home
I agree, here's why (5.00 / 2) (#24)
by fairleft on Thu Jul 05, 2007 at 02:46:45 PM EST
That's how I interpret the overall pattern since 9/11. Here's a very rough rendering of how 'our' Beltway Democrats have proceeded since then:

Gitmo: No reaction.

Death of Habeas Corpus: No reaction.

Obviously fake WMD b.s.: Yup, sounds good to us!

Iraq war going bad: We'll do occupation better.

Abu Ghraib: No reaction by 'our guys' except for Durbin's brief protest retracted (with a crying spell, nice touch).

2004 Presidential campaign: Insiders go all out for "we'll do occupation better" Kerry.

2004 antiwar effort: Democratic Party pressure puts it on hold during Kerry campaign.

2005: Despite the massive advantage it seemingly provides by getting in line with 75-80% of his/her party on the grassroots' number 1 issue, it takes till the end of this year for even one major Presidential candidate to have the temerity to say 'out soon' on Iraq.

2006: The three major Democratic candidates become 'out now' but with the huge hole of a 'residual force' in Iraq of 60-80,000.

2006 Congressional elections: Rahm and his insiders go all out to find military-loving 'out very slowly if at all' candidates.

2007: The party leadership (however they ended up voting) helpfully manages and designs the President's funding bill so that it is sure to get approved.



[ Parent ]

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft