Letters to the Editor
-
Great summation, Joe
Really good read. Or the Democratic congress could just follow the Feingold First Policy, wherein whatever Feingold suggests is probably the truest and most honorable action and other congressional Democrats much rally around the idea.
-
"Funding for the Troops"
What a wonderful rhetorical device. Kind of like a mugger pointing a gun at his own head and telling the victim that if he doesn't fork over the cash that he'll pull the trigger and then the victim will be guilty of murder. If the Dems didn't cave, it would be used to full effect, and the Dems, true to type, caved.
Of course, you never hear the flip side of this little gem, in that it indicates a willingness on the part of those using the phrase to leave the troops in Iraq regardless of the lack of funding, in effect pointing that mugger's gun at 100,000+ heads.
I am happy to say that my Congressman, Jay Inslee, saw though the ruse. Unfortunately my two Senators were just too lacking in the requisite intestinal fortitude, or too willing to sacrifice a few troops' lives to keep their seats.
-
To put it mildly...
Great article, right on target.
I have watched countless interviews from the various news outlets where Democrats have been given plenty of opportunity to debunk the amazing BS of this administration, to take control and reframe the debate, and time after time they take a pass.
Dithering is the right adjective. It is infuriating to know what should be said -what must be said- and how it should be said; and watch these idiots let it go or avoid it all together.
There are likely a variety of reasons for this repeated horror, among them stupidity, cowardice, nerves, a false sense of self-preservation...
Just watch Meet the Press on Sundays and no matter what Democrat is on, they will leave the most productive opportunities to get "hand" blowing in the wind.
The cynic in me thinks they might just be complicit in a bigger charade, and not just weak-kneed and stupid.
The only one who has acquited himself with any balls is Biden, who I had no love for until his last appearance on MTP. This time however, Russert was almost unwilling to engage in anything but "gotcha" bs from 20 years ago.
We are in deep deep dis-ease here people.
-
Bush says no to funding...
by using the veto.
And yet the Democrats get the blame? I still don't get it.
-
Completely Agree
The more I think about this cave-in to Bush the angrier I am getting.
I've been a lifelong Democrat. But that is coming to an end.
It's hard to explain, but I have always harbored the fear that the Democrats were no match for the Republicans and would not be able to stand against Bush's bullying.
I was right to have this fear. Voting for Democrats in 2006 did nothing. It has all been for naught.
Further, I have to ask, "If the Dems cannot stand up to Bush, how the hell are they ever gonna go against Al-Qaeda?"
I am beginning to think that it is a damn good thing Republicans are control. Imagine the Democratic leadership negotiating with Al-Qaeda!
-
Thanx Joe
Great summation. Joan may fire you for this article, but I'll subscribe to wherever you land.
-
Yep.
I think this article is a good summation. The Democrats still allow Bush to control all terms of discussion. They should have stuck to their guns for no other reason than that eventually it would have to restructure the terms of debate. Now, Bush gets to speak in terms of how his vision of no "arbitrary timelines" and withdrawal being surrender are the correct interpretations.
More than the funding, I think what outrages me is that smirky gets to control this rhetoric when I think the American people are beyond ready to have a conversation on the subject that might actually make sense. George Bush and the Rovian language factory have turned us into a nation of baby talkers. We are ruled by an infant, and no one has the guts to just tell him to shut up. As if his goo goo gaa gaa is an opinion that's as valid as any other.
How does a person in Bush's position - no support, no popularity, no rational policy - still end up holding all the cards? How the fuck does that happen?
-
Twiddling while Baghdad burns
Interesting piece, Mr. Conason. Christ, am I pissed off (not at you, but at the Dems)...
As for the Democrats, their leaders and strategists had nothing interesting to say about the war, largely because they were afraid that dissent would permit the Republicans to brand them as weak and unpatriotic. So they continued to say nothing.
This fear of branding is as frustrating as it is ridiculous -- it is exactly this fear which has gutted the Democrats for the last 60 years. First it was Right attacking them for being "soft on Communism" and then "soft on defense" and now "soft on terrorism."
Fear of being seen as soft on Communism paved the way for the insanity of the Vietnam War, for endless rotten Third World policy -- the Right brayed and the Democrats swayed, and slowly eroded their New Deal coalition trying to out-Cold War the Republicans, who simply can't operate without a bogeyman to threaten Our Way of Life(tm), so they try to get everybody to march to their panicked little tune.
Seems to me that instead of letting the opposition frame them, the Democrats should start standing for things of importance that have nothing to do with the latest talking points of the GOP noise machine.
Nothing the Democrats do will be okay by the GOP spinmeisters and accepted by their supporters, so why the hell do the DINOs assiduously court them? Why do some Democrats worry what the GOP will call them? Or are they just too insulated from their electorate by lobbying interests to get it?
F*ck the GOP. The GOP is the party that's out of step with the majority of Americans on every issue -- and yet they're not the ones cringing and navelgazing (they seem to prefer swagger and bluster). It's infuriating.
The GOP runs hard on national (in)security and war on terror because that's all they offer that appeals beyond their narrow base. If the Democrats were more than a shell party these days, they'd run on every issue the GOP is weak on, and they'd run hard on them. And if the Democrats won't do it, Americans will just have to find a party that will.