Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Ending the War: Time for the Dems to Play Hardball

By Arianna Huffington, Huffington Post. Posted October 26, 2007.


It is time the Democrats reframe the debate over funding for the Iraq war.
Huffington

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Also by Arianna Huffington

Memo to Obama: Moving to the Middle Is for Losers
Realpolitik is one thing. Realstupidpolitik is quite another.
Jul 5, 2008

Right Is Wrong -- How the Lunatic Fringe Hijacked America
The GOP is now a dark, putrefied party of Bush, Cheney, Rove, Limbaugh and Coulter. And we're all the worse because of it.
May 22, 2008

Hillary Clinton's Defeat: An Historic Triumph
Even though Rocky didn't win, he was ultimately seen as a triumphant figure. And that's how Hillary will be seen too.
May 20, 2008

More stories by Arianna Huffington

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

Taking a page from America's retailers, President Bush is getting a jump on the coming battle over Iraq war funding. On Monday, he added an additional $45.9 billion in supplemental war funding to the $150.5 billion he'd already requested, and then turned up the heat on Congress to sign off on the $196.4 billion before heading home for the holidays. Only 60 more browbeating days until Christmas!

And you have to give Bush credit. Despite record-low approval ratings, he's unabashedly playing -- and winning -- the PR game on the war. By incrementally adding to his funding request, he made his ongoing plundering of our treasury to pursue his disastrous Iraq policy seem relatively modest. The headlines all focused on the $46 billion he's just added to the tab -- not the $196 billion he's really after.

And while his language about "supporting the troops," and "providing our troops with the help and support they need to get the job done" is well past its sell-by date, the Democrats have yet to reframe the funding debate. So Bush replays his patriotic greatest hits while the blood of our soldiers continues to flow -- in the process making our country not more, but less, safe.

The president was feeling so cocky he even pulled out the "s" word -- "succeed" -- that had been in cold storage for a while. "Our men and women on the front lines should not be caught in the middle of partisan disagreements in Washington, D.C.," he said. "[Congress] ought to make sure our troops have what it takes to succeed." Whatever that means in Iraq these days.

The Democrats meanwhile remain divided and confounded on how to stand up to the president on Iraq. House invertebrates like Steny Hoyer, who foolishly think ducking for cover is a winning '08 strategy, are urging a cautious approach, suggesting that any hardball stop-the-war efforts will leave red state Dems vulnerable to attacks for undermining the troops.

Senate leaders, including Carl Levin, are also treading lightly. Levin's latest gambit: put Bush on the installment plan, giving him only part of the money and forcing him to come asking for more in June, after the next Congressionally mandated report from Gen. Petraeus (September redux?). Levin's plan would also aim for a complete withdrawal from Iraq within nine months -- but this would only be a goal, not a date certain requirement.

Hey, why accomplish today what you can put off until tomorrow -- or June?


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: iraq war, bush, democrats

Find more Arianna at the Huffington Post.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Lead, follow, or get run over
Posted by: gregoryx on Oct 26, 2007 4:37 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Someone help me understand, please. It seems to me Congress' response should be:

"You're wrong, Mr. Bush. The troops are best supported at home with their families. The American voters have made it clear this is their wish.

The only way to support the troops is to bring them home; and the only way for Congress to bring them home is stop funding.

We will use the tool given to Congress by the People and the Constitution to bring this about. We will stop funding to force the White House and Military to follow the voters wishes and support the troops by bringing them home."

It seems the only leadership position to me.

It seems to only become complicated when one worries about the impact of pulling funding from the Military and all the other recipients of federal money in the pursuit of war - those in Democratic states and regions, as well as Republican. This is the only reason I can find for our current Congress not to take the leadership position and proudly do the People's wishes. Approval ratings of Congress are lower than Bush's and polls show it is because the voters believe they put this Congress in power to do one thing: get us out of Iraq. Now.

Why are even those who wish the war and spending stopped still eager to assure "bridge funding" for this war? There is prodigious Military funding without any of the current Iraq-oriented additions. Pull all the additions and force the Military to use other portions of their budget to get troops home. It may not go well, but the Public deserves to get what they've asked for with votes and funded with taxes and inflation and at considerable expense to the economic health of this nation.

