Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
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.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Fall of the D.C. Democrats

By Jan Frel, AlterNet. Posted November 22, 2005.


John Kerry and a host of other squeamish Dems who have publicly 'regretted' their Iraq votes are now standing in a political wilderness.
Advertisement

"Kerry's Iraq plan ... lays out a comprehensive new strategy to complete the mission in Iraq and bring our troops home. Its goal is to undermine the insurgency by simultaneously pursing both a political settlement and the draw down of American forces linked to specific, responsible benchmarks -- beginning with the draw down of 20,000 troops after successful Iraqi elections in December." -- from JohnKerry.com

What's powerfully obvious after John Murtha's speech last Thursday is that John Kerry and a host of other D.C. Democrats who have publicly "regretted" their Iraq votes and made calls for incremental withdrawal since the 2004 election are now standing in a political wilderness. The political premium on being identified as "against the war" has moved down the field, requiring politicians to actually -- gasp! -- call for total withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq if they don't want to be like George Bush.

John Kerry's comprehensive new strategy to reduce the number of troops by 20,000 before the year ends comes off as completely fatuous in light of what Murtha proposed. Kerry could have said what Murtha did anytime he liked, stretching back to the moment before he cast his fatal vote for the Iraq war resolution in 2002. Employing a politics far more cynical than George Bush's, Kerry has been just fine with the invasion; only afraid to come out and say so, like most of his colleagues in Washington.

However bankrupt Rep. John Murtha's Iraq views happen to be -- and I'll get to those in a bit -- Democrats who want to be viewed as against the war will be forced to use starker language that reflects the terminology Murtha used in his speech and in the resolution he introduced in the House of Representatives:

  • Section 1. The deployment of United States forces in Iraq, by direction of Congress, is hereby terminated and the forces involved are to be redeployed at the earliest practicable date.
  • Sec. 2. A quick-reaction U.S. force and an over-the-horizon presence of U.S. Marines shall be deployed in the region.
  • Sec. 3. The United States of America shall pursue security and stability in Iraq through diplomacy.

Murtha in his speech referred to U.S. troop presence in Iraq as an "occupation." He also defined freedom in Iraq as a condition where U.S. troops are absent. The massive attention Murtha's speech received ensures at least a rhetorical shift for Democrats on Iraq. Blame-shifting re-evaluations on the Iraq resolution vote like California Sen. Dianne Feinstein's, "I would not have voted if I knew what I knew now," and apologies like Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin's, "It was one of the biggest voting mistakes of my career" won't last much longer as sufficient "positions" on Iraq, and they never should have in the first place. Viewpoints on What to Do in Iraq will necessarily require a standpoint on whether to withdraw.

The House of Representatives of course didn't vote on Murtha's resolution, it voted on a non-binding Republican alternative, which said that it was the sense of the House that "deployment of United States forces in Iraq be terminated immediately." It failed 403-3. While only 81 members of the Democratic House voted for the Iraq war resolution in 2002, they have been joined by another 60 House Dems who voted against it as part of a cowed caucus that has tiptoed and whispered on Iraq since the invasion.

The 140 or so House Democrats who have squeamishly supported the war in Iraq for the past two years got a lucky break; they didn't have to "take sides" as Murtha's bill would have forced them to do. Even as Democratic Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi attacked the House Republican leadership for replacing Murtha's resolution with a less palatable set of choices, she also said, "Mr. Murtha speaks for himself." Pelosi and her squeamish caucus have from now until the next time another political episode like Murtha's occurs before making a public statement on withdrawal.


Digg!

Jan Frel is an AlterNet staff writer.

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

Advertisement
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:
Can't you guys find someone else to beat up besides the Democrats?
Posted by: ShaSpirit on Nov 22, 2005 12:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Then is Then and Now is Now. What are we going to do now to change things beside throw our votes away on a third party? Where is your plan to turn things around? It is so easy to say, "look at the weak kneed Democrats and how badly they have screwed everything up." How about something positive everyone can work around. Where is your brilliant plan for organizing the situation on the ground in the USA? You are preaching to the believers that everything is a mess. What we need is a plan for how to do things better. Please I have had enough negative BS from the Republicans to last a lifetime. I am worn out by negativity and we need some of light and positive ideas. We need to rally the troops here at home with something everyone can believe in.

