What grade would you give DEM leadership since 1/4/07 on dealing with the Iraq War?

[RiverStone]

I'm trying to gage if my frustration toward DEM leadership is fair considering we have only held the mantle of Majority on The Hill for 7 weeks (since 1/4/07). I give Kudo's to Nancy and Co. for the bills passed to serve the home front during the first '100 hours' of Congress.

Beyond that and on the Iraq War quagmire in particular, I have felt that both Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi have shown too much compromise on Shrub's proposed escalation, not enough aggressiveness with the rethugs (in part due to threats of a Lieberman tantrum), and wimpy political tap dancing in the form of non-binding resolutions. I've tossed out a couple of OP's lamenting Reid's equivocating on pushing forward with a binding resolution and wishing Russ Feingold was Majority Leader in the Senate.

The will of We The People last November shouted a mandate to end this damn war. I have been feeling a growing disappointment that our DEM leaders have been slow and timid in response to that mandate. Assertiveness training is in order! Or am I being impatient? Question:

Since 1/4/07, what grade would you give our DEM leadership in taking action to end, reduce, or cap Iraq war funding?

[Beelzebud]

1. F

[Selatius]

2. They should've tried to pass a resolution with teeth instead of a toothless one.

At any rate, Bush would've vetoed in both cases. The Repubs in the Senate simply ensured that it never got that far because it would've made Bush out to be the bad guy. If you're going to go down in defeat anyway, might as well go down with both guns blazing.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

3. Given that the non-binding resolution couldn't even get passed,

I think we all need to drastically scale back our expectations here. The simple math remains - nothing will get done in the Senate without 60 yea votes - Period. That means there will be no binding resolution, there will not likely be any changes or repeal to IWR, and we will likely not be able to cut funding to the war either.

All of this makes our case in 2008 that we need more Dems in Congress.

[BayCityProgressive]

4. F

[RiverStone]

9. Damn, not quite ready to give up on 07 yet...

Though I agree we need to scale back expectations Vash, I hope we need not do it as drastically as you suggest. What did we get...7 rethugs joined us in the Senate on that lame vote to debate escalation funding.

My hope is that as public anger grows regarding the BushCo regime's disastrous policy in Iraq, more and more rethugs will have the guts to also reflect the will of the vast majority of Americans - and vote to end this f'cking war!

Of course, if that does not happen we are indeed stuck till 08. I'd at least repeatedly call for binding votes (even at the risk of losing the count) which will historically hold the rethug obstructionists responsible for tragically marching our troops into a failed war.

[trashcanistanista]

18. NO.

They need to hammer the senate with whatever they can come up with whether it can pass or not. Be unrelenting. With the bad publicity comming out about the war, the looming Iran WMD threat, the Walter Reed situation, etc., they need to ride this issue and get as much attention as possible. People are getting tired of nothing being done. This needs to be a daily issue and eventually, the repubs will comply, out of fear of public admonishment. if nothing else. I think they can end this war.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

20. Believe it or not, there are other issues that need to be addressed.

The war is not even close to the only thing Republicans have fucked up over the last 12 years.

[Edweird]

19. The 'pukes can hide behind the fact that it was non-binding.

They may say that since the resolution was non-binding, it didn't matter how they voted. And how if it had been an actual bill, they would have given it greater consideration. We all know this is bullhockey, but it gives them a plausible out.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

21. That doesn't make sense at all.

There's no way they'd not vote for something that doesn't matter, but would vote for something that does. And I don't see them tripping over each other to introduce a binding resolution either. I don't think it's even close to a plausible out.

[MoonRiver]

5. Being generous I gave them a D.

I think they've tried a little bit. Pathetic, yes, but still something.

[ourvoicescount]

6. I too will give them a chance, but I'm waiting for the ball to start rolling faster...

[tridim]

7. B for effort, D- for results.

Although it's really not fair because the Dems are forced to work within the bounds of a virtual dictatorship. This is uncharted territory.

[Auggie]

8. C. I think they started out with the right touch, but now

need to be getting tougher. I'll change my grade to an F if some serious action isn't underway by end of March.

[mazzarro]

10. Voted 'other' because...

I figure that since the DLC is still has a strong hold on the party despite the efforts of progressives to wrest control from them; and that a lot of the money used in running the party and the campaigns come from same corporations that are cozy with the republic party; and that some of the same corporations are profiting mightily from the misadventure in Iraq, I was not expecting much more from the democrats - though I would love to be pleasantly surprised by a more robust effort to differ from the republics and *Co and hold them to account.

[RiverStone]

11. Who would you be comfortable with?

Given your view of the DLC's influence over our party (and I see that particular with Hillary) - which DEM candidates would you feel OK with mazzarro?




peace
:)

[LSK]

12. wow, 40% dont understand how funding and Congress works

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

13. If they were plumbers we'd need boats. And, they'd be fired.

"Yes, sir. I know I said I'd get to it. But, I don't have the parts, the tools, or the energy. Still leaking? Just be patient, I'll hold a meeting with some other plumbers and see if someday we might get together and fix that pesky leak. Just be patient. Under water? Want to buy a boat?"

[mmonk]

14. Action? I've heard words.

And "non-binding" political maneuvering.

[TroglodyteScholar]

15. Thoroughly disappointing...

Couldn't even pass a non-binding panty-waste resolution, and now they think they can EMBARRASS Bush into a change of policy? BUSH HAS NO SHAME. What the fuck planet are these assholes living on? Do they honestly think they're doing the will of their constituents?

[Roxy66]

16. Not sure yet. n/t

[KansDem]

17. "Incomplete"

I need to see more work in this subject before I can assign a grade.