Usually when we contact our members of Congress our great challenge is to get policy hostile Republicans to understand that even in THEIR districts we have enough people opposing them to threaten their reelection. But we certainly expect our OWN representatives to listen to us. So why is it that STILL some of our most progressive House members are not fully behind Barbara Lee's amendment for a fully funded withdrawal of our troops from the hopeless sandpit in Iraq. You would be astounded by the names of some of your own representatives who have not yet committed to taking a real stand to end this war.
Is it any wonder that the popularity of Congress has dropped almost 10 points in the last month, back down to 28%. The American people elected a Democratic majority in both houses to take ACTION, not to just wring their hands and pass the buck of responsibility. The essence of exercising power is to take responsibility. When pushed, Bush will say, "So, I'm responsible, whatcha gonna do?" Yet, on the most drop dead critical issue of our time, the Democratic so-called leadership seems to be resigned to casting token votes of limp protest, quiet whimpers of timid discomfort, with no actual force of law.
Oh sure, it's all very well to take pot shots at lying attorney generals and call for resignations. It's perfectly fine to issue subpoenas and demand testimony under oath from self-evident liars, to root out corruption and everything else, and even to grandstand while doing so, assuming they manage to stick to their guns in doing that. All those things must be done too. But NONE of those things require any actual bravery, just a majority in Congress.
Are our Democratic bigwigs only capable of setting up some kind of "We told you so" for 2008, without actually risking responsibility for real policy change? Are they triangulating their bets just in case the situation in Iraq happens to take a miraculous turn for the better, in defiance of all evidence on the ground and past experience of the same failing, rehashed strategy. Are they so petrified of being blamed for losing a war, which was ALREADY a strategic debacle the moment Bush decided to invade Iraq, that they will do nothing of substance about it. And are they so frightened of taking charge that they will meekly submit even to a gross and insane expansion into Iran, just to avoid being seen as insufficiently blood thirsty.
The difference between the supplemental war appropriation and some other bill to stop the war is that this is a measure that the president NEEDS from Congress. This is not a bill he can veto and count on having enough remaining rubber-stampers to scuttle an override. This may in fact be the ONLY meaningful chance we will have in the next two years to keep from inheriting the military policy disaster in Iraq, to embrace for our very own shame. The American people will not forgive the Democrats for caving in again, when they gave us enough power to stop the war for the very PURPOSE of exercising that power. Text of the Lee Amendment.
The last poll we've seen shows that MORE than 90% of Democrats (and even a quarter of self-identified Republicans) OPPOSE dragging on a continuation of the Iraq war. Where are the 90% of Democratic House members who will represent their constituencies. Where are they? Where are 90% of Democratic members of Congress who will take a stand right NOW to STOP this immoral horror. And where are the 90% of Democratic presidential candidates who will do more than say their patience is wearing "thin," about four years too late.
What kind of backroom conspiracy is in place to allow votes on non binding resolutions, but NOT on amendments which would actually DO something. Why has Nancy Pelosi taken all options of any actual consequence off the table? Of course the president will veto anything that even suggests a check or a balance. What kind of phony activism is it to avoid a confrontation, where one is absolutely unavoidable and inevitable, and without which the outrages will just continue to grow more outrageous? That is all the more reason why we must put forth the strongest position possible.
"Such interviews would be private and conducted without the need for an oath, transcript, subsequent testimony, or the subsequent issuance of subpoenas . . . We trust and believe that the accommodations we offer here, in addition to what the Justice Department has provided, should satisfy the committee's interests."
Who do they think they are talking down to? Many of our senators and representatives are themselves experienced and seasoned prosecuting attorney generals from their own states. What disrepect for the prerogative of Congress! Isn't it perfectly obvious that they are counting on having enough crony judges in place to abort any credible investigation, in the case of a subpoena showdown? Are we the only ones who are reminded of IDENTICAL conditions imposed on the 9/11 commission about the testimony of Bush and Cheney, and what chumps the commissioners were at that time to submit to such a charade of an investigation?
Let us also remember that Alberto Gonzales is the same attorney general who, when the scandal of the NSA wiretapping first broke, stated that the White House was willing to listen to the "suggestions" of Congress. Suggestions?!?! Hello . . . Congress passes LAWS, the laws of the land. What we have here is a contempt for Congress, and their Constitution role, so endemic that nothing can possibly heal the body politic but a stone cold confrontation.
And the best and most important place to start is by demanding that any new Iraq appropriation be DEDICATED for the mission of getting our armed forces out of the Iraq civil war, where they are the primary obstacle to achieving the political settlement, which is the only possible solution. Please call your members of Congress and tell them this is the moment. This is the time. Do it now.
internet activist with the mission of generating as many policy messages to Congress as possible
Instead of telling people to write to their representative, it would be more useful to tell them to let go of their representatives and spend their time finding new representatives. If these people were qualified to hold the offices they hold, they wouldn't need to hear from constituents about what to do or how to honor their oath of office. Not at this stage. It's too late. They have betrayed us. We're not going to make any progress until you admit that and begin to act responsibly in the face of it. These people need to be replaced and we need to begin now to find replacements for them. Stop wasting time.
by
Mark A. Goldman (81 articles, 2 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 243 comments)
on Wednesday, March 21, 2007 at 11:36:38 AM
What part of participatory democracy don't you get?
Seriously. And how exactly will you elect all these new representatives without first engaging large numbers of people in the process? But ye who preach self-righteous defeatism will fufill only your own political death wish.
by
thepen (109 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 11 comments)
on Wednesday, March 21, 2007 at 2:15:07 PM
2 comments
How would you rate this?
You must be logged in (if signed up) to do ratings.
It's free to signup! And easy. And takes just a minute or two....
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
