerful. But if we've reached the point where a majority of the people wishes are trumped by a war machine and corporations that have no place in our Constitution then we're also way past the point when we should have shed the shackles of this repressive government and no amount of explanation given can change that. When the State takes over the corporations that's Communism. When the corporations take over the State that's Fascism. by Mr M (8 articles, 0 quicklinks, 66 diaries, 2845 comments [654 recommended, 27 rejected]) on Saturday, Jun 2, 2007 at 8:44:57 AM
|
|
I would encourage Mr. Kelley...
Mr. Biden, and others of like mind, to get their ass over to Iraq. Likewise, I would encourage any soldier to quit while he or she can. And any other young man or women to get a life that does not include killing others. by Daniel Geery (26 articles, 95 quicklinks, 126 diaries, 912 comments [27 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jun 2, 2007 at 9:02:07 AM
|
|
Reply: Yes, and...
I would encourage everyone who is mad... no incensed… about the war to actually do something about it. If you're not doing anything active, you can't really complain. by John R Moffett (89 articles, 18 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 697 comments [14 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jun 2, 2007 at 9:23:44 AM
|
|
Reply: Mr. Moffett ...
It would seem I would give political-junkies that would take the time to be in forums like this the benefit of the doubt that they also would be of like mind and participate in all, if not some of what you encourage. Everyone in here is probably doing most all they can for the cause. But like Ms. Sheehan we have our humane limitations. But I don't fault you for raging at the dying of the light. by Mr M (8 articles, 0 quicklinks, 66 diaries, 2845 comments [654 recommended, 27 rejected]) on Saturday, Jun 2, 2007 at 11:58:24 AM
|
|
Reply: Now that you mention it
Joe Biden has been to Iraq at least 7 times during the war, Senator Max Baucus lost a nephew in the war and Senator Jim Webb's son is serving there now. All three supported the compromise. Where would be in September 2007? Or stated differently, do you think Mohammed Ali should have gone toe-to-toe with George Foreman in the famous "Rumble in the Jungle" instead of using the rope-a-dope to wear Foreman out? Ali (who was the underdog against the powerful Foreman) stayed in the fight but waited for the right moment to unleash. The Democrats have adopted a similar approach and it is only a matter of time before Republicans hit the canvas. by Bennet Kelley (15 articles, 2 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 7 comments) on Saturday, Jun 2, 2007 at 11:28:41 AM
|
|
Reply: Reasoned, but ...
Reasoned until you used the boxing analogy. And one more thing. Anyone paying any attention knows we've run out of time and like titanic plates releasing pressure built over millions of years snaps and transforms all life on Earth is an instant is the precipice we find ourselves. Maybe, and that's a very weak "maybe", if we had started doing something about Global Warming, population explosion and pollution at the same time as the Industrial Revolution got started we could have forestalled the inevitable. But we haven't and all the mini-steps taken really don't mean sh*t to a tree. WE RUN OUT OF TIME. And after we've annihilated ourselves and we're ground-up into magma and spit out again to the surface of the Earth and are fortunate to try to get it right the next time one can only hope we do it right the next time. by Mr M (8 articles, 0 quicklinks, 66 diaries, 2845 comments [654 recommended, 27 rejected]) on Saturday, Jun 2, 2007 at 2:17:53 PM
|
|
The lesser of two evils is actually one and the same.
