The Democrats’ Support for Bush’s War

[babylonsister]

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/06/01/1608/

The Democrats’ Support for Bush’s War
by Stephen Zunes

snip//


Signs of Hope

It is important, amid the anger and disappointment at the Democrats’ decision to continue funding the war, to acknowledge the growing strength of the anti-war movement and signs of hope that the American public can still force an end to the U.S. war in Iraq.

In the vote on supplemental funding last year, only 48 House Democrats voted against the Bush White House. This year, the number of Democrats voting against funding nearly tripled to 140.

And, as disappointing as it may be that only 10 Senate Democrats voted against war funding last week, it is important to remember that not a single Democrat voted against war funding in 2006.

snip//


The United States will be forced to pull out of Iraq sooner or later. The question is how many people will die needlessly beforehand.

The war will last a long time and claim many more deaths as long as Democrats believe they can continue to bankroll Bush’s effort and get away with it. Every Democrat who voted for the supplemental must be challenged in primaries next year. If he or she is re-nominated anyway, a strong Green Party or independent challenger must try to defeat the incumbent in November. We must demand that Democratic Congressional leaders who allowed the unconditional supplemental funding measure to move forward be removed from their posts and replaced by representatives and senators who actually oppose the war. While individual anti-war Democrats still deserve our support, all contributions in time or money to the Democratic Party must cease until the leadership takes a firm and uncompromising position against further war funding.

And it may take heightened measures, including sustained nonviolent direct action. When Congress forced the withdrawal of American troops from Cambodia in 1970, it came only after anti-war protests shut down more than 300 colleges and universities across the country and more than 100,000 demonstrators converged on Capitol Hill in early May.

The betrayal by Congressional Democrats last week should be met not by despair but by escalating popular resistance to the war. The gains of recent months by the anti-war movement must not stagnate as a result of the Democrats’ capitulation on the supplemental funding, but must be built upon to demand an end to Democratic collusion with the war policies of the Bush White House enforced through binding legislative action.

[mike_c]

1. the proliferation of angry editorials like this is a sign of hope....

Liberal politics is on the ascendancy, even if the democratic party leadership is WAY behind the curve. That growing liberalism WILL find somewhere to call home. Right now it is up to the democratic party to start paying attention, or become a permanent minority party in the middle.

[disndat]

2. Bribery might have taken place

A very sinister possibility mentioned at another Democratic blog. I believe it is possible the Rove Republicans have deep pockets and could make offers that some ethically challenged Democrats couldn't refuse. It was also advocated that we target these traitor Democrats for defeat in the next election cycle. Senator Carl Levin was the biggest behind the scenes culprit. He is the biggest receiver of AIPAC money in the Senate.