Reid, Dem Leadership UNITED against "The Surge"

[Dems Will Win]

Josh at TPM reveals the DEMS ARE UNITED ON "THE SURGE" --

We've been on the phone all day trying to nail down congressional leaders on where they stand on President Bush's idea of increasing the troop level in Iraq. Here's the result of our day's work.

The Democrats' top leadership in the House and Senate are united against. The details are below.

...

After initially indicating an openness to the "surge" idea (providing that "it's part of a program to get us out of there"), incoming Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) issued a statement yesterday that he's no longer open: "I don't believe that more troops is the answer for Iraq."

The next Majority Whip, Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) told reporters this past weekend that "sending more soldiers to Iraq after the holidays would further drain an already depleted military."

House Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) issued a statement today rejecting the idea of a surge.

And House Majority Leader-elect Steny Hoyer (D-MD) earlier released a similar statement.

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/002202.php

Before the larger dirge, we need to purge the urge to surge.

PLEASE RECOMMEND TO GET THIS IMPORTANT NEWS OUT INTO THE BLOGOSPHERE

[ClassWarrior]

1. Done. K&R

NGU.

[Buzz Clik]

2. Cool. Reid considered a temporary build-up on Sunday, but against it by Thursday.

Shit. More confusion from the party leadership.

[Dems Will Win]

4. They just listen to wiser heads now -- US!

More confusion from the party leadership.

I knew when Reid issued his Sunday approval that it would only take a short time for him to recant. Here it is -- because the blogosphere is partly steering the party and it's very antiwar.

His office must have been flooded with emails and faxes telling him NO SURGE.

[Beelzebud]

12. I'll be honest here. I think it SUCKS that Reid has Leadership.

If any of you feel like flaming me for saying that, so be it.

I get tired of the mixed messages he sends out. Stand for something. Don't just be a Reid in the Wind! (ouch, BAD pun, couldn't resist)

[edwardsfeingold08]

16. At least he is willing to change his mind

His initial position was stupid. But, at least he changed and took a wiser stance and one that represented the will of the people. Bush should take a lesson from Reid.

[Beelzebud]

17. Honestly... It would be great if he didn't need to be reminded that we want out of Iraq.

I mean seriously. At this stage do you think he should need a reminder? He should have been with us from the start. Why the hell does he think America just gave him his majority?

[ClassWarrior]

20. The price of liberty...

...is eternal vigilance.

Never Give Up.

[ClassWarrior]

30. .

[lyonn]

39. Harry makes me nervous.

[IndyOp]

18. Reid is too much of a politico IMO, I want Leaders who stand on principle

Reid voted for the horrid bankruptcy bill that makes it so much harder for people who've gone bankrupt for medical reasons to get relief.

He also just helped vote out a package the GOP wanted that would give his state some bennies...

He is an old time politico, IMO. I admire his spine - and he has one once he has made up his mind - but I do not admire how he makes up his mind - political expedience.

I think Reid swayed against the surge after the Joint Chiefs came out in unanimous opposition. Reid wasn't willing to respond to public sentiment.

[ClassWarrior]

21. I wish they all could be Roosevelts and JFKs too...

...but that's just not realistic. I'd suggest we not let perfect become the enemy of good.

NGU.

[IndyOp]

22. I'm not aiming for JFK -- Feingold, Sanders, Kucinich - that is my idea..

And, yes, we have to work with the Congress we've got, not the Congress we might wish to have. So we tell them what we want and then hold their feet to the fire...

I agree. And I still have some energy left over to bemoan politicos.

[ClassWarrior]

23. LOL... Fair enough...

And I agree. We still do need to hold their feet to the fire.

:toast:

Never Give Up.

[disndat]

31. How about Webb?

He is a breath of fresh air.

[liberal hypnotist]

26. Strongly Agree!

It's up to us not to let them weezle around. Stand up and just tell the truth!

[CompassionateLib]

32. I agree

And this is a perfect example. Why compound a mistake in Iraq with more of the same. And Reid hemming on that is not helping.

