COUNTERPOINT: Vote To Change The Course
COUNTERPOINT: Vote To Change The Course
Our guest blogger, Denis McDonough, is a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress and was formerly a foreign policy adviser to Sen. Tom Daschle from 2000 to 2004. He disagrees with our position that Congress must reject the supplemental.
UPDATE: See our comment.
Congress should vote to enact the FY07 Supplemental, and progressives who have forced the President to change course on Iraq should vote for it. For the first time in the 5 years since the war started, the President is being forced to change course and accept something other than a blank check. He is now forced to respond to verifiable benchmarks — the fact of which Secretary Gates used on his recent trip.
The fact is that despite the hand wringing now, we all knew it would be near impossible to get the super-majorities needed in to enact hard and fast timelines for redeployment from Iraq. In fact, it was widely commented that the bare majorities in the House and Senate to pass the initial conference report were a triumph of leadership, given that the Senate Democratic Caucus could count on 49 votes and the House Democrats only 231.
Many critics of the current deal — ThinkProgress included — now suggest Congress should have somehow gotten more. They critique the inclusion of a waiver on the political benchmarks, though waivers have become standard in Congressional legislation on foreign affairs over the last several decades, so much so that even wildly popular laws enacted with overwhelming support, like the Jerusalem Embassy Act, retain waiver authority for the president.
Other critics suggest Congress should have simply kept sending the President a bill to veto, while existing funding runs out. One analysis suggested that the Food and Forage Act of 1861 would have given the President the authority to feed and arm the troops in the field, provided, of course, the President wanted to do so. A separate analysis of the same law suggested the President could simply choose to spend money to continue the war if the Congress failed to enact the supplemental — an actual occurrence of which CAP pointed out in an analysis we prepared earlier this year.
Whether you think the President might do the right thing or the wrong thing, it makes no sense for the Congress to abdicate its power of the purse, especially to this Administration on this issue.
At the end of the day, precedent demonstrates that Congress will be able to stop the war only when it has the votes to force the President to back down. Given Democratic votes alone cannot get this done, the President can only be forced to back down when significant numbers of his own party desert him in Congress. As we argued in a recent CAP paper — which ThinkProgress also used to support its case — this is going to be a prolonged effort that will require many rounds.
The good news for those who want to end the war in a way that protects our interests, there will be many more opportunities — in the Defense Authorization bill, the Defense Appropriations Bill and the FY 08 supplemental to do just that.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
It is staggering to read the words above. I guess that once a position is taken, it becomes terribly hard to change ones position. This past November the citizenry of this country spelled it out and the Dems can’t seem to read.
May 23rd, 2007 at 6:22 pmThey said “Get OUT of Iraq. Now that is not too hard to underastand. GET OUT!
There was a great banner from the nam period and it was also sold as pins for all to wear- it said- suppose they declared war and no one came.
The corrolary is – declar vicyory and come home.
The voters will dance in the streets!
“The good news for those who want to end the war in a way that protects our interests, there will be many more opportunities”
After a few more thousand deaths that is.
You know what Mr. McDonough, I appreciate your analysis, but I am insulted by the likes of you, Rahm Emanuel, and the rest the DLC types who tell me this bill is the end of the blank check. KNOCK IT OFF!!
We are not dumb. Don’t tell us there us meat in here, when there isn’t. it’s insulting. Just tell us that this is all you can do, if that’s what you think. But don’t give us your sorry excuse for spin on this by saying “For the first time in the 5 years since the war started, the President is being forced to change course and accept something other than a blank check.” It’s just not true.
May 23rd, 2007 at 6:23 pmWhen an employer once asked me if we should hire out to India some tech work… I said straight up no way do I support that because it is unAmerican. I didnt ask myself if my job would be on the line. I didnt worry if I looked like I was an anti-globalization wacko… Its called having a spine and not being a yes man… gamesmanship Politicians make me sick.
The power of Congress does not come from its ability to override vetos… it comes from the CONTROL of what laws do and do NOT get passed… and what money does or does NOT get appropriated.
No amount of excuses or BS will change this in my mind. Being professional doesnt include being a weakling about the facts.
May 23rd, 2007 at 6:23 pmso we should just lie down and fund more killing?
I can’t imagine ANYthing more disgusting. We need to demand that our congress not spend one more dime of OUR money to kill any more people in Iraq.
period.
aggressive war is murder and must be stopped.
