You have commented 358 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: WoT
Dems Want to Keep GOP From Votes on Iraq
2007-08-01
In which AP tries to paint itself back out of the very uncomfortable corner it just painted itself into. This article deserves a fair amount of parsing and a heavy-grit sandpaper fisking.
House Democratic leaders are intent on sidetracking bipartisan attempts to change course in Iraq at least until fall, officials said Tuesday, rather than allow nervous Republicans to vote for legislation that lacks a troop withdrawal deadline.
Also a fan to blow away all the paint fumes. I'm feeling a bit light-headed.
Try painting a door into the wall next to you. Always works for me.
Several lawmakers and aides said the goal was to deny members of the GOP rank and file a chance to proclaim their independence from President Bush by voting for a limited measure - after months of backing his policy in an increasingly unpopular war.
Then again, there have been signs that even some Dhimmicrats are figuring out that we're winning the war. Most disturbing if the Blue Dogs and the Repubs team up to force through a resolution supporting the war effort. And that's the motivation here. San Fran Nan is counting noses and getting nervous.
Polls have long shown the war to be unpopular, and a survey released during the day by the Democracy Corps, which advises Democrats, reported that 61 percent of those polled want their lawmaker to begin requiring a reduction of troops. By contrast, the survey found that 35 percent want their representative not to undermine the president.
And if you can't believe a poll from the 'Democracy Corps', what can you believe?
In a challenge to his own leadership, Abercrombie (D-HI) said, "I would hate to be in a situation where the Democratic Party was trying to explain that it wants to score political points rather than end the war."
One strategist, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Democrats had concluded Republicans "want to put some daylight between themselves and the president" and should not be allowed to do so "after voting in lockstep for the past four years." All officials spoke on condition of anonymity, saying they were not authorized to discuss the issue publicly.
And because the Repubs would challenge them on the floor of the House.
One such bill requires the Pentagon to provide Congress with plans for a troop redeployment within 60 days. The measure cleared the House Armed Services last week on a bipartisan vote of 55-2.

Rep. Neil Abercrombie, D-Hawaii, one of the sponsors, said in an interview that he was hoping for a vote before Congress begins a vacation at week's end. "The one thing that would actually advance the agenda would be to get a redeployment plan," said Abercrombie, a self-described progressive who has voted for far stronger legislation, including a fixed troop withdrawal deadline.

In a challenge to his own leadership, Abercrombie said, "I would hate to be in a situation where the Democratic Party was trying to explain that it wants to score political points rather than end the war."
Posted by:Seafarious

#13  One such bill requires the Pentagon to provide Congress with plans for a troop redeployment within 60 days. The measure cleared the House Armed Services last week on a bipartisan vote of 55-2.

Since when does the Pentagon do planning at Congress' bidding? Is there any precedent for that?
Posted by: KBK   2007-08-01 19:58  

#12  Democracy Corps is a dem pressure group. They whine about being non partisan but everything they do is donk-driven. Set lasers to .
Posted by: Free Radical   2007-08-01 18:56  

#11  Darth,
Actually, the Spanish American war got pretty unpopular once malaria season kicked in. And if you count the Philippine Insurection (that cost more than the war with the Spaniards), you wound up with a mess.

Pretty much every war in America has been unpopular from the French and Indian war forward.

Americans have an unofficial time limit of 3 years to win our wars, and George Bush hasn't even tried to get the GWOT done in that time frame. Taking any longer provides the Dems with a temptation that they just can't resist.

Al
Posted by: Frozen Al   2007-08-01 18:11  

#10  Depends on what Polls who is looking at: The ones who KNOW how to read polls, and detect the self-serving ones, know that the public is unsatisfied by the current progress of the war, but that they also want us to WIN that war.
Posted by: Ptah   2007-08-01 14:39  

#9  #5 -- I'm sure the growing revulsion on the US electorate over US casualties in the Pacific theater of operations by 1945 had a great deal to do with the decision to nuke the Empire of Japan - twice. Elsewhere I read some leftist snark that "we did the Japanese a favor" by dropping the atomic bomb on them. Perhaps we did after all.
Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418   2007-08-01 13:45  

#8  The last popular war was the Spanish-American war. All since then have had a good bout of unpopularity with a significant portion of the population. Most before that too.

Ok, almost all wars have a good chunk of unpopularity. But the dhimocrats have taken it to outright treason and selling America's safety downriver for power.
Posted by: DarthVader   2007-08-01 09:46  

#7  The real reason the Dems don't want to vote on the issue is to avoid being on record come Nov. '08. They want to "end the war" without being pegged with losing it. Wankers. The more progress is made in Iraq, the smaller the corner they paint themselves into.
Posted by: Spot   2007-08-01 09:41  

#6  Good point, Rambler, but how much more "unpopular" would WWII have been if the "Democracy Corps" took the polls back then, lol?
Posted by: BA   2007-08-01 09:16  

#5  NS, actually, even WWII was getting unpopular in the US near the end, especially after some of the horrific battles in the Pacific. There was some concern that the public would not support an invasion of the Japanese home islands, due to the projected bloodbath that would ensue.
Posted by: Rambler   2007-08-01 09:03  

#4  Those that end in victory.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2007-08-01 08:10  

#3  Can anyone think of a single 'Popular' war in the entire history of the world?
Posted by: CrazyFool   2007-08-01 08:09  

#2  "Polls have long shown the war to be unpopular,..."

That wouldn't have anything to do with your own non-stop efforts to undermine public support for the war, would it? You started yelling "Quagmire!" and "It's Vietnam all over again!" back in March of 2003 even before the last of our invasion force crossed over into Iraq, and you haven't let up for a moment since.

"I would hate to be in a situation where the Democratic Party was trying to explain that it wants to score political points rather than end the war."

But you have no problem at all with scoring political points rather than helping us win the war, do you?

We've got a stark, either-or choice in front of us: we can either win this war, or we can let these scumbags continue to run around loose undermining our every effort to defend this country. But not both.

Want to win the war? Then round these assholes up and get them out of the way. NOW.

Posted by: Dave D.   2007-08-01 06:51  

#1  Fools. You cannot "end the war". Wars are won or lost, and Democrats are the losers. Keep voting them in and you ALL shall be losers.
Posted by: newc   2007-08-01 06:05  

00:00