Bush needs to be figuring out how to get us out, not in deeper.

[dos pelos]

45. Inevitable severe systemic political crisis ahead....

The democratic leadership is slowly awakening,if not yet to the will of an irate electorate,then to an irate military and political/bureaucratic establishment.The generals are resigning in disgust.What to do,what to do?The cozy policy of accommodation which worked so well in the past,for the democratic leadership,now only leads inexorably to disaster."We voted for the Bankruptcy Bill,the Military Commissions Act,that didn't hurt us,our democratic constituents reelected us."But this war will break both republican and democrat,it will break the washington old guard power elite,and Bush will not stop.Bush will have to be stopped and the Democratic leadership will,with assistance from disaffected alarmed republicans,have to stop him.This is coming.These spineless quislings Bush will push to the wall until they can accommodate no more.We are nearly there now.A fight is coming and these spongy quivering vacillating pieces of crap that we call our democratic representatives are going to have to stand up and
force a stop to this war.Then they are going to have to force this President,this Caligula in office,out.They can do it,they're going to do it,some of them don't know it yet.But they will.

[CompassionateLib]

46. This is the problem...

..."The democratic leadership is slowly awakening,if not yet to the will of an irate electorate."

Politicans find parades and run in front of them, they don't lead. What about if Democratic politicians just sat down with Republicans and figured out how to get us out of this mess rather than waiting until the people speak and then pointing fingers.

[iamjoy]

25. Give Him Benefit od Doubt

perhaps he genuinely was open to hearing the plan - how will more troops get us out of Iraq? Once he realized the plan was really for a stronger, longer military presesce, he said no way.

Of course, it looks like a flip flop. It looks like he stuck his finger in the wind and thought better of approving more troops.

[liberal hypnotist]

27. Remember all the Dems that voted for the war?

This is exactly how they got into voting for the war in the first place. We have given everyone of them the benefit of the doubt too many times. Now we doubt the benefits. We're all in it together.

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

33. It's reasonable to think things through and change your mind

Then there's Truthless Leader.

[dos pelos]

44. Push is coming to shove......

The Democratic "Leadership"is going to find no quisling wiggle room in which to accommodate between Bush's intransigence and the will of the people.These guys,republican and democrat, are all members of the power elite, all committed to this blood-for-oil resource grab gone wrong.They are merely fighting,struggling,amongst themselves for position and direction as their boat goes over the falls.
The old guard of this party has failed us,will continue to fail us.

[demnan]

3. Thank you!

[Dems Will Win]

9. What's the blueyed cat's name?

[demnan]

29. That's Pad Thai

See him here:

http://www.catster.com/pet_page.php?i=98993&j=t

[Binka]

5. United We Stand Divided We Fall & If Our Backs Should Ever Be Against The Wall

:kick: and R

[Dems Will Win]

6. We'll Be Together - TOGETHER!!

[patricia92243]

7. Will the Democrats have enough backbone to refuse to fund a surge? I'll be not. Let them literally

literally put their money where their mouth is - then I'll believe them. I would bet MY last penny that if Bush wants more soldiers, Congress will hand him the money to do so.

[Dems Will Win]

8. That's what they are saying

They will fund the troops there but no surge and they will somehow force Bush into withdrawing, as the Dems did Nixon in 'Nam

[IndyOp]

19. Do you have a suggestion for where to look for more on how Dems

forced Nixon to withdraw in Vietnam? I thought it was by denying funding...

:shrug:

[rodeodance]

10. and the wait continues (for the WH Decision)------glad to see this.

[Dems Will Win]

13. Dems take their ball and go home. As Nelson would say:

[pacalo]

11. Thank God the adults are now in charge to prevent the "party of moral values" from doing more damage

to our country's reputation.

I've watched movies about how prisoners are treated in other countries & I've always thought, "Thank God I live in America." One that comes to mind is "Bangkok Hilton", a 1989 miniseries starring Nicole Kidman (my introduction to Nicole Kidman, who was brilliant in this movie).

What this administration does to prisoners, though, is far less humane than anything I've heard about before. I'm ashamed.

[opihimoimoi]

14. Spines of STEEL finally...them GOPers got spines of noodles

as they hesitate to remove the cancer they installed in the White House.

For this one neglect...the GOP will lose their collective asses in 08....

BTW...Blankenstein (Goldman Sachs) gets 53 million BONUS for six months work? WTF is THAT? Proof the Minimum wage thing is a fix to keep us low guys LOW...so low its sick....this happened in France in 1773.....

[spanone]

15. KICK AND RECOMMEND

[Dems Will Win]

24. k

[Lone_Star_Dem]

28. I'm glad Reid changed his position, this is very important with Americans.

I'll not disillusion myself that it wasn't due to the strong opposition by Americans to a "surge." At least someone clued him in and he seems to be catching up. That's a step in the right direction.

Unlike Lieberman who is sucking up to the repugs with renewed vigor on this issue. I'll be thrilled if Lieberman has signed his own political death warrant by advocating for more troops. It would be very funny indeed if McCain wins the nom and tells him, "sorry Joe, but you blew your chance to run as my vice president when you called for more troops in Iraq. You see, you're just a mini me and not different enough to help me win. I may as well run with a mirror as my vice"

[CompassionateLib]

48. Just curious

I live in Connecticut and Lieberman is very liberal. I disagree with him on the war, no doubt. I want to bring the troops home and start now. But why does his disagreeing with the party on one issue make him personna non-grata as a Democrat? It bothers me that someone who is so overwhelmingly liberal like Lieberman is so trashed over any one issue, even Iraq. And I totally believe that while he's wrong on that subject, he actually is driven by principle.

Do we want people with principle who do what they believe or those who do as they are told by the party?

I want him to learn he's wrong, not be beaten into submitting.

[YvonneCa]

54. I've watched a lot of C-SPAN Senate coverage during...

...the last two years. The problem is that on crucial votes...Lieberman voted with the Republican majority, rather than his own party. What made that a problem, in my opinion, was that the ISSUES were all critical to getting Iraq right and/or preserving the Constitution. Lieberman voted with the Bush position.

[CompassionateLib]

55. Do you realize...

...if Lieberman were not continuing to vote with Democrats, Republicans would control the Senate?

He can write his own ticket from the Republicans to switch parties and give them control. Democrats mostly backed Lamont and trashed him during his re-election campaign.

If he really is a Republican, why on earth would he not have switched parties? He had the carrot from Republicans and the stick from Democrats.

Liberal used to mean open to differing views and new ideas. I don't like his position on the war. I am with Democrats on most issues becuase of my ideolgoy, not because I"m a party robot. I like debate. It generates thought and ideas. The religous dominated Republicans certainly don't foster debate either calling moderate Republicans RINOS.

Can't we be better though? Can't we be the party of ideas? What ideas will stand the light of day if we won't debate them ourselves but just trash anyone in our own party who questions or disagrees?

[YvonneCa]

56. Yes, that is true...

...of the 110th Congress, starting in January. But it was NOT the case during the 109th. I agree with most of the rest of what you said...especially the part about liking debate, and being the party of ideas. BECAUSE Democrats are now controlling the Congress, I think we are more likely to see debate and ideas in 2007. That only happened because they (and We, the people) fought for it. Lieberman didn't help with that last year. Understand...I don't think Lieberman is a bad person (although some do) I just didn't appreciate his votes WITH the Bush Administration during the 109th Congress.

[CompassionateLib]

57. Fair enough

Just keep in mind you can't really foster debate and say what can and cannot be debated. There cannot be approval of topics without in the end shutting down dissent and discussion.

But we agree the 109th congress was a catastrophe and hope (fingers crossed) the 110th will be far better!