Americans are trapped in a corrupt political system where our choices are apparently limited to choosing between the lesser of two evils, but our choices are actuality limited to choosing between the two heads of one snake. And that snake is the Military Industrial Congressional Complex. The owners of the Military Industrial Congressional Complex are our de facto rulers, and they have been since World War II. The politicians we elect don’t determine or make national policy, they merely carry out instructions issued by their masters, the owners of the Military Industrial Congressional Complex. Actually the MICC should be called the Military Industrial Congressional Media Complex because the Monopoly Media is the propaganda arm of the MICC. This diabolical union of interlocking conglomerate corporations is owned by the richest one or two per cent of our population. These richest one or two per cent of our population define and determine our “National Interests,” which amazingly always seems to coincide with their own self-interest. That’s what we call “Democracy” here in America. . by rabblerowzer (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 227 comments) on Saturday, Jun 2, 2007 at 9:19:03 AM
|
|
Well put
Indeed the one reason we're not seeing the prosecution of obvious crimes against the Constitution, Bill of Rights and virtually every other common-sense law passed by reasonable thinking people before those ruthless and wealthy enough, you need to two to Tango, gained control of the distribution of life sustaining resources and 90% of the message, we, and the world, became basically screwed. I don't see any good coming from any of this. The last World War obviously taught us nothing. The last 20 to 30-odd thousand years obviously didn't either. The MICMC, as you put it, will like the last group of thugs that almost bombed civilization back to the Stone-Age, before being brought to justice, will unleash another "Scorched Earth Doom's Day" policy. Only this time they have the nasty little toys, at their willing, quivering fingertips to finish the job. It's got to the point that I hope there are such things as UFOs and somehow they have been keeping tabs, and like Ray Bradbury's "Childhoods End", intervenes in what seems to me a self-fulfilling prophecy of our species to have the stupidity to trump intelligence in a race to an extinction both foreseen and therefore preventable, made inevitable. by Mr M (8 articles, 0 quicklinks, 66 diaries, 2845 comments [654 recommended, 27 rejected]) on Saturday, Jun 2, 2007 at 11:45:16 AM
|
|
"[I]t is only a matter of time...
before Republicans hit the canvas." I certainly hope you're right. by Daniel Geery (26 articles, 95 quicklinks, 126 diaries, 912 comments [27 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jun 2, 2007 at 11:59:57 AM
|
|
Reply: You Have a Way of. . .
. . . cutting through the crap, Daniel. With this comment and the one above, you do what almost nobody in America does -- ask members of the military and prospective parents of members of the military to accept some personal responsibility for their actions or lack thereof. Helping your child to find other options than enlisting or if he or she is already in the service, refusing to pull the trigger. by Russ Wellen (58 articles, 1029 quicklinks, 66 diaries, 335 comments) on Sunday, Jun 3, 2007 at 2:32:08 AM
|
|
Bingo rabblerowzer! 3TU
but as Moffett pointed out lack of courage is not limited to congress. by HL Bumpkin (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 53 comments) on Saturday, Jun 2, 2007 at 12:03:24 PM
|
|
Republocrats is a better name
for the one party system we currently have, that operates the 2 fake wings, the Dems and the Reps, in cooperation with the MSM (6 megacorps own almost all the outlets) and most of corporate America and the elite investor class. They think they're superior and entitled, even obligated, to lie to the People, whose rights governments are instituted to protect, because we can't handle the truth about world affairs. Actually, it's them that can't handle the truth, which is why they lie and run like cockroaches when light is shed on their parasitic, criminal activities. After the Iraq War and 9/11 lies, the People are waking up to this infection of our government, press and economy, and we are using the new technologies like the internet to level the playing field, against the will of the ruling elite, who are not needed, let alone fit, to rule. by Better World Order (4 articles, 568 quicklinks, 39 diaries, 1111 comments [56 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Saturday, Jun 2, 2007 at 12:08:37 PM
|
|
and one more thing
the author/shill said that Nader helped Bush win; Gore won; the Supreme Court stopped the recount and the left wing of the Republocrats rolled over and certified the election. Screw Gore anyway- he's the criminal that helped ram NAFTA thru Congress, which has resulted in massive net wage decreases/job losses on both sides of the border, and is responsible for the increase in immigration. by Better World Order (4 articles, 568 quicklinks, 39 diaries, 1111 comments [56 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Saturday, Jun 2, 2007 at 12:13:16 PM
|
|
Contemptible BS from a Dem Party apologist
No lie -- up to and including "War is Peace" -- is beneath the shamelessness of Dem Party hacks like Mr Kelley. His thoroughly dishonest piece here is a lie from start to finishing, including the outrageous assertions that Nader cost Gore the '00 election, & that "the reality is that...the Democrats simply lack the ability to impose a timetable for withdrawal at this time." The truth is that they lack only the will, not the "ability." The voting mechanics required no "veto-proof majority." All they had to do was refuse to give Bush the money. If a unified Dem majority passed only bills with no money to continue the war, Bush could veto to his heart's content, but it wouldn't make the money magically appear. No money, no war. Game over. Mr rabblerowzer has it exactly right, above, in his remarks on the Military Industrial Congressional Media Complex. Lying hacks like Bennet Kelley get paid simply to keep the Dem-voting half of the population confused; to breed in them silly illusions in the terminally corrupt Democratic Party. In the raw sewage of this article, Kelley tells readers that black is white -- that a thoroughly loathesome capitulation by the Democrats should be regarded as a clever tactical maneuver, & as a sign of progress. by Richard Mynick (2 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 1552 comments [255 recommended, 5 rejected]) on Saturday, Jun 2, 2007 at 1:26:59 PM
