File under: I just don’t get it

Democratic leaders revamp anti-war plan

House Democratic leaders are developing an anti-war proposal that wouldn’t cut off money for U.S. troops in Iraq but would require President Bush to acknowledge problems with an overburdened military. The plan could draw bipartisan support but is expected to be a tough sell to members who say they don’t think it goes far enough to assuage voters angered by the four-year conflict.

Bush “hasn’t to date done anything we’ve asked him to do, so why we would think he would do anything in the future is beyond me,” said Rep. Lynn Woolsey, D-Calif., one of a group of liberal Democrats pushing for an immediate end to the war. Democratic protests to the war grew louder in January after they took control of Congress and Bush announced he planned to send 21,500 more troops to Iraq. Earlier this month, House Democrats pushed through a nonbinding resolution opposing the buildup.

It would “require President Bush to acknowledge problems.” So, is that supposed to be more or less meaningless than a “nonbinding” resolution? Let’s go all the way. I propose a nonbinding resolution suggesting that President Bush admit he has been a bad boy, and (per John the Marine) he should be politely requested to write on the blackboard 500 times, “I will not invade Middle Eastern countries based on weak intelligence ever again!”

They aren’t going to do anything. Nothing.

Trackbacks & Pings

  1. Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator on 01 Mar 2007 at 12:34 am

    Democratic leaders revamp anti-war plan

    House Democratic leaders are developing an anti-war proposal that wouldn’t cut off money for U.S. tr

  2. My Take on the Latest Anti-War Bill « Abstract Nonsense on 01 Mar 2007 at 6:08 am

    […] The Commissar is a lot less ambivalent than I am. He says, “I propose a nonbinding resolution suggesting that President Bush admit he has been a bad boy, and (per John the Marine) he should be politely requested to write on the blackboard 500 times, ‘I will not invade Middle Eastern countries based on weak intelligence ever again!’” […]

  3. appletree » Blog Archive » My Take on the Latest Anti-War Bill on 01 Mar 2007 at 6:08 am

    […] The Commissar is a lot less ambivalent than I am. He says, “I propose a nonbinding resolution suggesting that President Bush admit he has been a bad boy, and (per John the Marine) he should be politely requested to write on the blackboard 500 times, ‘I will not invade Middle Eastern countries based on weak intelligence ever again!’” […]

Comments

  1. commissar wrote:

    Note to the regular commenters. My spam filter sometimes seems a little aggressive. Please be assured that I have not, and based on your coments, I foresee no need to block, ban, or delete any comments you might make.

    If a comment goes into moderation, I’ll recover it, usually within the same day.

    Posted 28 Feb 2007 at 10:28 pm

  2. Grim wrote:

    I think this is meant to be clever — they feel, as you said recently, that this way the Republicans will “own” Iraq in 2008, and they can coast to victory. (This is exactly like the plan from 2006 and 2004, I can’t help but notice.)

    People are just as likely to draw the lesson that the Democratic national party isn’t capable of serious action, neither to deploy forces nor to take action to require their withdrawal. This is, I think, the correct reading: the party requires support from its base coalition, which is hardwired into the electoral process in the form of gerrymandered Congressional districts. They can’t risk alienating any of their core constituents, and those groups favor different things. (White male union men, for example, are often Vets who worry that withdrawal will make war more rather than less likely in the future; but professors at colleges are more likely to be anti-war by sentiment.)

    So, you’re right: unless public sentiment turns so solidly against the war that all their major constituent blocs are satisfied with serious action, there will be none. We have come to the point at which the national Republican party misgoverns, but the national Democratic party can’t govern.

    Posted 28 Feb 2007 at 11:05 pm

  3. John the Marine wrote:

    “We have come to the point at which the national Republican party misgoverns, but the national Democratic party can’t govern.”

    Grim speaks volumes of truth with the above quote. When it comes to elections I feel I have choice between; shooting myself in the head or jumping off a sky-scraper. Either way I loose.

    However, to date GOP misgovernment has been cheaper respecting taxes than Democrat inaction. Don’t get excited though because tax cuts don’t mean much to dead men.

    Posted 01 Mar 2007 at 9:00 am

  4. Rodney A Stanton wrote:

    The “leaders” are old Dems. 21 Reagan Democrats got elected to Congress last year. Which is why John The Marine who was asked to resign, did not get the top job Nancy tried to give him. And it is why they can not get a meaningful bill passed. The old, liberal dems want it bad. But the new conservative Dems are against it; for the same reason they killed John the Marine asked to resign’s elevation.
    What will happen is that there will be a lot less growth in government this congress than in the last 3.
    The war is a stalemate. Too many Regan Democrats , while thinking Bush has done a awful job, support it in concept - if not the dumb execution. The progressives lack the power within their own party to get anything significant passed without the help of a lot of liberal Republicans.

    Posted 01 Mar 2007 at 9:03 am

  5. John the Marine wrote:

    Hey Rodney, “John The Marine” as in that loathsome piece of sh_t Murtha!? I resent even an accidental association with him. Go play in traffic.

    Posted 01 Mar 2007 at 9:44 am

  6. Rodney A Stanton wrote:

    John - All of us who ever proudly wore the Globe and Anchor are associated with that t*rd! It is unfortunate that the Corps did not force him out sooner; like his first day!
    Like you and I he did wear the Globe and anchor! As did another tu*d F Lee Baily. Wijth whom we are associated by our service.
    A man from “the Old Corps”!

    Posted 01 Mar 2007 at 2:49 pm

  7. John the Marine wrote:

    Rodney, Point well taken. Please except my apologies for the traffic comment. I thought you were making pun. Semper Fi Brother.

    Posted 01 Mar 2007 at 5:14 pm

  8. jfxgillis wrote:

    Commissar, first, FYI, I had a comment swallowed near the bottom of the Obama thread. No biggie. I have to give Grim the last word one time or other.

    :^{)>

    On the main point. To re-iterate. Since the “ANYTHING” you want the Dems to do will perforce entail a Constitutional confrontation and politics at the Constitutional level requires (generally) a two-thirds majority, The Dems can do nothing until they get 40% or so of the Repubs on board.

    Shrug.

    Sucks.

    The only thing can really do as the 50% +1 Majority to stick it to Bush is the ‘08 fiscal year. For which they have time.

    EVERYTHING you see now from both sides is posturing and angling for position for the showdown.

    Posted 01 Mar 2007 at 8:00 pm

  9. commissar wrote:

    jfxgillis,

    Overall, I agree. But, as a detail, the Dems could do a lot with 60 votes in the Senate and a 51% majority in the House. If, on that basis, they pushed thru some war-limiting laws, and forced a veto, I’d call that something.

    But, overall, you are right; we are in for two years of posturing and angling.

    Posted 01 Mar 2007 at 8:17 pm

  10. jfxgillis wrote:

    I’m envisioning something all this line:

    1. Non-operating scold (already occurred);

    2. Funding threats, various trial balloons; (happening now);

    3. Scandal-ish Iraq hearings (Spring, Summer) on contracting, etc.;

    4. More funding threats, minimal funding restrictions (early Fall);

    5. A Binding scold attached to F08 appropriations (end of fiscal year; continuing resolution)

    6. Real funding restrictions (next Winter)

    That’s best case. Move everything back by months if the **** in Congress gets too deep to shovel.

    Posted 01 Mar 2007 at 8:45 pm

  11. Steve LLamabutcher wrote:

    And this is a surprise in that……..?

    Talk about your buyer’s remorse twice

    Posted 02 Mar 2007 at 3:09 pm

« A Stratego game comes to life
The Ultimate Time Waster »