We all know what is wrong. We know who started this wrong. And we want a way to fix it. We have one year to get this together, so We The People take back the senate and the house. House seat might be won by a the green party in some states like California, as they have been working at this for a long time, but they are not big in the red states. You are going to show a different way of doing things, to get what the people out to vote.

It is no longer about gays and abortion, but our very way of life. This big tent needs a lot of chairs and a circular table so everyone is equal. Working together wins the day, but everyone pulling in different directions will only lose everything we are writing we what to change. So much negativity kills creativity and stops the ball from rolling. I have gotten were I can barely read a lot of this stuff anymore. It is just rehashing the same old stuff. It is not who did wrong, but who can get the job done now. We do not have time for the blame game on our side of the issues. Negative politics did not work this year and hopefully it will not work next year. Put your energy into your feet and start working on electing people who you believe can get the job done. YOU and ONLY YOU can change things on the ground here in USA.

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

» EXCUSE ME.... Posted by: CatDad
Washington DC has that "sewer smell".
Posted by: Pepper on Nov 22, 2005 3:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You know the one where you walk by someplace and you can smell the sewage, but you can't really see it. You know its there because the smell leaves when you pass it by.

That is washington Dc. One big broken sewage line that needs to be replaced since its too far gone to be repaired. I would like to see that smell disappear forever. I doubt that can be achieved but at least maybe we can replace it until it gets worn and broken again and then fix it again. That idea is viable IF we have valid elections.

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

Dems
Posted by: Tom Degan on Nov 22, 2005 3:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Every time I start to question why I left the democratic party four, an article like this jolts my memory. "Oh yeah", I say, :The democratics are almost as bad as the republicans"! Lesser of two evils doesn't quite cut the mustard. Sure, I'll more than likely vote fot the dems, I just want nothing to do with them. Then again, maybe I'll re-register as one. We've (Excuse me, "they've") got to do some serious house cleaning in the next primary season. Any democrat, and I mean ANY democrat has got to go - particularly Joe Leiberman. A democrat by any other name would be called a republican. He's got to go. That also goes for Hillary Clinton. If the democrats are stupid enough to give her the nomination in 2008 they'll deserve everything that happens to them. As the saying goes, when the public has the choice between a republican and a republican wannabe, they'll go with the real thing every time.

It's time fro them to get serious.

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
tomdegan@frontiernet.net

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

» RE: Dems Posted by: seefleur
» RE: Dems Posted by: Basenjis
» RE: Dems Posted by: werely
» RE: Dems Posted by: cyclone
less palatable???
Posted by: adp3d on Nov 22, 2005 4:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
W-T-F-? So we have three members of the house that have any kind of stones to stand up to these bastarrds? I cannot imagine anything more palatable than beating them at their own game. Imagine the Republicans having to back down from their own resolution because they are playing games. Let them embarass themselves. Every Dem in that chamber should have voted yes for that resolution. Because they didn't take the Republicans at their word it highlighted their(Dems) relative disfunctionalism. It was just a blown opportunity, like the '04 elections...

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

We're going to need an insurgency in the form of primary challenges against the squeamish Democrats
Posted by: jmontars on Nov 22, 2005 4:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Jan Frel wrote "We're going to need an insurgency in the form of primary challenges against the squeamish Democrats in 2006 if we are going to hear honest calls for withdrawal." Not only must we target repuglicans, we must target milktoast democrats too. We have our work cut out for us. Perhaps another attempt at third-party politics would work? Why call it "Progressive Grassroots Democratic Party?" Something that reflects a grassroots constituency and that might seduce the better crop of existing democrats to crossover.

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

» Why aren't you a candidate? Posted by: Edward George
agitator church and state
Posted by: eileenflmng on Nov 22, 2005 5:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"We're going to need an insurgency"
And it can only come from WE THE PEOPLE: grassroots activists who fearlessly hold politicians to the fire, hold them accountable to their speeches, promises, resolutions and road maps:

"In the long run, there is no justice without FREEDOM. There can be no human rights without LIBERTY. All who live in tyranny and hopelessness can know the United States will not ignore your oppression or excuse your oppressors. When you stand for liberty, we stand with you."-Pres. Bush 2nd inaugural

read more on WAWA:
www.wearewideawake.org

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

Not only the war
Posted by: Lincoln fan on Nov 22, 2005 5:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is not only on the issue of the war that the Democrats have failed. They have failed on all fronts. They are aptly called "Republican Lite" because they are controlled by the same Establishment that controls the Republicans. As the Republicans move farther and farther to the right the Democrats follow at a respectful distance. The voter decides which candidates carry out the agenda of the Establishment. We can control both parties. Click on Do it now!

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

» RE: Not only the war Posted by: Gma1
» RE: Not only the war Posted by: Basenjis
» RE: Not only the war Posted by: werely
» RE: Not only the war Posted by: Basenjis
What do progressives and conservatives have in common?
Posted by: homebrewmike on Nov 22, 2005 7:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Answer: they both hate the Democrats.

A previous poster made the insightful comment "Maybe I'll re-register as a democrat."

You know, that's actually a good idea. Hey, Progressives - that ideal world you have isn't going to happen in the next 10 years. However, what you can do, is start taking steps in the right direction - and that isn't going to happen if you sit back and Monday morning quaterback. Frankly, I can understand the conservative's main complaint against liberals - we are a whiney lot. "Oh, the only game in town is tooo sucky. It's time for a latte at Starbucks." "Oooh! Ralph Nader isn't going to win, but I'm going to vote as a protest vote."

Like it or not, it's assinine thinking like that which got Bush elected. Know how the republicans are wining? They are effectively putting their differences behind them, and joining ranks. There really IS huge split in the Republican ranks - actually, there are multiple splits. There's a fair percentage of Free market fundamentalists who are going along with the Christian Fundamentalists (re-branded as Evangelicals, don't cha know) just so that they can bash the poor. The free marketers are selling your right to pray as you like in exchange for obscenely open markets.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, the progressives are whining that the Democrats aren't doing such a good job. Here's a thought - George Bush and Karl Rove aren't the problem - it's your neighbor, brother, co-worker who is. They don't have a problem with torture. They don't have a problem with stepping on the poor. As a result, they're voting in tyrants. What to do? Damned if I know - but I'll take a page from the Republican playbook, and cite "United we Stand, Divided we fall." And that's exactly what we're doing.

So, drop that latte, and give your poor senator a pat on the back - let him know you appreciate the hard work that he's doing. Tell him that although you may not see eye to eye on everything, you'll give him support when he needs it.

For God's sake, quite waiting for the optimal solution and go with something that works.

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

» Thank you, homebrewmike Posted by: cyclone
» RE: Thank you, homebrewmike Posted by: VAGreen
» Pal, I don't drink latte' Posted by: sausage
» RE: Pal, I don't drink latte' Posted by: Basenjis
Primary challange? Yeah right!
Posted by: AlanSmithee on Nov 22, 2005 7:14 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Touting the dem primary? Pull the other one! Anyone with half a brain knows that neither party's primary has meant squat since the '60s.

This has been the cry of the faux-liberal "progressive" press for some weeks now. Did Alternet get a talking points memo from the DNC?

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

John Kerry would be president today...
Posted by: sausage on Nov 22, 2005 7:24 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
John Kerry would be president today, inspite of the Ohio vote fraud, if he had said, "I voted for the Iraq war resolution...because I was LIED to!" But, of course, being a white, suburban, establishment "liberal" he just could not find it in himself to say anything so radical, Even if it is the truth. No, John Kerry thought he had to finesse the message so it would be palatable for the suburban soccer moms and SUV dads. You know, nothing too scary, nothing too upsetting.

I have backed these milquetoasts for thirty years and all I've gotten for my efforts has been Bill and Hillary Clinton, a blowjob in the Oval Office, corporate welfare and a stupid f*cking war because Saddam Hussein had his rowboat fleet ready to attack the USA! This country's going to hell in a handbasket that's carried in the mouth of a creature with the head of an elephant and the tail of an ass!

People, we're running out of options. As far as I can foresee there are only three viable alternatives:
1. Only back Democrat candidates like Dennis Kucinich and hope they win enough seats and influence to take over the party;
2. Break away and form a new, progressive* third party;
3. ________________ (You fill in the blank)

*By the way, DLC strongman, Gov. Tom Vilsack is busily undermining the meaning to the word "progressive."