Some additional thoughts:
“Is War Necessary?”
May 23rd, 2007 at 6:24 pmhttp://www.populistamerica.com/is_war_necessary
What do you expect this Congress to do to end the war? Withhold funds?
May 23rd, 2007 at 6:24 pmI fear that we will go into and past September with no change, and that we will go into the election with no change, and that a new Democratic president will be too timid, and will continue, with little change. The bases will remain, the embassy will remain, many of the troops will remain, Israel will be more vigorous in demanding war with Iran, and energy and environmental issues will be addressed only in ways comfortable for large corporations.
May 23rd, 2007 at 6:26 pmThere will always be war, until the people refuse to fight.
May 23rd, 2007 at 6:27 pmSell your bullshit elsewhere, not buying it here.
May 23rd, 2007 at 6:27 pmThis idiot is a Tom Daschle advisor. Anybody remember old Tom? Yeah, I know, the roll of Democratic losers is huge, but try to cast your mind way, way back…..
May 23rd, 2007 at 6:30 pmDenis McDonough,
Why should we think the Dems wont cave yet again come September? There’s no election between now and then. I’m sorry, but I find you to be full of crap!!
Now I am pissed.
THIS IS A PUFF PIECE DESIGNED TO GET US TO CALM DOWN!!!
DON’T LET IT WORK!!!
KEEP UP THE PRESSURE!!!
May 23rd, 2007 at 6:33 pmWell, fine. Now I don’t have to visit Think Progress any more.
May 23rd, 2007 at 6:34 pmWhat are you smoking, Denis? Go away and stay away. You are ugly and smell. I hate you!
May 23rd, 2007 at 6:34 pmIf it’s sure to pass, there’s no need to vote for it. Let the people who support it vote for it. Is that hard?
There have to be better strategies than first accepting the worst and then bandwaggoning the result. The bill belongs to Bush, the Republicans who vote for it, and the Democrats who vote for it.
May 23rd, 2007 at 6:35 pmWTF?!?!
How would actually using the power of the purse in Denis McDonough-land (aka Bizarro-world) be abdicating the power of the purse to Bush exactly?
This lamp works great, as long as you don’t turn it on.
Do you honestly expect people to buy your bullshit?
May 23rd, 2007 at 6:36 pmWhat do you expect this Congress to do to end the war? Withhold funds?
Comment by Nirvision
Either completely or until bush accepts he is wrong and helps undo his Iraq war.
May 23rd, 2007 at 6:37 pmAnyone who actually believes that the Democratic party is the “party of the People” is seriously misguided. It’s time for a grassroots effort to oust these K-street suck ups. They’ve spent more time and effort in getting a secret trade deal passed than actually solving the crisis they were put into power to solve. Pathetic.
May 23rd, 2007 at 6:38 pm#5
It would be Bush seen as withholding funds when he continues to veto every bill sent to him by Congress. The issue would be who gives in first. Bush has nothing to lose except face. Congress has a lot to lose since in November 2006 the people spoke wanting a change. The Democrats have betrayed the voters.
And, to simply say as McDonough said, ‘For the first time in the 5 years since the war started, the President is being forced to change course and accept something other than a blank check. He is now forced to respond to verifiable benchmarks’ is naive, and simplistic. Bush is NOT changing course, has NOT been forced to change course, and there are NO benchmarks that are ‘binding’. It is a worthless effort by Democrats.
May 23rd, 2007 at 6:39 pmas much as I hate to agree with Republicans about anything in recent years, they are right to call Democrats as gutless cowards.
May 23rd, 2007 at 6:42 pmDear Mr. McDonough – Nice try!! You’ll have to excuse our resident Lefty’s. The only thing that will appease this crowd is “cut and run” yesterday. And the good news for Conservatives….this is the crowd tol trot out as an alternative to Repubs keeping the WH.
May 23rd, 2007 at 6:43 pmThe only thing that will appease this crowd is “cut and run†yesterday. Comment by valiant venus
How passe! Do you really think that argument holds any water anymore? Stop with your stupid sound bite of yesteryear and move on – preferably to one of your right-wing, fascist blog sites where you will get kudos for your intolerant, ignorant remarks.
May 23rd, 2007 at 6:49 pm#19 “Cut and run”…?!?!?