Help me understand, please.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Lead, follow, or get run over Posted by: Moore Hognutz
Arianna is Spineless Too
Posted by: gary_7vn on Oct 26, 2007 9:24 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Still afraid to call a fake congress a fake congress.
"I'm sorry for this refresher in Congressional Power 101, but Democratic leaders seem to need it. The White House cannot force Congress to spend money. Period. The end."

Cmon Huffy, they know this! Better than you! What's the problem? The excuses that you and the congress offer are beyond belief. If they end the war they will win the election! It's obvious. It should be obvious even to you. But you are so far up Pelosi's rear they have to ship the sun in by rocket.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

dont forget this one
Posted by: dannrusso on Oct 27, 2007 3:10 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
this gem from yesterday

"The House yesterday passed a bill which simply will not be passed, and I'm sorry to say the Senate will do the same" Of course the bill that W was talking about was a child health care bill, which he was planning on vetoing...who vetoes a $46 million dollar bill to help kids as a waste of money and then asks for another $136 billion to fund a stupidass war?

this man needs to go

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: dont forget this one Posted by: thekidde
It is not time for the Dems to take the lead-it is PAST time.
Posted by: Ellie1 on Oct 27, 2007 6:48 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Put impeachment back on the table. Hire a hit man if we have to, anything to get of these two monsters.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Iraq
Posted by: kjg25171 on Oct 27, 2007 7:21 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Democrats in this country( not in Congress) who claim to want to end the war are hypocrites. If they truly wanted the war to end they would not be supporting that hawk Hillary Clinton. Maybe Congress really is listening to the public. This woman will not commit to being out of Iraq by 2013 even though earlier this year she said if Bush had not ended the war by 2009 she would. Hillary Clinton is too slick.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Iraq Posted by: Lauren
The time to impeach is past
Posted by: goddessq on Oct 27, 2007 8:07 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bush not only has caused an economic disaster in this country and started a series of unwinnable wars, but he's planning on starting World War III if Iran doesn't come around. He is not sane. These are the ravings of a madman, and he should rightfully be committed.

Commentary

It could also be argued that he's trying to engulf the Middle East in war in order to bring about Armageddon and the End Times, which he believes in.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The time to impeach is past Posted by: JSquercia
Fighting Back!
Posted by: ad132 on Oct 27, 2007 10:52 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Congress needs to start fighting back aginst the Bush cronies that are blackmailing them with threats and start doing their JOBS that they were elected to do and UPHOLD THEIR OATH TO THE CONSTITUTION! The reason they got put into congress was because the American people BELIEVED in them,and gave them their votes in 2006 and they have been nothing but disappointing all along,Please turn this around and don't make the very people that belived in you,Do the right thing BY STANDING UP FOR WE THE PEOPLE,Show us that you do have a spine and that you are not going to fear Bush&Co.anymore.I know we can count on you.Don't let us down once again.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

thekidde
Posted by: thekidde on Oct 27, 2007 2:07 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Arianna has it right! The chickenDems (as opposed to the war-mongering Republican chickenhawks) don't have the balls to just say no to King Shrub. Cut off ALL the money and tell Bush, bring 'em home. Kill all the extra $$ for contractors, missile shield bullshit and such and there will still be plenty of cash to bring our military out of this cluster f*ck.

Then impeach them all.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What a bunch of twits
Posted by: greginsocal on Oct 28, 2007 12:59 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And decidedly un-serious, to boot. We ARE winning, yet you STILL want to run away! Fortunately, the adults are in charge, and not the sissies that make up the nutroots. We WILL win this, with or without you.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What a bunch of twits...Ho Hum Posted by: Captainmagic
What War In Iraq!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Captainmagic on Oct 28, 2007 4:27 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Any money allocated today goes straight into the Iranian attack...talk about follow the money....Show me the money and I will take it that you have given me the mandate...show me the money..!! Sickening really..so pathetically sickening...New date to put in your diaries...January 15th 2008

Captain OUT

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Not just no, but....
Posted by: NumberSix on Oct 28, 2007 4:48 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was with Arianna for some time, then, she leaned too close to Mdm "No Spine" Pelosi and became contaminated with Baccillus Beltwayus. Now, she sounds like a DINO....all cashed in and ready for Mdm Hillary's coronation.....so we can have eight more years of this utter nonsense.

It's also why I no longer bother with HuffPo: It's a DINO watering hole anymore. Sounds like dissent, but it ain't. Oh, well, we must have someplace for all the contaminated to hang around, mmm?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

War, Money, and Power
Posted by: Gaubladt on Oct 28, 2007 6:06 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Congressional oversight of the money being spent on this war is the key to ending it.
Blackwater and Custer-Battles are just an insignificant few of the companies that profit from the war and depend on it's continuation for their survival. Those profits in turn go back to support right wing activist politicians who integrate war fervor into their Republican "Family Values" platform. I suspect that a lot of this war money is going to the Democratic leadership as well.
There is a lot of talk about graft in the Iraqi government. Yet nothing is done by our administration to curb it. They know that, in Iraq, the graft is what keeps their war afloat. I believe that, if they had given in to their own inclinations, the Iraqi leaders would have booted out the Americans last summer. But, with their shirts/pants/socks and Seychelles bank accounts being continually filled with US "graft" dollars, it has become very hard for them to make any kind of altruistic or nationalistic decisions regarding the United State's presence in their country. It is also silly for the US to criticize the Iraqis for corruption when we keep giving them our money.
What is so desperately needed here is the kind of "tough love" budget oversight that the administration is loath to provide. Only Congress can mandate this. And it would be a great political tactic if they did: Efficient use of our Tax Dollars is something that no corrupt republican legislator can successfully deride in a debate. At this moment, no one can deny the fact that vast amounts of US tax dollars are being squandered in Iraq. It is ludicrous to stand aside and let our military elite run the financial side of this war when the military personnel are so easily coerced by the war-bucks corporations with their "golden parachutes".
Once the "war machine" becomes lean, efficient, and competitive, the incentive for war will diminish; if the American war-buck companies have to justify and account for every tax dollar they get, they won't be able to lavish so much money on their political pets in the administration and congress.
The same is true in Iraq. When the Iraqi leaders are required to make an accurate verifiable and justifiable account of every dollar of ours they spend, they will be much less likely to be blinded by the lure of unearned wealth. They will also be much more likely to make decisions which will benefit their nation.
They may then decide they've had enough of us, and tell us to get offa their property.

IN ORDER TO MANDATE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT, CONGRESS MUST TAKE THE PURSE STRINGS FROM THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH, AND THREATEN TO EXERCISE THEIR PEROGATIVE TO WITH-HOLD FUNDS FOR THE WAR IF THE EXECUTIVE RESISTS.
After all, this is what checks and ballances are all about.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Dems develop a spine?
Posted by: Jeanne on Oct 29, 2007 7:14 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Can't happen. Won't happen. Clearly whatever transpired in the last election cycle was crumbs thrown to the populace. It kept us quiet and hopeful for awhile. Now, it's simply a few months til the next charade we call elections. We will have a "choice" of two bought and sold candidates pretending that they represent different interests when they, in fact, represent the military/industrial/congressional/media complex. Did anyone notice that demonstrations were held in 12 cities across the country this past weekend? I looked for reports of it on the internet. Only MSNBC and ABC had any coverage of it -- and you had to dig. CNN did not mention it. The TV news? Not a word. So, effectively they threw a peace march, and as far as the rest of the country and the world know, no one came. It's not even reported here on Alternet!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ha ha....
Posted by: JoshuaLudd on Nov 1, 2007 6:27 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Oh, this is the most comical article title ever... Dems... playing hardball!! Classic!

Just like the adherents to the cult of Saint Gore who are just waiting for the Real Gore (tm) they just KNOW has to exist to emerge and lead them to the promised land by running in 08.. those waiting for Dems to ever play hardball with the Republicans are trying to get blood from a stone. Hey, Maybe Saint Gore can go all Moses on them and at least get water from a stone.

They tricked you into voting for them when they had ZERO interest in paying attention to your will... just like the Republicans do with abortion and gay marriage for their base. They'll dangle that carrot in front of your nose, but buddy, you're never going to taste it. Dems and Reps are just two sides of the same utterly corrupt coin and as long as you keep putting your hope and faith in them you will always be sorely dissapointed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Ha ha.... Posted by: thekidde