|
|
Insanity is doing same, expecting different results
John Moffett asks why peace activists aren't out marching in the streets to protest this latest cowardly cave in by Congress. He says the peace movement is lazy, and that in order for Democrats to take a stronger stand, they need to see larger and more visible support for ending the war. Well Democrats saw the vote results in 2006 and they know it was a demand to end the war, they've seen the repeated polls, call-ins, letters, petitions, they've seen countless marches and demonstrations (don't forget the huge protests before the war began). We are hoarse from shouting our demands. How long does it take for us to see that our words aren't sufficient to motivate them to act. The only thing they care about is our votes (which they think we are afraid to withhold), and our campaign contributions. If the Democrats want to redeem themselves, they need to put Bush on notice NOW, that there will be NO Iraq funding legislation offered in September, period! (no votes to compromise on, nothing to veto). They should tell Bush there is plenty of money in the pipeline now for an orderly phased withdrawal and they'd better begin it. In addition, they should commence serious hearings NOW, with subpoena power, to investigate and expose all the countless illegal activities of Bush-Cheney, and follow this with IMPEACHMENT - thus demonstrating to the country that the Democrats are the Party that stands for the rule of law and defenders of the Constitution and democracy. But will they do these things? No. Because they have instead demonstrated to us that they are just the other leg, along with the Republicans, of the same corporatist pair of trousers. Instead of more peace marches, perhaps peace activists should shift their time, energy, and money toward promoting and supporting anti-war challengers to all the spineless Democratic incumbents in the coming Primaries. And when we call and write the Democratic leadership, perhaps we should give them a new message: tell them they have lost our votes and our money. Tell them we will NOT be voting for Democrats in 2008! - unless they cut the war funding, relinquish the permanent bases, bring the troops home, and commence with Impeachment proceedings! Send them a voided check too, telling them this is what they would have received from us if they had demonstrated some spine. by my2cents (0 articles, 5 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 30 comments) on Saturday, Jun 2, 2007 at 1:53:26 PM
|
|
Reply: Agreed, but...
But waiting for the next election IS the lazy thing to do. More will be killed or maimed. by John R Moffett (89 articles, 18 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 697 comments [14 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jun 2, 2007 at 2:45:03 PM
|
|
Reply: Shouldn't our votes be enough?
Not to be naive, in a prefect world, shouldn't our votes be enough to dictate policy that our representatives are suppose to follow? Why do we, at this stage in our evolution, have to demonstrate or overthrow our government to affect change? One of the things that I blame the war-opposition movement on is not forming "general strikes". General strikes, unlike demonstrations require little effort and can have a direct and immediate impact. Combined with the Internet and networking of the anti-war sites millions of people could focus their energy on a cause. Get 3 million people to stop buying gas at Exxon, and watch how fast policy changes. Boycott GE products and we'd have the troops home by October Fest. But I see, like in the past, co-ordinate efforts by the Fascist State to keep these kinds of efforts from happening. But that is still no excuse. We have the power to effect change, we have the will, we just need a co-ordinated effort. by Mr M (8 articles, 0 quicklinks, 66 diaries, 2845 comments [654 recommended, 27 rejected]) on Saturday, Jun 2, 2007 at 2:49:58 PM
|
|
That Nader comment topped it all
Long live war, warmongers, their defenders and coherts. (not) These videos were made for guys like Kelly so they can be proud of the military industrial congressional complex; youtube code : 6vS-Db9yT3c parts 2 & 3 can be found there as well. Boom ! War is fun, he he , he he. What a butthead. by Tony Forest (7 articles, 18 quicklinks, 166 diaries, 1429 comments [5 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jun 2, 2007 at 1:57:34 PM
|
|
this is sophistry
The truth is that a significant majority are against the war -- and everyone knows that, Democrats and DLC included. What the Democrats are practicing is not politics, but obstructionism. Perhaps if one is raising a toddler one needs to constantly tell the kid not to not to throw his applesauce on the cat, but unless we are to think that Congress is composed of people with the mentallity of a two year old then it becomes obvious they voted to fund the war because they want to fund the war -- to listen to the corporate fascists and other war-mongers who support them instead of the people. Nothing is possible unless one decides to do it. "But Mommy, I don't know how not to throw apple sauce on the cat. I didn't do it -- the apple sauce went through the air onto the cat. Ellie told me to throw it on the cat so I had to. The cat likes apples sauce on her." On and on and on... the Democrats -- all the politicans -- need a lomg timeout! Let's get real! by Blue Pilgrim (0 articles, 3 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 997 comments) on Saturday, Jun 2, 2007 at 1:58:45 PM
|
|
Reply: You know it!