ROFLMAO
You Fright-Wingers really do need to get a new line of name-calling. Your tired attempts at calling others who are your betters “cowards” is getting rather droll.
May 23rd, 2007 at 6:50 pmI SAY EMAIL HIM!!
dmcdonough@americanprogress.org
Let’s actually email this guy.
May 23rd, 2007 at 6:51 pmDear Mr. McDonough – Nice try!! You’ll have to excuse our resident Lefty’s. The only thing that will appease this crowd is “cut and run†yesterday. And the good news for Conservatives….this is the crowd tol trot out as an alternative to Repubs keeping the WH.
Comment by valiant venus
Consistentantly wrong year after year after year after year after year… wasnt there two more years in there? oh ya ..after year after year…
NO CREDIBILITY. Why do you even bother to post?
May 23rd, 2007 at 6:53 pmWas this the guy that put the “go along with the war so Dems could get back to domestic issues” into Daschle?
No thanks.
The Democratic leaders could have gotten more. Threaten committee assignment. Filibuster in the senate. Use blocks. Use holds. Attach ammendments. Dems can kill the funding. Actually if they went on a 6 month recess until Oct, I’d be happy knowing that Bush won’t get his money. How hard is it to do nothing? Don’t claim you’re doing all you can do when you have to do to win is do nothing.
And hey, the bit about Bush still being about to give the troops the essentials, try bringing that out before the Republicans have successfully sold the public on th eidea that Democrats are willing to let our troops run out of ammo and starve over there.
May 23rd, 2007 at 6:54 pmCalm down, everyone!!! The Dems have been in control for a little over 4 months…Did anyone truly expect the war to end in that time??? Be realistic…It’s going to take time. Stop the bashing and do something constructive…Get your a** out, mobilie, organize and march against the war…Our voice must be heard…We must be a force for change……AND NOT JUST ON THE NET!!! Words are easy……It takes ACTION!!!
May 23rd, 2007 at 6:56 pmLET THE PRESIDENT’S VETO STAND.
May 23rd, 2007 at 7:01 pmDON’T OFFER HIM ANYTHING MORE. WE ALL KNOW THERE IS MONEY FOR REDEPLOYMENT AND RECONSTRUCTION. LET BUSH TAKE THE BLAME FOR NOT FUNDING THESE TROOPS IN WAR ANYMORE. ALSO DON’T FORGET THE OIL PROVISION IN THESE SUPPLEMENTAL BILLS. IT WILL ALLOW PRIVITIZATION OF THE OIL IN IRAQ. WONDER WHAT THAT MEANS???HELLO EXXON THIS IS NO EASY SOLUTION.
DAMN THEM. WHEN DOES KARMA KICK IN?????
Denis McDonough you are wrong.
Reid is wrong.
Pelosi is wrong.
ALL OF YOU ARE WRONG! So stop it with your “counterpoints” and other baloney.
All of you have BLOOD in your hands and are personally and criminally responsible for any more death of our US soldiers as well as innocent Iraqiis lives.
COURAGE … it takes more than playing politics for doing the wrong thing.
The Democrats caved to bush, plain and simple.
I cry for our country led by non leaders aka the party of CASH.
The message was clear: END THE WAR NOW!
They don’t get the message? Well they will once we vote them out in November 2008 if they don’t stop the war!
May 23rd, 2007 at 7:02 pmNO CREDIBILITY. Why do you even bother to post?
Comment by ggibson
She keeps hoping to find someone who’ll buy her crap…?
May 23rd, 2007 at 7:05 pmNo, I think Congress should have given less. Bush vetoed the funding for his war. That should have been the end of it.
May 23rd, 2007 at 7:05 pm#25
One of the most powerful ‘word’ or message is the vote and in November it was clear the voters wanted a new direction. The Democrats promised that new direction and failed us. Our voice was heard loud and clear. Sure it has been only 4 months, and in those short 4 months the Democrats have managed to cave in and betray the voters who put them in control of Congress.
I am for your ‘call to arms’ so to speak to organize and march but let’s not forget what the Dems promised and how quickly they broke that promise.
May 23rd, 2007 at 7:06 pmhow many deaths will it take ’till you know that too many people have died?
The course you espouse leads towards an extinction event.
