Letters to the Editor
-
Surprised by Tim Walz
I'm surprised Tim Walz voted for it. I'm not in his district, but I have gotten to meet him and I donated to his campaign last year, and I think the world of the guy, so I was shocked to see him among the yeas. He can't suddenly have changed, nor do I think I judged him that wrongly, so I'm wondering if there's some reasonable defense for voting for the bill. All I can come up with is Bush was going to create hardships for the troops to prove his point if this didn't pass, and some Democrats think they can do something to change policy in the next budget.
-
A Case Could Be Made …
… for virtually any one of these "ayes" on a case-by-case basis. Some states (PA + OH for instance) are not clear cut pro- or anti-war. Both have long been battlegrounds re the War and the PhonyPrez, and I've spent enough time (over the years) in both PA and OH to know that being "against" the War per se won't cut it. Not seeming to "abandon" the Boots is critical. (Hence, Murtha's about-turn). You can be "against" the war; but, god forbid if you appear to be "against" the troops. I suspect that a similar dynamic plays out in the other states. And, of course, there's the sense here that as you drift further and further west into the alleged "Red States" the more difficult any "anti-war" political stance becomes.
Two additional points:
What's missing from this list is any sense of just how thin the margins of victory were for any of these "ayes." If the aim is to stay "centered" and save the seat in 2008, a case can be made for this appalling vote. But …
(Point # 2):
THAT'S vote-counting 101.
When the Dems came down the pike with this "confrontation" I thought, "OK. They must've cobbled something manageable together, otherwise they'd not risk being embarrassed by a veto."
But, no matter how "friendly" my thoughts are as I look at this fiasco, I still can't seem to shake the gnawing conviction that "NO! They DIDN'T do their homework!" (didn't count the votes).
THAT'S just plain CRAZY.
Were they using the vote to "create" Party "unity"? Hoping against hope that the Dems'd come together and find a cause in time for 08? Hoping that if they "declared" they had an anti-war "mandate (they don't) they'd scare enough rank and file into line to make them seem to be 'on message" and "listening" to the American people?
Or, was it even more cynical: An exercise designed to wring some concessions on social spending from an Imperial Treasury hell-bent on War? Using the dead and dying to fund the barely living.
---
Personally: I find this list interesting, but uniformative.
A similar listing and analysis of the Senate fiasco'd be helpful.
Bottom line? There is no shortage of bright bulbs at "Salon". Surely someone (or two) could get the details re who voted "aye" or "nay" and an article analysing the results could be cobbled together in time to enlighten your readers and enliven our "discussions." That's what all of this needs.
But, make no mistake about it, the Dems got hammered on this … and RIGHTLY so. They forced a vote they couldn't win and backed down in the face of bluster and in return for what can only be described as minor "concessions."
The road to '08 looks bleaker by the minute.
-
Joan, you love Hilary so much
Why don't you tell us how she voted on the ORIGINAL war resolution?
-
I'm having a nice relaxing Memorial Day weekend -- free from the fretting and worry
It's my birthday weekend. How blessed I am to be born on a day that almost always falls within the holiday. It's like all of America is celebrating with me. And when I'm dead and gone, America will memorialize me along with the other dead.
I'm not going to worry about the war, or Bush, or the feckless cowardly Democrats who piss their pants and run like hell at the first sign of a fight.
I don't care.
I'm having one of those birthdays that has a zero in it. Typically, after 20 they are not so much celebrated as mourned. But as the decades grind on with me being along for the ride, I'm coming to the conclusion that I am indeed just along for the ride.
My feeble efforts, no matter what, are not going to slow down the corrosion and rot that America is coming to. Long gone are the innocent days when I thought a congressman would actually read and take into account a letter from a constituent. Gone are the days when I thought the police were really there to "protect and to serve." And certainly and without any doubt I no longer believe anyone on television or is telling the whole truth, and that includes Keith Olbermann, Bill Maher and anybody on Air America Radio including the bilious Ed Schultz and the obnoxious ditzo Randi Rhodes. Putting aside the obvious falsehoods delivered by Right Wing propagandists, everybody's got a lying spin on everything, including the Democrats and including Salon.
You know, that son-of-a-fucking-bitch George W. Bush is going to do what he's going to do and nobody is going to stop him. Those sons-of-fucking-bitches in the Democratic Party are so feeble and indecisive they couldn't get laid in a whorehouse with a fist full of Ben Franklins.
The brain-dead Limbaugh dittoheads and the O'Rielly/Coulter/Savage radio listeners have the right idea, so it seems. Their minds are uncluttered by doubt. They don't stay up nights worrying about war and dead soldiers or government corruption. They have a simplistic view of life and an answer for everything. They simply adore the American flag and pray to Jesus.
Why do people on the Left have to be so damned complicated?
So why should I care? I've got 20, maybe 30 years of sentient life, barring an accident. There's nothing like turning that corner where you have more years behind you than in front of you. Some call it a "mid-life crisis." I think it's a wake-up call.
Nothing is worth worrying about.
Enjoy my birthday weekend and don't drink and drive.