[tom_paine]

34. K & R! So glad Reid realized his mistake

[ninkasi]

35. Good news

We need to concentrate on getting our troops home. A "surge" is only something that Bush thinks might in some way salvage his tainted legacy. There should be no more loss of life and limb for that twits ego. He made a huge mistake by going in, and had already decided to invade Iraq when he was still misgoverning Texas. As a Texan, I hate the thought of his coming back here after he is, hopefully, impeached, but at least it will limit his malignant power.

[Disturbed]

36. Busholini is stupid, arrogant and ignorant but even he is now

back peddling on this Escalation saying only if there is a defined Mission. I don't think there will be a Surge of Troops in Iraq. The ISG recommendations will be followed with plenty of spin by Busholini and his lackeys. Impeachment of gwb, cheney, rice et al is lurking no matter what anybody says otherwise.

[Dems Will Win]

37. k

[jazzjunkysue]

38. Excellent. Maybe they'll grow a set now that they have the congress.

One can hope.

[trashcanistanista]

41. They damn well better be

They weren't voted in for more of the same and they need to stand together and fight this. Pelosi needs to keep Harry in line and I think she just did. At least that is what I would like to think.

[Imagevision]

40. It appears Bush is testing the new Pelosi group...

[I_Make_Mistakes]

42. Call me a skeptic, but could this be an attempted political move

by Bush, for 2008? My point is, you know how many people believe that we could've won Viet Nam, if we only kept going? Remember, the average American has a short attention span, could the Republics (Pelosi's word) be hoping to blame the LOSS on the Dem's for 2008?

They could point to the fact that the Dem's were the problem? I am just asking, I know the political climate today is where I've been before the war, but could this possibly a Rovian setup?

I don't think it will work, but they know how to play the less informed!

[bobbolink]

43. So, did REid hear our outrage???

Maybe we got to him?

[Dems Will Win]

49. think so

[bobbolink]

50. Then we must keep up the pressure! NEXT-- restoring the cuts to

Medicaid!

Push, him, folks... please...

Peoples' very lives depend on it!

[YvonneCa]

52. More likely, he talked to Senators John Kerry...

...Chris Dodd and Bill Nelson, who all just toured the Middle East...including Iraq.:patriot:

[bobbolink]

53. True, that's a real possibility. Too bad he didn't consult before shooting off his mouth.

:)

[RestoreGore]

47. Everything is about 2008

Not about principle. Let them UNITE in calling for this war to END and not do it based on a poll or a flood of phone calls from constituents whose votes they think they will lose in the next election. I'm tired of this going the way the wind blows. Peoples' LIVES are at stake here.

[KamaAina]

51. Harry Reid has something against heavily caffeinated Norwegian soda?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surge

Surge (also SURGE) is a citrus soft drink first introduced in Norway, under the name Urge (1996), by the Coca-Cola Company to compete with Pepsi's Mountain Dew. However, while Mountain Dew is a yellow color, Surge is green in color. It became very popular in Norway. In 1997, Coca-Cola decided to start making it in USA under the name Surge, although in Denmark and Sweden, the name remained Urge. In the USA, the product did very well for the first few years, but eventually started to slip in sales. The Coca-Cola company has since ceased production of this beverage in the USA, Denmark and Sweden in 2001 and stopped making the syrup for fountains in 2002. Norway is the only country where you can still buy this soft drink.

'Cause that's the only Surge I can think of that exists outside the fantasy world within Bush**'s little pea brain!

[paulk]

58. Reid played this well, IMO

Bush is still commander in chief. He gets to set foreign policy. The only real power that the Senate has, in this regard, is control of the money to implement that policy. Reid, as Senate majority leader says - "We'll go along with this "surge" if you can show us that it's part of an overall plan to get us out of Iraq". That's what the election was about - the voters want, at the very least, a plan to get us out of Iraq. Bush - as usual - ignores him.

So, now Reid has set up a situation where the Democrats can oppose the surge - and point out that Bush doesn't have a plan to end the war.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

59. Good For Him! He's Handled This Perfectly So Far IMHO.

[shadowknows69]

60. Yay, Great

are they going to impeach him when he goes ahead with it anyway?