May 23rd, 2007 at 7:09 pm“Under the president’s Iraq policies, our military has been over-burdened, our national security has been jeopardized, and thousands of Americans have been killed or injured. Despite these realities, and the support of a majority of Americans for ending the President’s open-ended mission in Iraq, congressional leaders now propose a supplemental appropriations bill that does nothing to end this disastrous war,” says Feingold. “I cannot support a bill that contains nothing more than toothless benchmarks and that allows the President to continue what may be the greatest foreign policy blunder in our nation’s history.” Sen. Feingold
May 23rd, 2007 at 7:10 pmNo thanks, Denis.
May 23rd, 2007 at 7:16 pmWhile the dems are surrendering and allowing the Administration to continue its failed policy, at least it can be said that they went down with more of a fight this time. Hopefully this will lead to the administration finally getting the message that the American people do not support the war. However, the dems (and the republicans) should continue to keep in mind the high costs of war above and beyond the billions of dollars they have handed over to the president. Because of Iraq we are missing our chances to make positive differences in the world. The UN’s Millennium Development Goals have laid out an achievable plan for fighting global poverty, and the time to do it is now. However crucial political and financial support for the effort is being sucked up by the war. Maybe keeping thoughts like this in mind will lead to the commitment that is needed to finally bring an end to this debacle.
May 23rd, 2007 at 7:18 pmWow. Another politician telling me that oranges are yellow and that if you squeeze them hard enough that they will produce grape juice.
All that I can imagine is that Mr. Senior Fellow has some puts on some defense stocks and that the timing is not quite right for him/her to fully capitalize on the position.
Because if this “fellow” actually believed in ending the Iraq “war”, they would not claim that a compromise that fully funds the fiasco and has no binding controls as to its course, is in any way a “victory” for the END THE FCUKING WAR cause.
If this cat is a “senior fellow” at a leading progressive think tank, then I think I’m beginning to get the picture as to why the “progressive” think tanks don’t have any meaningful influence.
May 23rd, 2007 at 7:19 pmWow, that sure was a bunch of gobbly gook. Talk about spin. My head is spinning and I’m about to pass out from being so dizzy.
I thought that the Center for American Progress was on our side. I guess not, I guess the are just another arm of the DLC. Well, they can’t put the genie back in the bottle now and the Democrats are going to pay for their traitorous acts.
We the people have lost bigtime. Now we need to throw out all the Democrats who went along with caving into Bush. I’m sure we can find other progressive candidates to run against them in the primary.
If we don’t show Congress that there are consequences for going against the will of the people, we are doomed as a nation.
May 23rd, 2007 at 7:29 pm“What do you expect this Congress to do to end the war? Withhold funds?”
Yes.
May 23rd, 2007 at 7:31 pmLet me get this straight.
Your argument is that only by giving the president all the money he asks for with no restrictions can the Congress retain its power of the purse?
Does that really make any logical sense to you?
May 23rd, 2007 at 7:41 pmCome on guys, let’s have a little civility here. We can disagree without calling each other names.
May 23rd, 2007 at 7:55 pmIdiot! Congress needs to do exactly what John Edwards said – keep sending back to the White House the same bill that other idiot vetoed. Send it over and over if necessary. Bush will be the one who refused to fund the troops, not Congress. When the current funding runs out, Bush will have no choice but to bring the troops home. It is as simple as that. Any additional funding needed to bring them home can be voted on then.
May 23rd, 2007 at 8:11 pm#38 Exactly. Denis’ BS is stupefying in its brazen bullshit non-think up-is-down-ism.
A person employing such “logic” was actually working on staff with someone in United States Senate?
I would be hard pressed to be willing to let someone so befuddled obtain a driver’s license, much less have a hand in helping shape national policy. Makes me actually glad Daschle lost if this is the strength of delusional (not sure if it is self or outwardly directed delusion on McDonough’s part) thinking that Daschle would hire.
May 23rd, 2007 at 8:30 pm#39 Ok Marge, er… Rodney.. er.. nevermind.
May 23rd, 2007 at 8:31 pmWRONG !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
GET THE F*** OUT OF IRAQ RIGHT GD NOW !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
CUT OFF THE $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ TODAY !!!!!!!!!!!
LOAD THE TROOPS ON PLANES AND GET THE F*** OUT OF IRAQ NOW !!!!!!
IT IS THAT SIMPLE !!!!!!!!!!!
