Critics say the Democrats’ reluctance to seize the Iraq war’s purse strings stems from political timidity.This is all on the mark, of course, except for the bit about "timidity" and fears for re-election. The fact is that the Democratic Party, at the institutional level, has been behind this war from the beginning, and is still behind it. They're not afraid; they're committed.Jim Manley, a spokesperson for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D–Nevada), told TNS that while the Senator would scrutinize the upcoming funding requests, Reid "intends to make sure that the troops get everything they need."
For now, Manley said that Reid, who initially supported the war, is promoting a conciliatory approach: a non-binding resolution criticizing Bush’s troop increase, aimed at winning Republican backing to show bipartisan opposition. That resolution, Reid's office says, is still being finalized and has not been publicly released.
But retired Lieutenant Colonel Piers Wood, who heads the think tank Military Insights, said de-escalating the war would not necessarily put the troops at further risk. By enacting surgical budget cuts, he said, Congress "could constrain offensive operations" but maintain funds to cover troops’ basic needs.
He nonetheless predicted, "Congress, of course, being cowards, are going to hold off on cutting funds in any obvious or dramatic way…
Comments (10)
as much as i might like to take credit
for the last two posts
there not mine
father smiff what's happening maaaan
Posted by js paine | January 16, 2007 9:15 PM
Posted on January 16, 2007 21:15
As near as I can tell, the grand dem strategy is to keep the bloodbath going at least until '08, when they assume they'll be swept into power and President Hillary will win the war on terra by '10. '14 at the latest. Depending on the weather.
Posted by AlanSmithee | January 17, 2007 7:34 AM
Posted on January 17, 2007 07:34
at the max factor
its not just cosmetics anymore ....
http://maxspeak.org/mt/archives/002783.html#more
"the Iraq debacle and the defeat of Bush on Social Security offer the Dems a political opportunity to annihiliate the G.O.P. for at least a decade or so. The country is still conservative, but the failure of Bush is a chance to suggest that people think differently. Now is the time to go for the jugular, not entertain David Broder's fantasies of a centrist renaissance "
as to this
fond hope
for substance
or at least something
beyond lipsticking the jack ass
i comment :
tactics max ????
my thought ..errrr
our thought at "stop me..."
a bolt threat
in the dem house caucus
by the peace now caucus
"either join us and de fund now
or we bolt...
we bust your majority...
no more truckling
to spineless party machiavells
and
no more
okee dokee my hands are clean
we no controlo the remoto bs......
if we don't stop it now
we're pushin the button too ....
we're killers.."
js paine | 01.16.07 - 8:01 pm | #
Posted by j s paine | January 17, 2007 12:00 PM
Posted on January 17, 2007 12:00
I wonder what it will take for people to get the fact that the Democrats are also a war party. Even smart, relatively anti-democrat people I talk to speak as if the Iraq War and war in general is something that the Democrats didn't want, but are politically unable to deal with, or that a few bad apples in the DLC are preventing the Dems from truly flowering and achieving their natural anti-war stance. This is the party of Wilson, Truman, Johnson and Clinton! Why can't you get this?
Posted by Rowan | January 17, 2007 1:14 PM
Posted on January 17, 2007 13:14
this keeps haunting me ...
why so many goo goos
convinced
the iraqupation
is
hapless hideous horror
but are still trying
tofigure out
how best uncle can act
since he's "responsible "??
why are they trying to figure
what if any
actions by
uncle's armed and shootin forces
stuck in there
might reduce
the aggregate
human
killed and mutilated count
(that is of course
other then returning to base
to await prompt removal)
its got to be
for the record
so the world we have faith
in future intervention moments
we can act like humans...
yes we americans
can act like brutes
yes
brutes live among us
and
brutes get elected to lead us
from time to time
a brute is now our unitary prez
but but
but
we can intervene
with responsible humanism too
look at ...kosovo
and now
we responsible caring souls
thru ....we hope ...
our brand new opposition congress
want to show the world
just how humane we can be
even in a gruesomely bitched up
intervention setting ...
the nightingale surge
Posted by j s paine | January 17, 2007 2:35 PM
Posted on January 17, 2007 14:35
...or that a few bad apples in the DLC are preventing the Dems from truly flowering and achieving their natural anti-war stance...
But of course they can't do anything about the DLC. That would be cheating. [snerk]
Posted by ms_xeno | January 17, 2007 6:57 PM
Posted on January 17, 2007 18:57
not cheating, ms xeno. It would opposed to our Big Tent Democratic ideals. And I don't know about you, but the size of my Big Tent is very important to me.
Posted by Rowan | January 17, 2007 10:11 PM
Posted on January 17, 2007 22:11
Kosovo? I'm sure Serb civillians who had bombs raining down on them were pleased at how "civillized" The Clenis' campaign was. And, I'm sure the gang of human slave traders, drug pushers, and warlords we've installed in Kosovo appreciate our kindness.
Or...were you just being ironic/sarcastic, Mr Paine?
I'm with the antiwar.org/Arthur Silber crowd on interventions. They 99.9% make things worse.
Posted by Brian Miller | January 18, 2007 11:22 AM
Posted on January 18, 2007 11:22
I do believe JSP probably was being ironical, Brian. It's been known to happen.
Posted by MJS | January 18, 2007 12:04 PM
Posted on January 18, 2007 12:04
regardless of my ironic brush strokes
the bombs away liberals
seekosovo as THE paradigm
for intervention with a human touch
Posted by js paine | January 19, 2007 11:42 AM
Posted on January 19, 2007 11:42