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

Fall of the...
Posted by: Gma1 on Nov 22, 2005 8:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Don't you just love it that you can sit at your compuiter and write about this trouble we are in and voice your "hair on fire" opinions. Castigate the Democrats because they could/should have done it better. Geza-z-z you ought to run for office! You have such wonderful, idealistic views! The basic difference between the Republicans and the Democrats is that Democrats care about people. Politics is not a nice business. If you don't get elected what can you do then? Hm-m-m! Well, you can sit and blog and blog and blog about how everyone else - the Democrats - should have done it/should do it! When something positive happens for the Democrats why don't you either support it or go join the hypocrites (Republicans) and spare us your "insight"!

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

» RE: Fall of the... Posted by: Jeff G
» RE: Fall of the... Posted by: Lincoln fan
How many more liars do we need?
Posted by: Ellie1 on Nov 22, 2005 8:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So now Scalia claims he was lied to also (see today's Alternet
news) . How much longer are the American sheeple going to buy this crap

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

"A pox on both their houses?"
Posted by: monkeywrench on Nov 22, 2005 8:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A few points on the article:

The neocon arm of the GOP will become the party of STATED withdrawal, but will continue to find reasons why we can't; because they have no intention of leaving all that oil without the threat of their political demise – and the public is not ready to hand them that just yet, especially without help from the panty-waisted Democrats.

I've been a life-long Democrat and I'm about to exercise my own feeble protest and join the independents. The Democratic leadership has become Republican Lite so they can sit in on the corporate feast by currying the favor of the mouthpieces now in power. In short, the Democrat's leadership has lost its integrity because they've become "fat-n-happy" on the corporate dole, just like the Repuglicans. (Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have all the independence of Pinocchio and Charlie McCarthy.)

The grassroots Democrats should put together a committee to examine carefully any challengers to the entrenched Democratic leadership in the 2006 primaries – and they can start by "looking under the hood" for testicles. So far, the only Dem with any has been Howard Dean...and he was nearly side-tracked because of 'em.

Do I sound frustrated? You bet I am! We're up to our asses in problems and all we get out of Washington is the same old smoke-and-mirrors political crap. There's no time left to play out the Washington soap opera; we need to find real solutions to real porblems, and we need to do it real fast, or there isn't going to be much of an America – or world – left in the future.

It's a sad day in Mudville for the Democratic Party; they're one strike from out.

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

» RE: "A pox on both their houses?" Posted by: Lincoln fan
re: can't you guys find someone else
Posted by: jareilly on Nov 22, 2005 9:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Appreciate your frustration shaspirit but the truth is a lot of otherwise perfectly sensible liberals and progressives, took something like your position on John Kerry in 04 and look what they got. Frei's condemnation of Kerry is painfully accurate. And god knows why many of my self-described liberal friends think there is anything "liberal" at all about Hillary. It is almost as if they believe the nutcase Right's poison fairy tale on the Clintons.

I agree we need a progressive farm team. At the same time, we need to keep the pressure on the appalling and craven party leadership. Nancy Pelosi actually was sort of a liberal once. Listen to her now, dodging to the right of Murtha, a diehard Reagan Democrat! By exposing their cynicism, perhaps we can get their constituents to contact them and tell them that this shit has to stop right away. That, they, the Demo leadership need to fight back vs. Bush and end this war right away or we will withdraw our support, our money, our votes. The Right's base threatens their leadership all the time and they get away with it. Look at Harriet Miers. It's time we applied the same kind of hard ass, bare-knuckled pressure. Or get out of the game and move to New Zealand or Venezuela.

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

Gee. Didn't the polls show 90% of the american voters backed the war!
Posted by: stoney13 on Nov 22, 2005 10:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was one of the 10%. Ask anybody that knew me! I wasn't taken in for one second by all the hub-bub and shit-slinging!

The "weak-kneed" Democrats did what the people said they wanted them to do!! That's kind'a how you get elected to office, you know!! We all got conned by the administration!! (Well 90% got conned by the administration!)

In 2006 we've got a choice between the neocons and door number 3! I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm taking door number 3!!

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

US PERSON
Posted by: US Person on Nov 22, 2005 10:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You heard it from me frist! Iraq is such a freakin' mess that all the "phased withdrawals", "diplomatic efforts" and other soothing CYA laguage is irrelevant at this point. Congress only has themselves to blame for sucking up the Boy Emperor's toxic brew of bellicosity, jingoism and delusional ideology. Let the guilty Dems search for fig leaves.