CONTINUED AMERIKAN OCCUPATION OF IRAQ JUST CONTINUES THE WAR CRIME !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
LEAVE THE IRAQI OIL BEHIND AND GET THE F*** OUT NOW !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
May 23rd, 2007 at 8:32 pmNow, with trumpets blareing, ta da! Here is the place our guest comes from. The DLC.
The Democratic Leadership Council argues that the Democrats should shift away from traditionally populist positions. They believe the Democrats needs to shift to the right of center to remain viable.
And here is the position of the DLC on IRAQ. From Wikipedia:
The DLC gave strong support for the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Prior to the war, Will Marshall co-signed a letter to President Bush from PNAC endorsing military action against Saddam. Marshall is one of the founders of the New Democrat movement, which aims to steer the Democratic Party toward a more right-wing orientation. During the 2004 Primary campaign the DLC attacked Presidential candidate Howard Dean as an out-of-touch liberal because of Dean’s position of only pursuing Osama Bin Laden instead of invading Iraq. The DLC dismissed other critics of the Iraq invasion such as filmmaker Michael Moore as “Anti-American” and members of the “loony left”. Even as domestic support for the Iraq War plummeted in 2004 and 2005, Marshall called upon Democrats to balance their criticism of Bush’s handling of the Iraq War with praise for the President’s achievements. Marshall cautioned “Democrats need to be choosier about the political company they keep, distancing themselves from the pacifist and anti-American fringe.”
So what would you expect Denis McDonough to advocate? He is a solid DLC person. And as we know, the DLC is a strong pusher of the strategy of “triangulation” between the political left and right. As we have seen repeatedly, this strategy of triangulation results in concession after concession to the opposition, while alienating traditionally-allied voters.
Any wonder why Hillary triangulates on Iraq? Does it get more DLC than Hillary? Even when the DLC does criticize the policies of BushCo it is “measured and nuanced” so as not to make waves. Talk about the Neville Chamberlain approach!
The DLC is nothing more than BushCo light, sucking up so they won’t be criticized.
May 23rd, 2007 at 9:41 pmYOU ARE A PATHETIC SHILL.
May 23rd, 2007 at 9:42 pmheheehe…wow the dems. have broken their promises to all of you who are on here,gee i am smiling from ear-to-ear suckers….
May 23rd, 2007 at 10:21 pmWow, and people got mad at Obey for telling a marine mom the truth.
So long as Bush is President this pork-barrel project will not end, as he will find loopholes or flat-out break the law to continue funding this occupation.
May 23rd, 2007 at 10:22 pmWhat do you do when you have no representation in congress (mine is Heather Wilson, NM), and you call and you email, and you try to contact Moveon about this and can’t, and you can’t email another congressperson because they don’t allow that anymore if they aren’t your own congressperson, and you call a few others but they are busy or their voice mail box is full? There is no mechanism to say we are mad as hell and we won’t take this anymore. We, not they, need to demand impeachment of the whole lot of them. Karl Rove needs to be in jail. How much plainer can we make it? They either do their jobs, uphold their oaths of office, or they can all go. We need good candidates people. Get in line.
May 23rd, 2007 at 10:37 pmnot my problem i never voted for him,i just don’t like whineycrybabylibbies,when things don’t go their way….go ahead stomp your feet like a child,throw your fists in the air,and boo hoo all you want too…hell i don’t even like bush,but yet i ain’t bitchin like woman who bitches about leaving the toilet seat up…….
May 23rd, 2007 at 10:48 pmlibssuck, are you joking? I believe you have Bush fecal matter on your nose.
May 23rd, 2007 at 10:55 pmno,like i said i just don’t like libs at all…and far as bush is concerned he will be leaving office in less than two years,so what is the point of bashing,you know he is going to veto everything that the dems throw at him….so go ahead bash away…
May 23rd, 2007 at 11:02 pmI get it libss, you don’t actually have to take a stand on anything. You can just stand back and insult everybody because you don’t have any beliefs of your own. That is very ballsy of you.
May 23rd, 2007 at 11:05 pmGreat post’s folk’s, with the exception of the visiting troll writer and M.A’s usual drival and her alter ego…..
Let me say I am still enraged, sent out a short scathing email to Larsen ( no foul language that I am most famous for)…
This is bull shit spread with jelly to appease the voter’s….It ain’t gonna work for me not in a million..I am letting them know they are not going to get away scott free with this crap…..Either they stop funding and impeach these basterd’s, atleast put it back verbaly on the table, stop this war and tell bush to take a hike or I’m against every last one of them..Period…They didn’t put up a fight, hell I can do better and I know how to win..No more money, end it now…..Bull shit..I’m pissed and looking at other parties to join..Yah I know that would mean we would be just as screwed for 4 more year’s but about this, lives and my country I am one way….Lead. follow or get the hell outta my way….Blessings
May 23rd, 2007 at 11:17 pmDenis McDonough is wrong. Congress has a moral obligation NOT to give Bush the money he asks for, especially after Bush, through incompetence and inefficiency, has wasted all the money already appropriated. As Murtha said the other night on Blitzer, it is Bush who has incompetently blown the nation’s money while failing to protect our troops.
That being said, it is completely inappropriate for Congressional Democrats to give Bush a carte blanche for more war. They are betraying their core constituents, and hopefully they will be challenged by independent, antiwar candidates in marginal districts in 2008.
This is a dangerous President who must be stopped. And this war must end now before it expands further. No to Denis. No to Bush. And no to the DLC.
May 23rd, 2007 at 11:25 pmBush and the Pentagon will manage to reallocate money through at least September regardless of what bills congress passes. The Dems are smart to show that we are reasonable and that we want this thing to work. It is almost universally accepted that September is a make or break deadline. At that point the Dems will go for the jugular and the bloody fight will begin. In the meantime, the dems will appear reasonable and Bush looks more and more out of touch with reality. Not funding the war right now will not end the war before September. It’ll only allow Bush to politicize any failures from now till then. The ball is now in Bush’s court, but only till september, then we take over and end this sad war.
May 24th, 2007 at 1:14 amThis a$$hole is a blue dog doubletalking paid shill whose job it is to pat down the feathers of the blogoshphere. You may have noticed them on other sites–they’re too eloquent, too longtalking, too referential. Like a congressional staffer or PR flack. Don’t be deceived by these beltway a$$holes. The people have spoken. We want the Iraq war over–no matter which district you vote in. And if you won’t lead, we’ll put someone in your place–that means you, doubletalking paid shill.
May 24th, 2007 at 1:27 amJay, who’s a “blue dog doubletalking paid shill?”
May 24th, 2007 at 1:42 amIf the Iraqi government successfully meets the benchmarks, we’ll reward them by staying longer.
If they fail, we’ll punish them by not leaving.
May 24th, 2007 at 2:35 amWise words, Mr. McDonough. Many of the commenters here seem to be in an adolescent snit, which must be of great comfort to Republicans.
May 24th, 2007 at 6:56 amScrew the DLC.
May 24th, 2007 at 8:10 ami haven’t seen so much happy horseshit outside a stable in years.
May 24th, 2007 at 8:16 amJust to clarify why we decided to publish Denis’s guest’s post:
Denis has dissented from the TP/CAP position, and we believed he deserved an opportunity to make his case through a guest blog post in order to generate some true reflection and discussion on this issue. We also wanted to provide an opportunity for the TP community to weigh in with respect to his views.
Please be civil in your comments regarding Denis’s posting. Thanks
May 24th, 2007 at 8:53 amLet shrubs veto stand.
No more $$$$$$$ for Iraqs civil war.
Bring our troops home NOW!!!!
May 24th, 2007 at 10:15 amThanks – I think – for the comments, and for the emails. They’re tough, but this is a tough business, and I accept the criticism of whatever role I may have had in the run up to the war in Iraq.
A couple things.
One, there is an internal inconsistency in the position of letting the veto stand. Generally we all mistrust the President and fear he will not do the right thing, but to let the veto stand would be to transfer the power of the purse to the President as he would have the flexibility to do what he chooses until Congress does act. The most pertinent precedent in this regard is the fight in 1970 over the Eagleton amendment to stop all funds being used in Laos. Nixon vetoed it and continued the bombing campaign for months, coming back to Congress for new funding only after the campaign was over.
Two, why is this a change of course? The President has to now, for the first time since this started, report to Congress on progress in Iraq and on whether Iraqis are meeting the benchmarks they agreed to. DO I wish it were more? Of course. But is the fact that the president has to come back to Congress and outline where his policy is failing — and do so before the next supplemental is considered — is an important change from his record to date of receiving blank checks for which he had to do nothing to be held accountable.