And fiber -- lots of fiber. But fascism is constipating -- just look at what's happened to the Democrats... by Blue Pilgrim (0 articles, 3 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 997 comments) on Saturday, Jun 2, 2007 at 2:30:06 PM
|
|
Reply: BTW -- if want the facts...
Go to VFCN Iraq and Afghanistan Supplemental Spending 2008 and read and/or listen to (or download) the presentation. I suggest listening to speech which has some extra comments. by Blue Pilgrim (0 articles, 3 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 997 comments) on Saturday, Jun 2, 2007 at 2:27:47 PM
|
|
Like I said, stop complaining, and start dialing...
Call Congress Monday, and let them know that you are not pleased. by John R Moffett (89 articles, 18 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 697 comments [14 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jun 2, 2007 at 2:50:29 PM
|
|
quibbling over details
You say that the dems didn't have the votes to pass a bill that would require a phased withdrawal and that's true. But they DID have the power to block funding, period. That's the power a principled, functionally spined congress DOES have-- the power to block funding for the war. BTW, do a search for democrats and spineless and you come up with over 300,000 hits. You are right that dems have done some of the things they said they would, but mostly, you're talking technicalities. Oh, yes. They passed the minimum wage-- not living wage-- legislation, at the cost of giving up their control over the budget. But what a price they paid. They now OWN the war. The Republicans will blame them for any outcome other than what they define as a win. The dems were afraid to be spun, over the break, as failing to support the troops, so they passed this spineless sellout bill. But they failed to realize that they bought a delay and even worse spin-- that their funding and micromanagement of the war interfered with Bush's ability to win the war. Bottom line-- the Dems did and still do have the power to stop the war-- not with a time schedule, but with the hard refusal to fund the war, period, until Bush comes around. They didn't have the spine to do it. by Rob Kall (952 articles, 4177 quicklinks, 374 diaries, 2087 comments [45 recommended, 3 rejected]) on Saturday, Jun 2, 2007 at 3:38:01 PM
|
|
People...
I, the local group, other groups -- we've demonstrated, met with politicians, hold vigils, marched, called, written letters to papers, had teach-ins -- but those in power have decided that be ignored. Yes -- it's time to General Strikes. But it's still a matter of having enough people participating, and it seems that building numbers like that takes time (although less time now than in the past). There are still many people who may be opposed to the war, but often for the wrong reasons (such as not winning), and who still understand the situation or what has happened. The main obstacle to peace is still the mass media and propaganda -- they are like infantry and an artillary barrage on information and understanding. At the root of all this it's a war on information and concept. This article right here is disinformation and obfuscation, intentional or no. Of COURSE if the Democrats wanted to they could have stopped the passage of a funding bill. A simple majority can do that, not even considering a filibuster in the Senate which would have required 60% vote for cloture, holds, and other possibilities. Saying a veto-proof majority is needed is simply not the case: just NOT passing a bill. It could probably have been blocked in committee. At the least it could have been strongly resisted, as only a handful have done. As been pointed out, this is not a bill about continuing a farm subsidy or education program, but about continuing war crimes -- crimes against humanity. Those who voted for this bill are complicit in the worst crimes in the world -- in aggressive war, the willful destruction of a nation, in the mass murder of as many as a million people or more. The people of this nation need to understand that in no uncertain terms. by Blue Pilgrim (0 articles, 3 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 997 comments) on Saturday, Jun 2, 2007 at 3:49:39 PM
|
|
beginning where you are
Everytime I get my hopes up that America is FINALLY waking up from the nightmare of denial that: (1.) America is 100% a Dictatorship of the Rich (2.) We have a ONE party system -- the Democratic/Republican Party (or visa versa) which are the court jesters of the 1% American Royalty (of both parties!) But then a piece like this cmes along and offf we go again into la la land and congradulagte ourselves for having a party which has abandoned rationality, ethics, and their constitutents. WE HAVE NO ADVOCATES. God in heaven, how many more rastionalizations away of this fact are we going to have to read. Things aren't going sort of OK with a sort of OK Democratic Party. We are rapidly dying as a country and planet and the alleged Democratic Partiy is now and always has been more part of the problem than the solution. As was earlier pointed out the nefarious military indestrial complex (alias America's Dictatorship of the Rich) is America's God. Maybe a grassroots uprising with boycotts and demonstrations will slow our fall into hell, but the LAST thing on planet Earth which will save America is the Democratic/Republican Party. So pLease, please, please, No more faiiry tales. No more "let's count our blessings". The only blessing we have to count is killer realism. No more whilstling in the dark. The dark's not listening. We are on our own. We do not have advocates. We do not have a political party. This is called beginning where your are. by W. Christopher Epler (Bill) (291 articles, 59 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 763 comments [44 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jun 2, 2007 at 4:49:36 PM
