Support Reid-Feingold

By Big Tent Democrat, Section War In Iraq
Posted on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 09:37:42 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Georgia10 asks why the Democratic Presidential candidates, who all proclaim a desire to end the Iraq Debacle, are not supporting the Reid-Feingold bill. She discusses Barack Obama in particular, but it applies to ALL the candidates except Senator Chris Dodd (who I am supporting):

To Obama (and Clinton, Biden, and Edwards, [and Richardson, Kucinich, Gravel] for that matter), I ask this: how can we believe you words, your claims that you are the president who will end this war, when you refuse to take the one step that best evidences your dedication to that cause? Either you want the war to end in March 2008 (as so many of their bills claim), or you don't. It is fundamentally inconsistent--and frankly, disrespectful to the American voter--to on the one hand boldly proclaim that it should be the policy of the United States to have all or most troops out of Iraq by March 2008, but then refuse to sign on to legislation that would truly effectuate that policy.

Hear, hear! Hurray for Georgia and the other daily kos FPers who are speaking up on this. Oh by the way, where is Move On and the rest of the Netroots on this? I hear crickets.

Hurray also to Jerome Armstrong, who adds great political analysis on how Obama is putting himself in a corner.

< New Details About Civilian Casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan | Reid-Feingold: 'But We Don't Have the Votes, Bush Will Veto . . ' >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Support Reid-Feingold | 6 comments (6 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

oh, snap! (5.00 / 4) (#1)
by chicago dyke on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 09:41:26 AM EST

BTD, you are funny.

but yes, where are the "anti-war" candidates, anyway? sob, i really wanted russ to run. just for the pleasure of working for him. i approach despair to realize that we can't elect good people who don't have lots of money to highest office.

Is Reid-Feingold a sop to the anti-war crowd? (5.00 / 1) (#2)
by fairleft on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 10:05:15 AM EST

My suspicion is the leadership wants it to lose, and it's meant just to show those who want us out of Iraq that our position is unrealistic, that it doesn't have enough votes. Its defeat, the leaders may wrongly suppose, will make the supplemental capitulation easier to swallow. "Hey, we tried..."

Of course, even if it is so designed, there's really no excuse for an 'antiwar' candidate not to support it. Good post, again, BTD.

: They may think that (5.00 / 3) (#3)
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 10:11:11 AM EST

But if it gets enough DEMOCRATIC support, say 45 votes in the Senate, the principle can become the Dem position.
Understand how this will work, a date certain when Dems will NOT fund the Debacle.
Line in the sand. Remember to NOT fund requires the passage of NOTHING, just the NOT passing of funding.

Although I am undecided, I have a list of who I am (5.00 / 1) (#5)
by mentaldebris on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 12:55:01 PM EST

not voting for in the primary. Obama inches closer and closer to that list every day. He continues on this path for much longer and he's out. The Lieberman influence (sell out Dems publicly) is becoming quite visible in this politician. No thanks. This is not leadership.

Unless the Democrats actually put a serious effort into, at the very least, shortening the leash (funding for shorter stretches and revisiting cut-off scenarios as the public's patience wears thinner than it already is and the hellhole into which Bush is dragging the GOP looms ever larger in the window, causing them to rethink their position) I'm inclined to agree with those who feel that most of the Dem leadership are playing the anti-war crowd (you know, most of the country) and hoping everyone not paying attention falls for the bait and switch.

"We tried" just ain't going to cut it in the long run, especially when you have Dems like Obama running about spouting RTP nonsense and the "trying" appears to be only for show.

Georgia10 is right, they can't have it both ways.

S**t, or get off the pot. "We don't have the votes" is no excuse for not trying. Move the window. Paint the repubs into a corner instead of painting yourself into one. Accentuate the differences between those who want the war to continue and those who don't. Some of our frontrunners have failed miserably in doing that.

: Same on Obama, but (5.00 / 2) (#6)
by fairleft on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 04:50:15 PM EST

more on more, it looks like the 'major' Democratic Presidential candidates, taken as a whole, are a disaster on Iraq. Are they against the war? Are they? How are we supposed to know, because they support fully funding it? And that's Iraq. It's much worse, much more war whoring worse, when it comes to Iran.
They're all unfailing and uncreative followers of whatever they think is the most politically advantageous position. No leadership at all.
So we can't be sure of even the basics with the 'top' candidates, and in that case I tend to just look at where they're getting tons of money from and assume the worst.

No Longer Believing (4.75 / 4) (#4)
by JHFarr on Fri Apr 13, 2007 at 10:31:53 AM EST

There will never be a concerted anti-war effort on the part of the Democrats, who will soon fall into line with a terrible attack on Iran. In my 61st year, I no longer believe that my country will ever be humane and reasonable, as Kurt Vonnegut says here.

All of these efforts on the part of the blogosphere and a few outspoken individuals will come to naught, and life will only become worse for all by the very rich. There's no stopping the current slide except the rocks at the bottom of the cliff. For my part, I hope to find a bit of refuge somewhere, maybe inside my heart, where I can live out the rest of my days with my wife and whoever wants to be my friend. I owe her at least that much, and my path from here on out is clear.