A long term stabilization of Afganistan--a failed state before our entry to pursue "the bad guys"--should be our primary military emphasis in the Middle East. Diplomatically, our front should be the establishment of a Palestinian State which includes a West Bank and East Jerusalem settlement. Troop withdrawals from Iraq should begin after the establishment of a permanent Iraqi government, ready or not to defend its legitimacy. Except for a advisors, our troops should be "redeployed" from Iraq by the end of 2006.

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

What is a Boosh to Do?
Posted by: cyclone on Nov 22, 2005 11:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now that the new, democratic Iraqi government has said that it wants all foreign troops gone, what is the White House position now? Stay for oil? Gonna be interesting.

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

OK, let us ask "why?" -- PART I.
Posted by: nuncus1 on Nov 22, 2005 8:54 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's Not Rocket Science -- Money Rarely Is.

1. It's all about the OIL, stupid.

OK, what does that mean?

We Americans have an insatiable thirst for oil.

We have NO ALTERNATIVE to using oil as our energy source: coal is too polluting; nuclear energy leaves us with an absolutely intractable "waste storage" problem, and it is "expensive;" forget burning "wood" -- we'd be out of trees in a month; and OUR BUSINESSMEN AND INVESTORS ARE NOT GOING TO IMPLEMENT A HYDROGEN-BASED ENERGY DRIVEN ECONOMY FOR A VERY LONG TIME. You will not in your wildest dreams see the FIRST nickel invested in hydrogen based energy until the oil business has made its LAST nickel out of extracting oil, refining it, and selling it at the local fuel pump -- AIN'T
gonna happen.

2. We are IN Iraq militarily to SECURE an OIL SUPPLY. The oil fields were the very first thing the United States military "secured" in Iraq. Within FOUR HOURS of reaching Baghdad, the Iraqi oil fields were probably the "safest" spot on the planet Earth to sit on a lawn chair and get a tan.

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

God do I hate holier than thou progressives!
Posted by: richards1052 on Nov 22, 2005 10:56 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First, let me say that I share Jan Frel's frustrations with the Democrats on the war. I share his frustration w. Kerry's position on the war. There's lots to criticize there.

But why do you go after Murtha? Oh, he's in the pocket of the military brass, I see. So a guy comes forward with a good progressive position, though not for the reasons you would, and you want to diss him & act like he's not worth crap?

I don't care what Murtha supported ten yrs. ago or even 2 yrs. ago. I care about what he said now. He said something good, brave and honorable. And he got flayed in a despicable manner by people that Jan & I both hate. I'm proud of John Murtha--and even people like Jan for whom the Democratic Party can never be pure enough should be proud of him. It's just a start (you have to start somewhere). Barack Obama just called for troop withdrawal today. That statement might not have happened w/o Murtha. So give the guy a break.

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

» Amen, richards1052 Posted by: cyclone
Democrats are whiners?!?
Posted by: CyraBrown@aol.com on Nov 23, 2005 2:37 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'd say the Republicans are quite gifted whiners themselves. How about Tom(everybody is picking on me!)DeLay ? Or Jean Schmidt? Or Bill Bennett, Rush Limbaugh, Katherine Harris, and on and on and on. Yes, the Dems have issues. But we would be better off countering the Republicans slams rather than adding to them ourselves.

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

where are the dems?
Posted by: bushbegone on Nov 23, 2005 4:43 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
FIRST THINGS FIRST 11/19/05

The democrats must come up with a clear and simple position on this complicated subject, a way of allowing the American people to understand what we stand for concerning the War in Iraq.

Many of our Senators and House members voted for the authorization and the continued funding of the war in Iraq. This has placed the democrats in the position of not wanting to say it is time to get out of Iraq. A strong position would be that we insist talking about making the decision to get out. The next question of how we accomplish our departure only comes into the debate when we are honest with the American people about not having any intentions of staying in Iraq. This is where the NeoCons are the most vulnerable, they do not want to leave Iraq and lose whatever advances they believe they have won. The permanent Bases are the Achilles’ heel of the NeoCons

I believe that many Americans confuse cut and run with proclaiming that the war is not over and we are running away--- not true! What we are doing now is occupying Iraq. We have won the war, the armies of Saddam Hussein have been defeated, the very people who he is charged with trying to destroy will try Saddam. Once you make that distinction it would allow you to say to the rest of the world we have done all that we can. We have saved Iraq from the terrible dictator, and we must now train the Iraq forces to a level that they have every chance to create their own form of government. The rest of the world would come to our aid, if they believe we are truly leaving. The democrats want to leave but the NeoCons do not----that is where the arguments should be. The democrats must push Bush on the issue of building permanent bases in Iraq. You can call them embassies or bases, makes no difference. They are a big hindrance when you try to convince the world we have no desire to control the internal affairs of Iraq. The democratic position should be no permanent bases.

