|
Edited on Fri Sep-21-07 10:33 AM by rateyes
It is my opinion (and, this is opinion....please keep that in mind), and I hope I am wrong, that the Democratic Party is on a course that will cost us seats in the House and the Senate, and perhaps even the presidency in 2008.
There are those of us, myself included, who are so disgusted with the seeming impotency of a Democratic Congress in doing anything to stop this war, that we are about ready to give up. We have been told by some of our Representatives and Senators that "there is nothing we can do, because we don't have the votes." Angry Democrats, such as myself, don't buy that argument. We know that it is not true.
A few months ago, Nancy Pelosi said about funding the war in Iraq, "No more blank checks." Well, about a week after Bush vetoed a "deadline for dollars" bill, instead of sending back the same legislation, we wrote a blank check---the only caveat being that General Petraeus would come back and give an "unbiased report" (like a General can disobey the orders of his Commander-in-chief) on how the "surge" is working.
Somehow, before we wrote that blank check, the Congress (WITHOUT 60 VOTES IN THE SENATE) passed a "deadline for dollars" bill. So, to say that it can't be done, because we don't have the votes, just isn't true.
The reason the Democrats didn't stick to their guns, and keep sending up that same legislation, which FUNDED THE TROOPS, and instead wrote the blank check was, in my opinion, out of fear of losing at the polls in 2008.
Well, again, in my opinion, the Democratic Party is in danger of losing in 2008 anyway, because they listened to their fears, and wrote the blank check, which has made Democrats such as myself very angry. And, there's more of us than the Democratic leadership thinks there are who are ready to give up on the Democrats.
Now, I've heard the argument time and time again that, if the base abandons the Democratic Party, then we will get a Republican president in 2008. I believe that's true. But, the base IS starting to abandon the party, and some of us are starting not to care if the Republicans win the White House. The reasoning is that, if a Democratic majority in Congress can't get good legislation passed anyway, especially when it comes to the Iraq War, then what does it matter which party controls the White House?
So, what is the solution? The obvious answer is that we Democrats have to stand united. I agree. But, stand united on what principles? The argument I continually hear from those who are not angry with the leadership is: "I'm as frustrated as you are, but we have to stand united, and not criticize the leadership, and keep voting for them. If so, we will win the White House, and have a majority in the House, and a filibuster proof majority in the Senate." But, is that true?
Will we gain 11 seats in the Senate in 2008? I think that's a stretch. That means that we won't have a filibuster proof Senate. Which means, unless the Democratic leadership does what it has shown it's not predisposed to do now---keep Republican blank check legislation off the floor---then we will continue this slide into governmental hell.
But, even if we do gain 11 Senate seats, and get a filibuster proof majority...what makes us think that the Democrats in the Senate will stand united and break those filibusters. They showed yesterday how fractured the party really is, when half of the Democrats in the Senate could not bring themselves to either abstain from the vote, or vote no on the Cornyn amendment.
I do think the Democrats need to "stand united." But, for me, that does not mean that the base should move toward the center (for lack of better nouns). For me, it means that the moderates need to move toward the progressive wing of the party, and stand united with us.
Angry Democrats like myself, feel that the Democratic leadership in the House and Senate has taken our votes for granted...that, regardless of whether or not they stick to their guns on withdrawing our troops, or setting "deadlines for dollars," we will continue to hold our noses and pull the lever beside the candidate with the (D) beside his/her name.
And, I'm here to offer the opinion, that, this time, taking our votes for granted will be a big mistake. If the Democratic leadership wants to keep the party united, then they had better start standing firm on votes like those taken yesterday, and more importantly on legislation that will result in the end of this war sooner rather than later. They want us to stand with them, but then when it counts, they won't stand with us. Now, that statement may be hyperbolic. But, it might not be, too. At the least, that's how it looks to me, and, I believe, a lot of other Democrats, as well.
Therefore, I am begging the Democratic leadership to quit allowing votes on amendments like the ones offered yesterday. I am on my knees pleading for them to not pass any war funding bills that do not, at the least, tie dollars to mandatory deadlines for troop withdrawal. And, I'm asking those of you who are not angry with our leadership to understand the anger a lot of us feel, and to stand with us to hold our Democratic leaders' feet to the fire...not because you are angry with them...but, because it's what you know is right for the country.
And, if the leadership stands united with us...rather than asking us to stand united on a promise of better days ahead, when nothing shows us that such promises will be kept...if they will stand united with us, I am convinced that we will win the presidency, gain a greater majority in the House and Senate, and realize a better future for ourselves and the world.
If not, we're in trouble....in my opinion.
"Deadlines for Dollars." Don't capitulate. Please.
Edited for grammar.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