|
|
The Two-Party Sham Democracy
There needs to be a political realignment and the elimination of this phony left-right paradigm that has prevailed and served as a facade for the dismantling of the middle class, the implementation of a police state and the selling off of our infrastructure to the hightest foreign bidder. Enough is enough and it's time to issue a wake up call - we are all on the SAME SIDE and it is against the oligarchy, enough is enough and any acknowledgement of the current DLC Democrat/Republican Neocon alliance as one of legitimacy serves nobody but them. Throw ALL of the bastards out, then haul their asses in front of a jury where they will be tried for treason and then imprisoned in their beloved GITMO. Just my two cents EE by Ed Encho (12 articles, 20 quicklinks, 65 diaries, 438 comments [14 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jun 2, 2007 at 6:11:08 PM
|
|
Dems are doing good work?
URGENT! URGENT! URGENT! by LYNNE KRINGLER (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 70 comments) on Saturday, Jun 2, 2007 at 6:19:29 PM
|
|
The Grand ole Corporate Party
Welcome aboard ! Please do take a seat. Sorry, would the half of you please sit on this side ? And the remainder ...o'er here please. Thank you very much ! Now we're in balance ! go to dogpile, search for styx grand illusion click on he very 1st mp3 The Grand Illusion writen by Dennis Deyoung "Welcome to the grand illusion by Tony Forest (7 articles, 18 quicklinks, 166 diaries, 1429 comments [5 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jun 2, 2007 at 7:15:51 PM
|
|
OK, Everyone is mad, now what are you going to do?
OK, Everyone is mad, now what are you going to do? by John R Moffett (89 articles, 18 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 697 comments [14 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jun 2, 2007 at 7:15:54 PM
|
|
Reply: write my congressman !
What esle ? He can read, can he not ? In memory of Berthold Brecht...... I shall NOT mention the "S" word, ...... yet by Tony Forest (7 articles, 18 quicklinks, 166 diaries, 1429 comments [5 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jun 2, 2007 at 7:20:06 PM
|
|
maybe activism isn't enough
I know if I were an elected representative, I would tell constituents that emails, letters and phone calls really make a difference and I give my full attention to them. I would tell my constituents this even if the letters went in the trash unread, the emails got deleted and the phone calls were intercepted by my staff under orders to not bother me with them unless someone I know died. I know from my involvment in politics that the same people tend to contact our electeds over and over thereby giving them another reason to ignore these communications. It seems to me that if our electeds are as corrupted by money and power as I believe they are, why on earth would these communications make any difference in the electeds actions? For me the only activities that make sense are ones that will change the current system into one that will make our elected officials accountable to the people and not to the special interests. Therefore I volunteer my time and give money to an organization that is working on getting the "clean election" system of campaign finance reform passed. More so than a strong antiwar movement, we need a strong campaign finance movement. All and I mean all of our current political problems can potentially be fixed by creating a system where we are actually represented, rather than keep trying to change the behavior of elected officials who don't in fact represent us at all. by John F Howes CPA (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 28 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Saturday, Jun 2, 2007 at 7:54:24 PM
|
|
clean election laws
Well put BT your right the clean election laws are a good first step in stemming the of corporate graft that now dominates our system. Then the focus need to address the laws that enabled cooperations to be given the same rights under the constitution as an individual. As corporations have, as can be readily verified buy their multinational propensity, have no allegiance to any one nation under god or other wise. Then Electronic voting needs to be eliminated thus taking another tool away from the corporate Nazis. by Keith Hupp (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 23 comments) on Sunday, Jun 3, 2007 at 12:20:31 AM
|
|
Lessons Learned
Thank you for your spirited comments. To recap, it would appear that even if someone has been an outspoken critic of the Bush administration and opposed the war from Day 1 - should they disagree with you on this one issue of providing an additional 4 months of funding for the war - they are by definition a warmonger, fascist, criminal butthead. This is true, even though the approach advocated in these comments would yield a standoff that by September would be no closer to bringing our troops home than the compromise so vigorously denounced today -- but with no increased minimum wage or increased funding for Katrina or homeland security. This is hardly a recipe for a building a broad coalition to actually achieve a tangible result. But what do I know - since according to this page I'm just a lying DNC hack. by Bennet Kelley (15 articles, 2 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 7 comments) on Sunday, Jun 3, 2007 at 3:27:58 AM
|
|
Reply: Sometimes they also eat with their left hand.