When the Bush Administration goes after you on cut and run relate what at least one general has said----it would take 12-18 months to get our troops out of Iraq if we decided to leave today. There is no cut and run.

We can ask Jordan to help set up peace talks with all the interested parties. This must include as many groups as possible, and we should not exclude anyone that has a power base. Jordan will help.

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

rover
Posted by: Roverton on Nov 25, 2005 3:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They have it coming. The Democrats were the immune system against the Corpo-Right Flu. They have failed miserably. Failed disasterously, exhibiting only weakness and fear-motivated compliance. Barbera Boxer and a TINY handful of others stand in defiance of the intimidation that has consumed the rest of the party. Beating up? These guys deserve some sort of response to how they've let us down. For a group that reponds to it's own, immediate self interest so promptly, I'd say a resounding slap on the collective ass is the ONLY thing making them get some balls/ovaries back at all.

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

rover
Posted by: Roverton on Nov 25, 2005 3:24 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I do agree with the '' We're the ones who will actually institute any true change'' part. That's why I'm wary of the Dems now too. They need to step up and WIN me back again. Really dazzle me with some TRUE Democratic behavior or it would be sociopathic to assume they will magically transform into our heroes. Too much harm will come to us in the interim, while waiting for the party to awaken.

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

Something Borrowed
Posted by: Roverton on Nov 25, 2005 3:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Things work great when they're new. Like a car. At a certain point, one must consider shopping-new-rather-than-repairing again. Humans used to be wonderful at problem solving. Has the evolutionary curve topped us this time? Are we incapabale of any further change as a species? Pity. Cockroaches apperar to operate in their own best interest with maximum effiency... Congrats, guys. Good luck with the planet. Pity...

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

Holier Than Thou
Posted by: Roverton on Nov 25, 2005 4:16 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Don't expect us to stay silent about how we've been raped while the Dems were put at America's gate to protect us. that's their primary job - Secure our feedom. Guard it as if it were more important than their income. Have they done their job?

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

Catharsis
Posted by: Roverton on Nov 25, 2005 4:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Maybe the Democratic & Progressive parties should team up and form the DIGRESSIVE PARTY. Instead of a militia, we'll have a MINUTIA. They can have a meeting about forming a coalition to begin to decide something in seconds flat.

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

Remember that Senator Paul Wellstone Voted NO----
Posted by: oleMnRose on Nov 26, 2005 4:14 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
on the 'war' and he and his family and staff paid for it with their lives.I'm old, I knew Hurbert Humphey, the Kennedy's and Paul Wellstone BEFORE he was a Senator. And he wasn't any different after he was elected then he was before. Suck it UP, Democrats, Progressives, Independents, we have a Country to take back, and we better get at it, times a wastin' and it waits for no one. We'd all better pull up our Big Kids panties and get off the computer chair and get out there and DO SOME THING. I came through the 60's and the Farm Protests of the 80's in the Midwest, some of you complaining are too young to remember these, but I know what it's like to look down the barrel of a loaded Riot Gun held by a State Patrolman who's job it was to protect the citizens of Minnesota, but was protecting the Financial Insitutions instead. I'm a Farm woman who knows up close and personal what a loaded shotgun from 3 feet away does, I've seen it from the other side. If you think we can take our Country back without going to the streets and some of us dying of it, Think again.

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

» You got that right, oleMnRose Posted by: Artemis3
Candidate for the dems
Posted by: reinaldok on Nov 26, 2005 5:51 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
At the present time and of course we still have almost three years to figure out how to get us all out of this disgraceful mess, I see only one clear minded possibility to take on courageously and effectively the present neo con gang.
That is of course Wesley Clark. He would get the job done quickly and correctly.

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