Raising Kaine: "You don't play chicken with a sadistic sociopath"

[Catchawave]

Greetings from Virginia and my favorite homestate bloggy:
http://www.raisingkaine.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=8629

by: thaddaeus toad
Tue May 22, 2007 at 22:26:12 PM EDT

While I share the chagrin and perhaps the outrage at the feckless seeming of the Democratic leadership, I feel that living to fight another day better serves the interests of progressives.
The sad fact of the matter is that Bush would leave the troops over there to die without any money. He would not begin to remove them even while knowing that their funding had run out. And it would be irresponsible to knowingly leave the troops unfunded at the hands of a delusional Commander-in-Chief.

thaddaeus toad :: You don't play chicken with a sadistic sociopath.
Another sad fact is that we could not count on enough Republican votes to force our timetable and benchmarks and standards through. That fact says more about the President, and his Republican allies, than it does about the Democrats. In fact, the only thing it says about Democrats is that we need more of them!
Yes the leadership kicked the can down the road. That is disappointing.

But it is the wisest move politically and it prevents the GOP from foisting responsibility for this policy off on its opponents. By September it would be hard to imagine that what sits in the mind of the American people will be the fact that Democrats lost this battle. The reality is that they are powerless to stop the President because of his allies in Congress.

It is not the fault of Democrats that our Constitutional system has limits.

Were it not that Bush and the Republicans are so divorced from reality, are so craven, are so stubborn that they insist on pursuing neither a policy for victory nor a strategy that enables our exit, we would have the votes to implement a timetable and a shift in focus toward the political reconciliation that must take place to make any military effort lasting.

Best comments ever at the link.

[mzmolly]

1. Thanks for posting another perspective.

I needed it. Recommended.

[Catchawave]

2. Blame the republicans !

Easy, isn't it :grouphug:

[Donnachaidh]

3. of course this thoughtful posting will do nothing to make screamers stop and think

But you have my THANKS for posting this. People are NOT factoring in the evil in Bush's heart. He WOULD screw the troops and their families, and not lose a wink of sleep over it.

And YES -- we need MORE democrats!

[ProSense]

4. Feingold is voting against it, and now Dodd is urging the other candidates to

vote against it.

There really is no excuse for this bill.

[beachmom]

7. We don't have 67 votes. The two Republicans who voted for

the original Reid resolution said they weren't going to take part in this fight anymore. This round is over. Another round will come up in the fall.

All of these votes were important. But we need a vote that can garner 67 votes to override the veto. I understand if the 29 who voted for the Reid/Feingold Res. vote no, but this bill should pass. This fight is far from over, but this first round will be over soon.

I wish people would calm down and understand it's going to take more than one appropriatations bill fight to stop this war. The next round, I hope we'll get to 67.

[ProSense]

9. Maybe, Feingold and Dodd should calm down!

I think that's the point: They want to continue fighting and believe it's worth fighting for.

[ShortnFiery]

15. No dammit! It means something to STAND STRONG even if you don't have the votes.

Send the damn bill with deadlines back to the Idiot King until he LEARNS that you *won't back down.*

Take off those pink tutus and put on some pants Democrats, I'm disgusted with your COWARDICE!

Even if you LOSE, show US THAT YOU GIVE A DAMN!!!

[beachmom]

19. Wrong. The Reid resolution, which got 51 votes, will now not pass.

Two Republicans voted for it, and have now said they will NOT vote for it again. So you CAN'T send it over and over again.

Look, Kerry and Feingold are going to vote as they are going to vote. And they're going to continue the fight, as they should. But other Democrats and all the Republicans are going to vote for it. It's called adding up the numbers.

And this idea of passing NOTHING for months and months will not appeal to the American people.

I like this TPM post:

The Dems -- reflexively -- want to claim some measure of victory here. After all, you have to "win," otherwise D.C. pundits will call you a loser. But as a Dem House staffer remarked to me earlier today, why bother declaring victory here at all? It wasn't a victory. The President basically got his way, and the Dems didn't. And that's fine -- let that be the story. As the staffer suggests, why not acknowledge that this is a crappy bill -- and let it be seen as the President getting his way? Dems had to pass this bill because the Commander in Chief wouldn't let the Dem Congress do what the American people wanted it to do.