Now, don’t be getting all bent out of shape Bennet, we play Rough and Tumble here. Most of us are so pissed off with our government and leaders, we’re ready to burn it down and start all over again. Though we are all mostly hardcore progressives, that doesn’t mean we won’t rip each other a new a**hole, if anyone disagree with us about anything: like for instance, “How many conservatives does it take to bring back Outhouses? Answer two: Reagan and Bush. The rest of them wipe their asses with their left hand because they eat with their right hand. . by rabblerowzer (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 227 comments) on Sunday, Jun 3, 2007 at 12:41:18 PM
|
|
I don't buy it
Mr. Kelley, If Congress wanted to restrict spending on new armour for military vehicles in Iraq, they could have done that. The ultimate proof to me that the Democratic Party is just as evil as the RNC was the fact that they voted to force the Iraqis to privatize their oil, aka - turn it over to U.S. oil companies. Yes, I'm mad as hell and called my Senators and Congressman. I don't care if the staffers are just working people - they're working for the devil as far as I'm concerned. by Bob Fireovid (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 19 comments) on Sunday, Jun 3, 2007 at 8:56:16 AM
|
|
I normally would side with you against the shrill
"Blame the Democrats for Everything" crowd that exists here. I'm not able to do that with this vote. This vote, and opposing continuation of the funding was basically the most important legislative vote of this session, and 1/3rd of the congressional Democrats blew it. See my article today on the subject Democrats Missed it Badly on Iraq War Funding Vote by Steven Leser (255 articles, 58 quicklinks, 38 diaries, 2147 comments [63 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Sunday, Jun 3, 2007 at 1:16:26 PM
|
|
"Iraq, Democrats and the Art of the Possible"
I would most willingly agree with the reasons being put forward by Mr. Kelley for the Democrats voting the way they did BUT I can't because, when it comes to US Foreign Policy in the Middle East in general and Iraq-Iran in particular, neither the Congressmen nor the Senators can afford going against the dictats of those who placed them and sustain them on Capitol Hill AND I don't mean the American electorate. The ones I mean are the Oil, Defence, Zionist-Neo Con Mafias who are all Imperialists and Dominionist, each mafia with its special agenda and expected 'returns on investment'. High American casualties are a pain in the ***, but can be treated by the likes of Karl Rogue, Rupert Murdoch and Falwell. Iraqi and for that matter the Palestinian & the Lebanese casualties as well have no chance of becoming common knowledge in the US.The same Mafia imposed censoring, double talk, demonizing of hadjis and gooks and spreading of fear by the State takes care of this 'slight' inconvenience'. For these reasons, the US Congress & Senate can not bring back the troops home before 2008 or after 2008, specially when the construction of Imperial Capital of the US (The US Embassy)in Baghdad is nearing completion and Iraqi Oil reserves are about to be signed off to the Oil Mafia by the Vichi (Oops! Malaki) Govt. Only the Iraqi Resistance can get the American Hordes out of Iraq and this is exactly what they are busy doing in their crude ways. Only then will the Americans demonstrate in the manner their parents did thirty odd years ago and force the said mafias to bend to public opinion. Meanwhile, I sincerely advise my brothers in humanity in America NOT to bet a single dollar either on the US Legislature or the US Judiciary & definitely not on the US Administration! by syed mahdi (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 156 comments [17 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Jun 3, 2007 at 3:08:29 PM
|
Want to post your own comment on this Article?
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tell a Friend:
|
Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews |