Why I think Bush's veto of the timeline benefits the Democrats

[auburngrad82]

The reason the GOP doesn't want to leave Iraq is it will be this election cycle's wedge issue. What they don't seem to realize is that every poll shows huge opposition to staying in Iraq. So by voting against a funding bill with a timeline the GOP is going against popular opinion. This (along with the immigration bill) has potential to bring voters to the polls to vote against the GOP.

The Iraq war and immigration have potential to tear the GOP apart. Bush wants Congress to pass the Immigration bill asap not because it's the right thing to do but because the GOP is so anti-immigration that if this issue hangs around into 2008 the GOP will be screwed.

I personally think that on a political level keeping the Iraq war an issue only benefits the Democrats. I say this because as more soldiers are sent to Iraq and the casualties mount, public opinion will shift even farther to the left in relation to the war. In 2008 the Democrats will be able to point to the fact that they brought a timeline to the President and not only did the President veto it but the GOP stood with the President against the timeline.

I would love for us to get the hell out of Iraq but the longer we're there the worse it looks for the GOP.

[Heath Hatcher]

1. Atleasts someone supports my party

I thought I was the only one left.

[auburngrad82]

2. I'll vote for whatever Democrat gets the nomination

People don't seem to realize that there is no perfect candidate. We will never be able to get things done if we quit voting for Dems because they did one thing we didn't like. I'd love to see Obama get the nomination but I'll vote for Clinton, Edwards, Richardson or whoever gets the nod. I will not abandon my party because the candidate is not my ideal candidate.

[Forkboy]

26. Save it.

Plenty have,and will continue to do so.

My party right or wrong is great if you're a Republican.

[ananda]

3. This is not about parties.

It's about people, the survival of the species,
the planet... which is being so harmed that
the damage will be irreparable.

Who cares about parties, propaganda, and
political jockeying when so much is at stake
and so many people are so tolerant of
abuses and evils that will make life
unlivable in the near future???

Sue

[auburngrad82]

5. Because if we continue to split the vote the GOP continues to win

And we know the GOP doesn't give a damn about "people, the survival of the species,
the planet..." Unless we can get a veto proof majority we will never see improved mileage standards, alternate energy bills, education bills that work, health care for kids and the elderly, etc. If you refuse to vote for the Democratic nominee, then you are voting against your interests.

[Heath Hatcher]

10. Thats why I will NOT sit out this election

And vote Democrat because I am looking out for my inrests.

[TwilightGardener]

4. What if someone from the GOP comes up with a way to end (or at

least resolve) Iraq? We just gave that person an opening by not showing enough leadership on this, IMO.

[Heath Hatcher]

6. With the exception of Ron Paul

No GOP member wants to resolve or end this, that's a fact.

[TwilightGardener]

14. Hagel. He's going to run right up the middle. Got my eye on him.

Edit to add--Bloomberg too.

[Heath Hatcher]

16. That's if he runs though

You think he will no it, him and Bloomberg running on a 3rd party basis?

[TwilightGardener]

19. He's already sort of running. He is giving commencement addresses,

talking to union and various other groups, as a "potential" candidate. He wants to be prez really, really bad. He'll take VP, but he is planning to run, I think, either with or without Bloomberg.

[Heath Hatcher]

22. Since by looking at your avatar and telling what state your from

It must be terrible for you. What with a open minded Senator like Chuck Hagel having a good chance of getting replaced by a empty minded POS Hal Daub or Jon Bruning.

[TwilightGardener]

29. LOL! The majority of Dems in Nebraska approve of him, and I am in that

majority. I'd hate to see him go--we won't get a Dem to replace him--just a psycho Bushbot Nazi (Bruning or Daub--SHUDDER!). I don't think he really wants to fight for his seat, deep down. That's why I think he'll probably run for Prez.

[Heath Hatcher]

33. What about Omaha mayor Mike Fahey?

I heard he may run or even Scott Kleeb, who only lost by 10 points in the 3rd district to Adrian Smith but I heard with he that he may just challenge Smith again.

[TwilightGardener]

34. Fahey, if memory serves correctly, is kind of old (mid-sixties)--I don't

think he's serious about the Senate, he seems to want to stay on as mayor. Kleeb would have a tough road to go against Bruning, I think--better to go back up against Smith, and then try for the Senate after he gets into Congress. He's young yet, got plenty of time, and I'm sure we'll hear from him again.

[Heath Hatcher]

40. Age matters in this election

Isn't Daub in his 70's? I hope Kleeb does run again againist Smith though, he showed alot of strghenth in the election hell even got the endorsement of the Omaha World Harold, a paper that rarely endorses Democrats what does that tell you? he's got guts, unlike that bastard Adrian Smith.

[TwilightGardener]

46. Yep--Daub is REALLY old. The OWH (Repub rag) endorsed

Fahey over Daub--that tells you he won't get anywhere for Senate, so I assume it will be Bruning, unless Hagel decides to run again--boy, that'll be ugly. I'd almost rather he retire with dignity than see him have to go to the mat with a snakey opportunist like Bruning, AND possibly lose. I don't think Kleeb is going to give up or go away, fortunately. There's not much future for Dems in Nebraska without him, IMO.

[Heath Hatcher]

47. Yes I agree I rarher see Chuck retire with dignity

Then seeing his record get tarnished by a RW sociopath. If he runs for re-election in the Senate he will get trashed because it seems that Nebraska GOP like to see there lawmakers be rubber stamps for the party, you know like Ben Nelson.

"There's not much future for Dems in Nebraska without him, IMO."

What about Jim Esch in the 2nd District, only losing 10 points to Lee Terry, that's got to be impressive too.

[TwilightGardener]

48. Jim Esch--If a Dem can't win in Omaha, where can a Dem win? Sigh.

[Heath Hatcher]

49. Omaha is Democratic

Could of fooled me since they keep re-electing that gasbag Lee Terry every two years.

[TwilightGardener]

57. I can't stand Lee Terry. Fortenberry is my Rep--no better, still a Bush enabler.

Lincoln is actually a more Dem-friendly city, but one would think with all the Working Joes and minorities in Omaha, plus a Democratic mayor, we'd be able to have a Dem Rep there.

[atreides1]

20. You Don't Know That

None of us do! For all we know this could be part of a plan to show that the Democrats won't even pay attention to their own supporters and that they lack the will to stand up for what they claim to believe in.

[auburngrad82]

15. It gives that one person an opening but not the support from his own party

Besides, the way we tear our own candidates down I'm sure there will be plenty find on the GOP candidate. Take Guiliani for example. He's for abortion rights, he's for gay rights, he's for gun control, he's been married multiple times... Right there are three things he can be busted for and all are offensive to the GOP's base.

All of our candidates are better. The problem is we don't have enough votes to override a veto and we will never be able to make a difference if we don't get Democrats elected. Do you think that if the timeline came up for a vote under a Democratic president that he/she would veto it? If we can get the people in place we can make the changes. If we can't then the GOP continues to control everything.

[54anickel]

7. Lord how I long for a candidate who stops looking at this as some

political chess match. We are no longer talking pawn pieces on a game board, these are real people they (and you) are playing with. Personally, I've had enough of it.

[auburngrad82]

21. Absolutely, but we don't have the votes to overturn a veto

So if we can't overturn a veto, how do we end it? We can work to get a veto-proof majority and make sure when we get it that the first thing we do is end the war.

[Heath Hatcher]

25. Why are you maing sense right now about how to end the war?

ask me that. You seem to be one of the few people here on how politics and the goverrnment works you must have a ton of patience like me.


No offense to anyone here at DU

[TwilightGardener]

31. There's not much they can do, but they can sure put up a better fight

before losing.

[tularetom]

8. You're making a couple of assumptions

One that the Dems will have the courage to make the accusations you refer to and

Two that the press will even cover it.

The entire Democratic party has now become a full partner in this war and that's how it will be protrayed in the media from now through at least the 08 elections. Perception will become reality. And if any Dem presidential candidates vote FOR this thing in the Senate, they're dead meat.

The public doesn't necessarily oppose the repubs or even bush, they oppose the fucking war. Unfortunately the Democragts have now tied themselves to it.

[auburngrad82]

18. They have not tied themselves to the war

The fact is the Democrats do not have enough votes to override Bush's veto and they know it. If they continue to delay the funding then the GOP will simply use this as an election issue, as in the Dems turned their backs on the troops. We've seen them do it in the past.

The only assumption I'm making is that the Dems are smart enough to use the fact that Shrub vetoed the bill and the GOP members of congress by their votes against it also defeated the bill. How many Dems voted against the funding bill with the timeline? Then how many GOP members voted against it? It takes 60 votes in the Senate to override a veto and we don't have enough to do it. We can continue to throw bills with timelines out there but the simple fact is they will never pass until the Dems have a veto-proof majority.

[atreides1]

24. No matter what

The GOP can also use the Dems lack of courage as an election issue, and they will!!!

Bush got exactly what he wanted, that's what the GOP will use to show that Republicans are strong and Democrats are weak.

By the way you need 60 votes to bring a bill to the floor to be voted on, to overide a veto you need at least 67 votes.

[tularetom]

32. I agree with you but that isn't how the press will portray it

This will be spun as the Democrats buying into the war itself, and they should have been smart enough to realize it. How many timeshave you heard some asshole pundit on TV say, "If they (Dems) are so against the war all they have to do is cut off the funding".

That's what I mean by perception becoming reality. The corporate media is gonna hammer the point that the Dems are either complicit in the war or lackedthe courage to cut off funding for it.

[iamjoy]

9. Didn'tcha Hear - Dems Caved

And that will only hurt Democrats for not showing true leadership on this issue.

[Czolgosz]

11. I don't think Bush's veto of the timelines benefits those Democrats in serving in Iraq.

[Grandrose]

12. I agree...

It is lonely being a Yellow Dog Democrat this week and it is not easy!

I totally understand the frustration and anger, but in the final analysis, where will that get us? We are stuck between the Bush cabal fiasco and lack of votes!!
:banghead:

[ShortnFiery]

13. Let me guess, you're too young to remember Vietnam?

I'm sure the parents who are informed that their beloved sons and daughters have been killed in this SENSELESS occupation would fully understand your rationale? :eyes: YES! Be sure to tell them that "this is good for Democrats in 2008" that their children continue to be maimed and killed in the midst of a full-blown civil war for A FEW MORE MONTHS to benefit BULLSHIT philosophy for gutless democratic party to politically win the high ground? :puke: :thumbsdown:

[Heath Hatcher]

17. What does Vietnam have to do with what were talking about

Besaides the fact that it took us 13 years to get out, kinda hard what with them having a razor thin majority.

[auburngrad82]

28. Actually I'm old enough to remember it

Ever hear of Hoc Mon Bridge? Look it up on the internet. On March 2, 1968 C Company of the Manchu division (4/9) were ambushed at Hoc Mon Bridge. All but 19 members of the company were either wounded or killed. That was my father's company. One of his men was awarded a medal of honor. My father spent the last 2 weeks of his tour of duty identifying the bodies of the men who died that day. The first thing he did when he returned stateside was visit the wife of one of his friends who was killed. The only time I've seen my father cry was when he talked about this.

My father received two Purple Hearts and a Bronze Star with Oakleaf Cluster. Not much different from what Kerry earned. I was highly offended by the GOP's treatment of him in 2004.

My family has a long history of fighting in wars for this country. This war is wrong. Vietnam was wrong. But we can't end it at this time because we don't have the votes necessary to end it. What would you like us to do? Wring our hands and moan that we can't end it? or maybe get pick up enough seats to overturn a veto and end the war the first chance we get?

What are the choices?

[Forkboy]

23. Great...let's have a bunch more killed so we can score some political points.

What a fucking joke.

[Heath Hatcher]

27. That's politics, that's how it works sadly.

If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen.

[Forkboy]

Talk to me in 20 years.

[Heath Hatcher]

42. Why?

[auburngrad82]

30. So tell us how we get out now

We do not have the political votes to end the war and that is a fact. So what do we do? Quit voting for Dems and just turn the whole thing over to the GOP? That's going to get us out in a hurry...

[Forkboy]

37. There are other forms of leadership besides votes.

You can at least stand up publicly and vocally and then actually follow through because it's the right thing to do.Even had we lost at least they would have made an effort,and everyone would be upset,but not this pissed by any stretch.You don't rally support by saying,"Oh,we'll never win so let's not even try.And let's go beyond not even trying...let's just throw in the towel."

THEY are the ones turning the whole thing over to the GOP by handing them victory on a silver platter.

You don't raise the morale of your Party by pissing all over it.

[auburngrad82]

64. Didn't the Dems do that with the bill WITH the timeline? nt

[Zodiak]

35. No, it's not cowardice...its a grand strategy

I have heard this ridiculous entreaty before....in fact, I have heard it MANY times before. It never pans out...it is never a grand strategy. We lose and Bush goes on to set the pins up for the next victory over the American People.

And now...after six years, there are still doe-eyed loyalists telling us the same thing...that this betrayal is really just a grand scheme to give us everything we want.

BULLSHIT!!

You people lost...they sold you down the river, and you are such sycophants, you cannot even look up from under the sand to see that your party is pissing on your heads.

DU should have stopped listening to you Pollyannas years ago...perhaps without your "don't worry be happy" bullshit we might have had a stronger grassroots movement. The Democrats would have been afraid to piss US off for a change.

Pollyannas....blind loyalists....your rhetoric is steeped in nothing but opinion. You are not privvy to what goes on in these politician's heads, so do not speak to us as if you are. Those grand strategies you were sure were in effect have so far amounted to jack and shit. Your rose-colored outlook is seriously hindering the real work that must be done...and that is purge the party of neoliberals and their Bush-friendly voting record.

To me, you are telling people to sleep....to "trust" their leaders to do the right thing when they have NEVER done the right thing without being forced to.

[auburngrad82]

36. So what's your plan to get us out of Iraq?

One that's realistic, ie a bill that can be passed with a 1 vote majority and not be vetoed. I'd love to hear it.

[Zodiak]

39. Shut down the government

completely.

No money. No bills. No more work except investigations and impeachment. Force that fuck back to the negotiating table or watch his war whittle to nothing....and his agenda. He can beg for his money all he wants but he fucking gets NOTHING. The corporat media can howl all they want...but still...nothing.

You can pretend the system works still....I do not. You (and the Democrats) are trying to play by Bush's rules, and THAT is where you go wrong.

Shut it down and call for a general strike until we bring our troops home.

And I know what you are going to say....."but the Republicans will say....". Like I give a shit what traitors, thieves, bigots, and warmongers have to say.

By the way...the burden of coming up with a plan that will work is not on me....it is on the Dems. That's their job, and they suck at it, apparently.

[auburngrad82]

43. Then we become a do-nothing govt and the GOP uses it to regain control

that's a smart move...

[Zodiak]

45. Do nothing...or continue the Bush agenda...that's the choice

and the agenda is world war.....resource stealing....third world status.

No one wants that, but if you play by Bush's rules and run scared of everything, that will happen.

Man...you sure are scared of Republicans and their spin machine.

But I understand...you have damage control to do. All of DU is up in arms and its up to you to set us little know-nothings to right (voting blindly for the D's). I shouldn't take up more of your time because you have important work to do telling us how scary scary the Republicans are and how we desperately need these turncoats to save us.

But it is not going to work on me. I've been here and paying attention for six years. I would only be a great fool to buy this bullshit argument for the tenth time.

Enjoy your dry powder and your yellow stripe.

[auburngrad82]

50. Great, vote for Nader and see how that works out for you.

Better yet, just vote for the GOP.

You did read the post you replied to, didn't you? I DID NOT say we should do nothing. You did. Shutting down the government is doing nothing and achieves nothing. That would be a surefire way to end up stuck in Iraq for another 20 years since it would be handing the government back to the GOP. That would be a waste and one of the dumbest things we could do.

What scares me about the GOP is the damage they can do to our country and the whole world. And unless we can win in the elections there's not a damn thing anyone, including you, can do about it.

As far as spin, it doesn't scare me. We need to take a lesson from the GOP and learn how to spin things ourselves. And lately we have gotten better at it. We benefitted greatly in 2006 by learning how to frame things and how to spin the corruption issue, the war issue and Katrina to win votes.

You want to end the war? Then get the GOP out of Washington. Otherwise sit there and wring your hands and stomp your feet and bitch about how the Dems are weak. We are. We don't have the votes needed to get out of Iraq. Not yet, at least. Maybe after the next election.

And just how in the fuck is trying to win the Presidency and more Congressional seats "playing by Bush's rules?"

If you have a better idea then let's hear it.

[Zodiak]

60. Don't raise the Nader strawman with me.

that is an underhanded tactic and a form of Democratic McCarthyism, and I will not stand for it. Please stick with the issues at hand.

Shutting down the government means everyone has to come back to the negotiating table. It has happened before, you know. That is not doing nothing....in fact, last time it was done, it balaned our budget. But it takes guts and the will to ignore the media's spin.

The rest of your post is still thinking within a framework that is completely broken. Elections do not matter in case you haven't noticed. The Republicans can do whatever they want from both a majority and a minority position. They sit in the catbird seat no matter what we do. And if we get more seats, it won't matter. Their fear of the Republican spin machine wil make them capitulate over and over....and a turncoat like Leiberman and his merry band of 10 DLC Senators can run the show with the pukes.

And I did not say that trying to win seats wins by Bush's rules. You can take that strawman back. What I DID say was that treating this man like a fair arbiter and "working with him" IS playing by his rules.

And he smoked us.....and now he is dancing on our backs as our party grovels at his feet.

Please do not piss on my head and tell me it is raining with that "we don't have the votes" BS. Collectively, DU has been through that too many times to mention.

You get the last word, please try to refrain from strawmen and raising Nader's name out of the blue.

[54anickel]

51. Hush! There are those who still believe there is a 2 party system and

a representative government of, for and by the people. Let them have their dream of strategic leaders plotting to take their country back - it's all they've got. The media's been reduced to pundits. The public been reduced to entertainment/consumption zombies or, worse yet, armchair/keyboard pundits. Just so long as we stay off the streets and continue working, buying and selling, our corporate masters are perfectly happy with the system they've built ove the past 60+ years. Don't be upsetting the applecart!

[auburngrad82]

52. What the fuck are you talking about?

That makes no sense at all. For fuck's sake, if you're going to give an opinion at least have one to give.

[54anickel]

53. I do and I did. If you don't believe there is something seriously wrong with this

country then I must ask, where the "f*k" have you been? A little civility might go a long way. :eyes:

[auburngrad82]

54. Oh, there's plenty wrong with it but how do you fix it?

Do you leave it up to the GOP or do you work at getting enough Congressional votes and the Presidency so you can actually fix things? Here are some things I would expect Dems to fix that the GOP would NEVER fix:

Gas mileage standards
alternative fuels
minimum wage
Withdraw from the Iraq war
Healthcare for the uninsured
Greenhouse gasses
Foreign relations
Public education
The deficit

They can't all be fixed immediately or even in the short term but the GOP will NEVER even attempt to look at them.

If I were an elected Dem after 2008 and we won the Presidency the first thing I would do is get the Hell out of Iraq. Then I'd look at healthcare and gas mileage standards.

If I were an elected Dem TODAY I would look at raising the minimum wage and doing something about greenhouse gasses, public education and alternative fuel sources.

Foreign relations and the deficit are going to take years to correct, not because I wouldn't want to but because the Bush administration has dug some really deep holes that will need to be climbed out of.

[sampsonblk]

55. I don't think they are that stupid, I think they are paid posters

I think at least some of them are getting paid to come here and push these pathetic points. Look at the number of posts. Some of them rushed over here just to support what's going on now. Never heard a peep out of them until now.

Some of the points are so stupid, I can't find any other explanation. They must be paid to say this shit.

[auburngrad82]

59. Now, that is one intelligent statement

Oh yeah. I'm getting paid to post on DU. Just about as much as you are getting paid to post on DU. When you start referring to points being stupid, don't do it in a post as idiotic as the one you just made.

Look at the post counts on the people "who just rushed over here to support what's going on now." That's about as asinine as anything I've ever seen posted on DU.

[sampsonblk]

62. You just made my point

I wasn't referring to anyone else in particular. Feeling a little self-conscious?

[54anickel]

56. Oh stop it. Just look at some of the latest accomplishments on trade alone

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/05/24/1417

House Democrats Buckle Under Pressure from Big Oil, Strip Down Price Gouging Bill
The Corporate Crime Reporter

Behold the spineless Democratic Party.On Iraq, no deadlines.

On trade, no enforceable worker protections.

Now, today, on oil industry price gouging, collapse.

In the face of withering pressure from the oil industry, the Democrats in the House, led by Congressman Bart Stupak (D-Michigan), have reportedly castrated their own legislation.

more...

[Jersey Devil]

38. What? The war should go on because it's good for Dems politically?

Tell that to the parents of a dead soldier.

[auburngrad82]

41. You're obviously not reading

We DO NOT have the votes to end the war. I would LOVE for the war to end. I was never in support of the war from day one. Anything we do as far as not funding the war or resubmitting a bill with a timeline WILL NOT WORK. The only thing that will work is a VETO-PROOF MAJORITY. We have to TAKE MORE SEATS before we can end the war. And we can't do it if we DON'T SUPPORT the Dems.

Everything we see in the papers indicates that Americans want the war ended. So how do we do it? The only way that we can end it is to win more seats and the presidency and then end it. Until then we don't have the political power to end it.

I AM NOT in support of the war. I NEVER WAS. But I'm also realistic enough to know that the war won't be over until after the next election.

[Heath Hatcher]

44. I agree this is a two part plan, no one seems to get it

Part one easy, get the Democrats control of Congress

Part two, elect a Dem for Pres then pad our majority in Congress espically in the Senate with cause of our one vote majority LIEberman the warmonger is holding the Democrats hostage on the war.

This is a two part deal and it will take heart, faith and patience.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

58. The debate has been important, timetable or no timetable

While I'm very upset about the outcome of this debate (and would gladly vote against it if I were in office), what has Bush/GOP REALLY gained out of this? They are now clearly on record as continuing to support a limitless, goalless, soulless, and increasingly unpopular occupation. The only thing that has been dropped is a congressionally mandated timetable for withdrawing our forces. While there is really no logical reason to believe that we are really going to need to stay in Iraq beyond March of next year (if even that long) I would think that by then, congressionally mandated timetable or not, it will become increasingly more and more difficult(if not impossible) for Bush/GOP to continue defending this occupation. Already, support among Republicans is starting to soften and if things do not noticeably improve, at least in the eyes of the "reality-based community", by then (if not sooner), the number of people supporting the withdrawal of our troops will be more than enough to push through a veto-proof bill through demanding withdrawal or at least setting a timetable. We should not forget that the original legislation wouldn't have even demanded troop withdrawal until March 2008(which is too long to wait IMHO) and Bush could've signed it but attached a "signing statement" negating it. There is little doubt in my mind that support for the occupation will have evaporated by March 2008 without things getting better and we might not even need to worry about getting legislative support for troop withdrawal at that point. I know that everybody is pretty down on the Democrats in Congress right now and I agree with you that they should'nt have given in to Bush and his tantrums but I think that we should give them credit for bringing the issue into the public sphere, letting everybody know where we REALLY stand, and bringing some pressure to bear not only on the Bush (mis-)administration but also on the Iraqi government to get moving and achieve some tangible results. Although it has been subtle and downplayed by the MSM, I would argue that there is evidence that our push for the timetable, even if it didn't ultimately result in us actually getting one through, is starting to reap some positive results.

[Zhade]

61. There has to be a timeline to veto one.

Fucking Dems caved. FUCK THEM!

[auburngrad82]

63. You do remember that there was a bill with a timeline, don't you? nt