"Never mind declaring victory," this staffer says. Indeed. This policy belongs to the people who "won" -- the President and the GOP.

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2007/may/23/house_dems_mixed_message_on_iraq_bill

[ShortnFiery]

26. Right! You stand up to bullies. You see, that's how you EARN respect.

You earn respect by doing "the right thing" even though the odds are against you.

The American People are disgusted with Spineless Democrats "keeping their powder dry."

If you compromise with swaggering bullies, you've already lost the campaign. :thumbsup:

[calimary]

29. Absolutely true. "...but we don't have the votes..." You know what? DO IT ANYWAY.

PUSH IT ANYWAY. MAKE A STAND, ANYWAY!!!!!!!!

Now, thanks to our "leadership," we're all jokes.

I hope every last one of them has one historically miserable Memorial Day weekend with the folks at home. I would rather see them push and fail than watch them just cave. And they caved. And I'm left wondering why I busted my ass all last year. Next thing I'm sure they'll do is tell little monica that because she didn't mean to break the law, it's all okay, sweetheart. Don't worry your pretty little head about it. Just go home and don't worry about it anymore, honey. You didn't mean it! There, there! That's okay. No biggie!

This is a disgrace. At least with nixon, America got some accountability for high crimes and misdemeanors. There is NOTHING now but kneepads as far as the eye can see.

[truedelphi]

17. The points that you are failing to see on this are these

1) The power is with you until - and only until - you concede.
Then the power is GONE!

Can you imagine Newt Gingrich - with or without the votes needed to carry something his party wanted - coming along back in his day and conceding BEFORE he instructed/ educated the media on what the public wanted??

When Pelosi is being interviewed by John Robert, she looks like she's been raked over the coals.

Why? Why would you ever EVER let yourself look like this. Why would you ever FAIL to use the expression "what the people want." (Remember that is what the Republican Congress, circa 1994 and on, let the media know: "We are the Congress, BLAH BLAH BLAH that the people elected, that the people wanted.")

Is it asking too much to ask that the Dems do this? That they acknowledge that the PEOPLE want this war ended. (Or would that acknowledgement make the corporate donors to their campaign chests wary?)

Why do the Democrats in power, again and again and again fail to see the importance of EMPHASIZING that what they are doing is the will of The PEOPLE -they are only doing what the PEOPLE want.)

Shame on Pelosi and the other "leaders" for caving, for failing to put up a fight. SHAME!

2) When you fail to put up a fight, then you are basically BEING, ACTING, and LOOKING like a coward.

3) Any politician who is worth their salt has read their Machiavelli

And has learned: You strike when the iron is hot

okay so at this minute they don't have enough votes.

But do you HONESTLY think it will all be okay in September?? Putting aside the notion that the *only* downside <sarcasm> to this is that another thousand or so service people will have died, etc, there are HUGE ELEPHANTS in the central living room of the AMerican Psyche.

These HUGE ELEPHANTS in the living room of the collective psyche do include the US Attorney scandals. Including the oil price gauging. Including the fact that the President's polling numbers are in the BASEMENT.

Do you think if this was a Rove or a Gingrich standing up to a Clinton that he
would not have introduced these talking points into the efort.

Oh, I am forgetting - it wasn't a Rove or a Gingrich - it was the spineless SOUP lady, Pelosi (Jello having more wherewithal to stand up to an attack and an all out fight - SOUP is all I can think of with I think of Madame Spineless Speaker.

By September, if we let this HooliganBUSH stay in power, we will be in Iran. Or under his thumb due to another terror attack.

[ShortnFiery]

18. Well put! I'm ashamed of the DAMN Cowards from my party who vote for this bill.

I will work with my local Democratic Party and donate $$$ to all your Primary Challengers.

COWARDS! You disgust me. :grr:

Want to Support The Troops? BRING THEM HOME FROM THIS ILLEGAL OCCUPATION!

[beachmom]

20. This post comes from Virginia. And your fiery rhetoric will not play

well here. This is a long fight. Webb voted AGAINST Reid/Feingold. The president VETOED the bill that did pass. WE. DON'T. HAVE. THE. VOTES.

Republicans and centrist Dems will vote for this bill. Liberals won't. Then we'll have another vote in the fall. Hopefully, we'll snag more votes the next time, until we get to the magic number of 67.

[ShortnFiery]

25. Newsflash, I'm a Virginian! ROFL, I live in Vir-GIN-I-A. Too funny!

Of course it will play here in Virginia, especially the Northern Part of the state. :hi:

[magnolia]

32. FYI

Thaddaeus Toad is not a native Virginian. He is no moderate.

[ProudDad]

27. You Don't Get It...

The plan would be to pass NO SUPPLEMENTAL!!

Then the money directly earmarked for Iraq/Afganistan would run out and they'd have to use some of the $550,000,000,000 The FUCKING pentagon's already getting to buy them all a ticket out of Iraq!!!

Now that the Dem "leadership" has caved in to the sociopath in the WH, * gets his money on my grandchild's credit card. :grr: :grr:

[beachmom]

5. Good post. Thanks for posting. n/t

[Catchawave]

6. I xposted to RK and let thaddaeus know :)

:hi:

[ecstatic]

8. The sadistic sociopath wouldn't get away with leaving troops in battle without money

He wouldn't get away with that. Congress would step in. The people would step in. The Generals would step out. I'm sure no repub would be dumb enough to support Bush on that one. Good attempt at spinning though.

[annabanana]

10. If this crop of repugs thought that it would get the slaughter blamed on the

Democrats, I absolutely believe that they would stymie any attempts to go and save them...

[Vincardog]

11. When was the last time anyone STEPPED IN to stop the The sadistic sociopath ?

[ecstatic]

13. good point, although I'd LIKE to think that such a crime would be way

too egregious for them to sit by silently like they usually do.

[ShortnFiery]

16. Bush is a pissant BULLY, not a sociopath. He's an posturing a**hole ...

Stand up to him and the swaggering Republicans, even if you lose. Why? The AMERICAN PEOPLE demand that you give us "just one inkling" that you give a damn about what *us little people* (your constituents) WANT! :grr:

[Vincardog]

28. Do you think that there is a difference between a sadistic sociopath and a sadistic posturing a ho?

[Grandrose]

12. Excellent!

:kick: and recommend.

[ShortnFiery]

14. No, Republicans HATE wussies. They will figuratively SLIT our Throats.

Never back down when facing a BULLY or a Right Wing Republican. :nuke:

IMO, on this topic, Raising Kaine is merely "kicking up dust." :shrug:

[beachmom]

23. Webb voted AGAINST Reid/Feingold. What do you want us to do?

We are where we are. This bill, if it is passed, will be passed by Republicans and centrist Dems. This coalition will be very shaky and next go round, I hope we can get to 67.

I'm for the greater goal of ending the war, but we don't have the votes yet.

[ShortnFiery]

24. Not having the votes does NOT mean that you capitulate. Replace Reid and Pelosi. n/t

[Vanje]

21. Correct

FIRST impeach.
If theres a sadistic sociopath running the country, use our excellent constitution to get rid of him.

[mzmolly]

22. I have a thought. "You impeach a sadistic sociopath."

Now all we need are the votes I guess...

[NoodleBoy]

30. so, you do want to play chicken with a sadistic sociopath and all his friends in congress?

there's absolutely no way that enough Republicans would jump on board for a conviction in the Senate, and might even filibuster it (if that's possible).

Impeaching him in the house, then, would accomplish absolutely nothing. Do you really want this Congress to look like the Gingrich Congress-- levelling very serious charges at a president knowing full well that once the shouting is over nothing will have changed?

[mzmolly]

33. I want impeachment IF it will lead to more than a dog and pony show.

However, I feel that we may lose progressives if we don't "try?" I honestly am torn on the issue.

[NoodleBoy]

34. it wouldn't be more than a dog and pony show-- and...

not impeaching Bush is not enough to "lose" progressives. The ones who wouldn't vote Dem in 2008 probably wouldn't anyway, and those who may threaten not to vote will end up voting.

[farmboxer]

31. Make Bush show his damned colors once again!

Let the "Village Idiot" veto! Campaign reform ASAP! As of yesterday!!!