This fight is in the early rounds. This supplemental is not a knock out by any means, but we are moving toward ending this in a way that protects our interests.
Thanks again for hearing me out.
May 24th, 2007 at 10:39 amThis is why people perceive democrats as push-overs. Because they are. When the going gets tough, the dems cave.
Stop the war. Impeach. Do it. This isn’t a decision for you. The American people have already decided.
~Sean
May 24th, 2007 at 10:52 amI agree with Mr. McDonough on this… as much as I don’t want this war to continue, how long do you expect the Democrats to yell at the brick wall that is the Bush White House? If the Dems cut the funding for the war, Bush will just keep our soldiers out there anyway. He’s proven that he will use signing statements to virtually ignore anything he signs into law; why wouldn’t he just ignore the will of Congress as he has been wont to do in the past?
The Democrats cannot override his veto, and will never be able to, given how the GOP votes party over country. If they keep pushing along this path, they will also lose control of the Senate (due to the traitor LIEberman’s switching caucuses threat), and that would be a huge blow to their hopes of ultimately stopping this war.
It is quite unfortunate that the Democrats have to let Bush win this battle in the war over the war… It is far more important for the Democrats to be ultimately victorious in this fight, though.
I’ve heard a lot of people parallel the Democrats’ behavior at the end of Vietnam to this, in the attempt to say, fighting the White House works. However, Bush is not Nixon; Nixon at least had half a brain inside his head. Bush doesn’t care about the troops, he doesn’t care about what the American people want, and he certainly could care less about what the Democrats in Congress want.
Ideally, I’d like to see the Democrats take a firm stand on ending the war, and I’d like to see it done NOW. The reality of the situation, though, is that Bush doesn’t have to do anything he doesn’t want to do, as his veto cannot be overridden, given the current configuration of Congress.
I have faith in the Democrats that this is by no means the end of their opposition to the war, nor the end of their attempts to bring the troops home as soon as possible. Fighting this battle, however, doesn’t seem to be the way it’s going to happen. I don’t like that things are that way, but that is the way it seems to be.
We’re all passionate about ending this illegal occupation to defend an attempted corporate takeover of a nation’s natural resources. We cannot, however, let our passion blind us to reality.
May 24th, 2007 at 12:21 pm#40: “Congress needs to do exactly what John Edwards said – keep sending back to the White House the same bill that other idiot vetoed. Send it over and over if necessary. Bush will be the one who refused to fund the troops, not Congress. When the current funding runs out, Bush will have no choice but to bring the troops home. It is as simple as that. Any additional funding needed to bring them home can be voted on then.”
May 24th, 2007 at 1:29 pm—–
Yes.
I can hardly believe we’re reading this quisling crap in ThinkProgress. We did mobilize, act, blablabla, as one poster above suggests. And the Dems haven’t got the balls to do anything about ANYthing: the wars, trade, domestic squalor.
Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton should just get the eff OUT of there. They have set back the cause of women a thousand years. Send in Maxine Waters.
I have to add my name and voice to those who do not accept excuses for the backpeddling in Congress.
We’ve been patient for far too long and we’ve had enough. We’re tired of politician after politician selling us the same old crap. If we seems angry, it’s because we are no longer interested in compromises or consensus with George Bush.
Cut the funding. All of it. It’s our freaking money and we’re tired of our elected ‘representatives’ spending it on killing and maiming people who aside from the accident of their birth country, wouldn’t have any reason to be killing one another.
Enough. We’ve had enough. Especially of excuses.
May 24th, 2007 at 3:58 pm#66 Comment by an evil liberal — May 24, 2007 @ 12:21 pm
“The Democrats cannot override his veto,
And this is why a NO vote was the best thing to do! The supposed cost you advocate below is simply quitting when the going gets rough. Throwing in the towel, as they say. Your “pragmatism” lacks courage!
and will never be able to, given how the GOP votes party over country. If they keep pushing along this path, they will also lose control of the Senate (due to the traitor LIEberman’s switching caucuses threat), and that would be a huge blow to their hopes of ultimately stopping this war.”
This is just fearful capitulation. Read the DLC ideology and see the basic idea that formed it was a dramatic shift to the right, based, IMO, on the fear of becoming irrelavent.
May 25th, 2007 at 1:45 pm