Posted on 03/08/2007 7:30:03 AM PST by SoFloFreeper
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Congressional Democrats have decided to push a specific timeline for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.
Ahhhhhhh.....Therein lies the problem with Conservatives these days.....
In politics, the idea is to know and to understand where the public is, not force them to swallow something they won't eat.
This is what the Conservatives within the party tried to do to the voter in the last election, and they voiced their opinion.
With that statement, you nailed down the problem and the solution in a few words. As I said, if we do more of the same, we will get more of the same.
Many of us on the moderate flanks have been giving warnings for the past three years about this. We are still talking, but on this forum there are fewer of us. Many have given up.
It sound harsh to say it, but eventually everyone will be forced to get the point I am trying to get across.
We lost a battle, but we don't want to lose the war! The Conservative wing needs to realize that it must give some ground to have a chance to rule again, and they cannot do what they did before. If they do, the war is lost and the faction will be jettisoned from the party as others were before it. Anyone remember the Stalwarts?
This is a supplemental to the existing FY2007 DoD budget that runs from Oct 2006 through Sep 2007. So the poison pill would force Bush to Veto, the result would be an immediate loss of funding since the last supplemental runs out in April. The Sec Def could rob all other DoD accounts for funding but he can't go outside his agency unless the Congress authorizes it, some funds that are unobligated could be transferred but most funds are colored for certain activities and it is illegal to redirect them w/o congress's Ok.
As for fillibuster, the gambit is that this would force some compromise for a timetable because a fillibuster is a win for the Dems if it lasts past April, no supplemental no OIF/OEF funding equals immediate withdrawal.
this is what happens when you fight a war on the cheap....if the OEF/OIF costs were all inside the DoD budget when it is marked up in the Congress in September of last year then this would have been voted on by the last Congress not the Dem controlled one.
''They are playing to an audience for the 2008 elections.''............ Your so right!I agree! I have thought about it for a while and concluded their strategy for 2008 is....... ''Look we tried and we tried , you can all see we really and truly tried to stop this war but we just can't stop the President, because he has all the power, so put us (the RATS) in the White House in 2008 and then we will have the power we need to stop the war''......brilliant!
The fight must be waged by going to the people. If there is enough potential damage to the democrats seeking reelection, the bill will fail, and a presidential veto will not be needed.
If the needed, the veto needs to be override proof, or we will have the same situation we had in Vietnam.
The RATS and some REPUBS would not let this happen. They wanted the war budget in the supplemental so they could keep the actual budget from exceeding the screwball caps that they always violate. The caps are a product of both sides.
A veto is a win for the Dems( no supplemental equals immediate withdrawal), a fillibuster is a win for the Dems( if it lasts long enough then the supplemental from last year runs out and the lack of funds forces immediate withdrawal), the timetable is a win for the Dems( a political win due to the date certain but funds would be there for the surge and the fight through early 2008). So that leaves us with Joe Lieberman switching as the sole lever to keep this from happening. We are screwed......
Every issue advocacy group for the military would be flooded with cash to run ads against the Dem's who are putting the troops in danger by taking away their bullets while still in a fight.
I would say to the Dem's....."Bring it on! We shall see who emerges the winner!"
They got by with this stuff during Nam because we had withdrawn American forces by then. They screwed the south Vietnamese and caused a huge death toll.
I don't see them doing the same thing with our men and women in the field.
People forget that he is indeed a liberal Dem. Very liberal.
I've noticed that some (most?) of the exceptionally insightful posts around here go unnoticed. But to be fair, human nature is to not do much until someone yells fire in a crowded theater. ;-)
The advocacy groups would be rightly enraged but I do not feel that the Dem leadsership gives a sh!t. The end this war now ANSWER crowd will turn out in 2008 the military advocates will not turn out enough oppositon to dethrone Hillary and her running mate, Al Sharpton (just Kidding).
They have overtly started a fight over the supplemental, this gives Bush absolutely no outs. He signs it and gets some funds for the rest of his term or he gets bupkus and robs the rest of DoD to keep it going.
The real policy will be to continue making the Iraq war political, and damage Republican election hopefuls in the process.
Note that they have settled on trying to tell Bush when he can deploy forces, and all of this is meaningless.
The only real power they have is to curtail funding, and the public is not there ........yet. So they beat the bushes, looking for something to stick.
But this will stick, the left leaning public will see this as a middle road compromise and if the DEMS spin it that way then Bush is being hard headed and doesn't care about the troops. He let the soldeirs suffer at Walter Reed so he doesn't care he vetoed the supplemental so the troops lack equipment he doesn't care he refuses to compromise he doesn't care....
I hope that the sheeple bleat loud and long but i truly beleive Pelosi doesn't give a crap and will drive on until Bush is forced to veto this...if it gets through the Senate. Which is unlikely. But it will be fodder for the media to spin Bush as heartless or stubborn or who knows.
Due to their world view on war (at least by US, Brit, Australia etc.) their number 1 issue with Iraq is the possibility of a permanent base in the middle of the Middle East. Strategically it is unquestionably a powerful safeguard against Muslim nations that may attack the Homeland. Hit us and we're right nearby and will retaliate. The left can't allow this.
The DEMONRATS will be responsible for the next 9/11.
|
Good point.
How long? Two years?
Nope. This is an '08 election platform. They've proven they could care less about our troops. What this little play boils down to is that congress is threatening to cut off funding to our troops during a time of war unless we retreat. If passed, our troops lose and Iraq is history.
Just in time for the election. Whadda coinkydink.
Fodder for the media.......yes......
We can''t stop that, but we can control some things, like support for this embattled president.
We need to stick by him until the end of his term, and move on. But the party base has not done that, and they have one more chance for the next eighteen months to do what they were supposed to be doing all along.
There are a lot of us out here in the boonies who know what losing a war is all about. The psychological damage to the country cannot be repeated under any circumstances.
If it were to happen, I would not give a plug nickle for the lives of a lot of veterans, and I don't want to see that again in my lifetime.
Some of us out here, are quite serious about getting a bit of revenge for making wars political fodder. We are at a age that we have lived about all we care to, and are finished with family raising and such major chores.
Personally, I would like nothing better than to take out some long held anger and resentment against the appropriate people at the proper time and place.
We sent this message to John Kerry, a couple years ago, and we are waiting to be called on again to serve.
I think you can take comfort in the fact that we are ready and willing to defend this president against anything he may face, when it occurs.
It won't be pretty, I can guarantee that much. And this time, we are not going to hold back.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.