NYT: Bush "swaggering ...like a victorious general because he cowed a wobbly coalition of Democrats"

[ProSense]

Editorial

War Without End

Published: May 27, 2007

Never mind how badly the war is going in Iraq. President Bush has been swaggering around like a victorious general because he cowed a wobbly coalition of Democrats into dropping their attempt to impose a time limit on his disastrous misadventure.

By week’s end, Mr. Bush was acting as though that bit of parliamentary strong-arming had left him free to ignore not just the Democrats, but also the vast majority of Americans, who want him to stop chasing illusions of victory and concentrate on how to stop the sacrifice of young Americans’ lives.

And, ever faithful to his illusions, Mr. Bush was insisting that he was the only person who understood the true enemy.

<...>

It’s upsetting to think that Mr. Bush believes the raging sectarian violence in Iraq awaits reigniting, or that he does not recognize that Americans’ support for the war broke down many bloody months ago. But we have grown accustomed to this president’s disconnect from reality and his habit of tilting at straw men, like Americans who don’t care about terrorism because they question his mismanagement of the war or don’t worry about what will happen after the United States withdraws, as it inevitably must.

The really disturbing thing about Mr. Bush’s comments is his painting of the war in Iraq as an obvious-to-everyone-but-the-wrongheaded fight between the United States and a young Iraqi democracy on one side, and Al Qaeda on the other. That fails to acknowledge that the Shiite-dominated government of Iraq is not a democracy and is at war with many of its own people. And it removes all pressure from the Iraqi leadership — and Mr. Bush — to halt the sectarian fighting and create a real democracy.

<...>

The Democrats who called for imposing benchmarks for political progress on the Iraqis, combined with a withdrawal date for American soldiers, were trying to start that process. It’s a shame they could not summon the will and discipline to keep going, but we hope they have not given up. As disjointed as the Democrats have been, their approach makes far more sense than Mr. Bush’s denial of Iraq’s civil war and his war-without-end against terror.

more

[bigtree]

1. who gives a shit what they say?

who is listening to them?

Who's busy encouraging us to listen to them?

[ProSense]

6. I hope Congress. I take it you're happy they passed a toothless bill? n/t

[bigtree]

16. they still support the teeth (timetables) which republicans are obstructing

and which failed to get a veto-proof margin of support using the funding bill as a vehicle. There will be other vehicles and the majority of Democrats will again vote for timetables for withdrawal (the teeth).

[ProSense]

18. There was no need to strip it from the bill

This is not about Bush and his stupid veto, it's about holding him accountable.

The Democrats control the committees, they decide what goes to vote.

[bigtree]

24. the effort to use the funding bill as a vehicle failed

time to try something different

[Edweird]

23. bull. By authoring the bill, they became supporters of the war. No bill = no war.

"REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, you know, there’s a fundamental misperception about the path the Democrats should be taking. We shouldn’t be offering any legislation at all. We should just simply tell the President we’re not going to fund the war. And this idea about funding the war to help the troops is absurd. You want to help the troops, bring them home.

I offered a plan, HR 1234, that would provide for a plan that would bring the troops home, close the bases, end the occupation and reach out to the international community for an international peacekeeping and security force that would move in as our troops leave. But we can’t do that until we end the occupation. We can’t end the occupation until we stop funding the war. We simply do not have to have a bill, Amy. It’s just as simple as that.

JUAN GONZALEZ: What about those Democrats who argue that they could not get a majority vote or at least one that would survive a presidential veto to stop the funding, so that they’ve got to then have a concession of some sort?

REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: I want to make sure I’m being clear about this. I’m saying that it’s not necessary to have a bill, that the process depends on legislation to keep the war going. But there’s money in the pipeline right now to bring the troops home. We simply should tell the President we’re not going to fund the war, period. We don’t need legislation to do that."

Don't give me any of that "it's all part of a bigger plan" bullshit.

[bigtree]

25. the supplemental is not what is enabling Bush to continue

It's the refusal of republicans to vote for timelines which the majority in our party support. There IS a bigger plan to keep submitting the timelines in other legislation.

The 'money in the pipeline' Kucinich talks about is the October supplemental from last year. Even if the money still exists and actually was destined for the troops it didn't cover the priorities *outlined in the Democratic spending bill.

Also, if there is 'money in the pipeline' to withdraw, there is money for Bush to continue to limp our soldiers along without a supplemental that he couldn't have cared less about.

Don't give ME the bullshit that holding up one supplemental spending bill was going to cause Bush to take notice and care enough about the integrity of the forces to withdraw.

[Edweird]

27. well, then if it wasn't going to hold anything up, then why did they bother passing it?

I mean, if it was so inconsequential, what difference would it make, right? I mean, it's not like it was AIRLIFTED to camp david so chimpy could sign it right away or anything, right? They need the money. Dems gave it to them. That makes them complicit. They are now partners with bushler in his illegal war. Actually many voted FOR the war to begin with, but they all cried about how he lied to them. Well, they now had a chance to show where they stand, and they stand with bush. There is no excuse great enough to justify continuing what is going on Iraq. Especially not when the Dems were given a mandate to STOP IT!

[bigtree]

32. it wasn't going to end the occupation

A vote for timelines needs more than just Democratic votes to pass.

Those members who voted for the supplemental evidently didn't think that the Democratic funding bill, containing money for priorities outlined by our own party, should fail.

Partners with Bush? Bullshit. The majority of our party is still committed to voting for a date certain for withdrawal. The majority of republican enablers are not. Voting to let one supplemental spending bill containing Democratic priorities for Iraq spending Bush didn't care about anyway hasn't changed that opposition.

[ProSense]

33. The current bill doesn't address ending the war. It gave Bush a go ahead until September ends. n/t

[Edweird]

34. What democratic priorites were accomplished?

[bigtree]

35. Our own Democratic legislators chose which items to include in their spending bills

Murtha, Skelton, Obey, Byrd . . .

[ProSense]

37. Yeah, they chose not to include a timetable!

Didn't Obey vote against the bill?

[mmonk]

31. The truth hurts.

[aquart]

2. Uh, NYT...Democrats ARE "the vast majority of Americans."

As you would know if you'd examined how many of our votes were stolen.

[ejbr]

28. a kindred spirit

would we be arguing about ANY of this had any of the MSM had the balls, integrity or journalistic curiosity to find out, report, follow up and do their own LEGITIMATE investigations as to why the Dems were cry..SCREAMING foul?

It was as if that by calling the election to Bush, nothing could be done. He didn't have the votes? No matter, we said he won. He and his buddies prevented people from going to the polls, sabotabed voting machines, thwarted recounts and provided WAY too few voting machines in Democratic districts all adding up to a President Kerry? No matter, we said Bush won. FUCKIN infuriating!

And now we have the assholes saying we deserve Bush because we reelected him. My head is on the verge of exploding!

[ProSense]

3. Soldiers are dying for real so Congress needs to pass an Iraq bill with real consequences

Soldiers are dying for real so Congress needs to pass an Iraq bill with real consequences

[rwenos]

Bush is a Superficial Jackass

While I believe Bush is patting himself on the back, this is just another example of a President who lives in a dream world. While I wish our guys and girls in Congress would grow a backbone, the Grim Reaper comes in September -- when General Petraes, who is the current Man on the White Horse, has to report to Congress. The most likely thing to happen is he'll say, "It sucks, but there's light at the end of the tunnel."

If the Dem's don't cut off the funding for the war then, they never will.

A pity this Mensan can't see beyond the end of his nose to the Endgame to come.

[The Count]

4. Doncha know? terraists only incite violence to inconvenience W poltically

Everything revolves around him - always did, always will.
Them commoners is defeated, so all's well in Bushworld.

[The Backlash Cometh]

5. There is no reason in the world why that man should be swaggering.

He should have been humbled by all the negative press the White House is getting, but Noooooo, the Democrats had to play business as usual and make a stupid deal.

[kenny blankenship]

8. WHy not? He can't beat the Iraqis but he can still beat the Democrats like a rug

[BrklynLiberal]

7. He can claim all the "victories" he wants. He is still the f**kin naked Emperor!!!

I can only hope that the "people" will be so enraged by his attitude that
they will eventually storm the palace walls and hang him by his....

[ProSense]

9. Did anyone expect Bush to act any other way, and

the media to cheer the Democrats for letting him have his way?

[Mind_your_head]

10. How come there is NO AUTHOR who wants to take credit for writing this piece?

Isn't that weird? Unusual?

-------------

Whoever wrote this wants to have people "let off steam" before it "blows the top off of everything" is what I see! That's why no author, imo. Some *co shill wrote this.

(i.e., "It’s upsetting to think that Mr. Bush believes..." - NO, it's not 'upsetting'....it's f*cking MADDENING, OUTRAGEOUS, MIS-GUIDED, and STUPID!)

[Morgana LaFey]

13. ????

Editorials aren't signed (Commentaries and Op Ed pieces are). Editorials are typically written by one of a stable of editorial writers who are on staff, on behalf of the paper. If I'm not mistaken, they have meetings of the editorial staff to decide just what the paper's position on something is. Then someone is assigned to write it.

[Lautremont]

14. It's an editorial.

[Mind_your_head]

21. Oops

:blush:

I guess my 'cup runneth over with anger' this week and I "typed before I thought". So sorry, please forgive my stupid mistake.

Peace,
M_Y_H

[ejbr]

29. Nothing to forgive...

these assholes are trying to make us crazy and sometimes it works. :)

[spanone]

11. Great Editorial.....

K&R

[OzarkDem]

12. He earned it, he made them look like asses

Sorry, but its the Dems time to eat crow. They decided to capitulate to the ignorant fool, so let them bear the humiliation.

[TheCowsCameHome]

15. He swaggers because Cheney's arm is up his ass

directing the rest of his movements.

[Phrogman]

17. Today the Democrats, tomorrow IRAN!

Thank you congress.

[AlinPA]

19. Could it be that Rove-Bush**-Cheney actually need to have our soldiers die to

remind everyone that Bush** is the "war president" and they need to keep "boots on the ground" to keep the flags waving ......? Honestly, they do not seem to care at all about one single death or injury. It seems to puff them up and they swagger around looking tough.

[gordianot]

20. War is their only accomplishment.

And we all know what War is good for!

[ejbr]

30. No, they don't care

witnessed by dumbya's search for WMD at the correspondent's dinner, reduction in veteran benefits, refusal to add an additional .5% to their pay raise while funding Halliburtin & Co. up the ying yang, continued use of vulnerable Humvees, lesser quality body armor, walter reed, longer deployments, "bring 'em on", his pathetic "coalition of the willing" and his absence from funerals tend to make me think he don't give a shit.

With all this, our dumb ass representatives are scared that he will say they don't support the troops. Are we in the twilight fuckin' zone? Where's Rod Serling. Maybe we are on Candid Camera? Allen Funt are you out there? No, I know! We are being Punk'd! Ashton Kutcher you got us good! ....Ashton? Rod? Allen? You mean this is for real?

[rucky]

38. or a simpler explanation...

to keep the money flowing.

[Bluebear]

22. And the Democratic Party humiliated its base.

Read: us.

[Rex]

26. Ugh.

...I feel sick.

[gulliver]

36. Yep. He thinks people like him again.

Time to pounce on that monkey. Make a big deal of his victory. Keep Bush crowing. Thank the GOP for Bush's victory over the people's expressed desire to see change in Iraq. Bush's swaggering got the GOP and America where it is. Let the little twit keep on doing it.

[ProSense]

39. Kick! n/t