John Edwards: Support the troops by Ending the war

[Philosoraptor]

Being discussed Sat. morning on cspan.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/realclearpolitics/20070510/cm_rcp/edwards_stumps_in_chicago

"Today the White House said that the President intended to veto a proposed compromise on Iraq. The Congress has met its responsibility by submitting the president a funding bill on Iraq in support of the troops that had a timetable for withdrawal.

"Congress has done the will of the country, the President is trying to thwart the will of the American people by vetoing this bill. What the Congress should do is submit another funding bill with a timetable for withdrawal. If the President vetoes that, they should stand strong and firm and submit another funding bill with a timetable for withdrawal.

"This president has made it absolutely clear that he cannot not be negotiated with and there is no compromise in him, and we should not be compromising anyway. This is not politics. This is about life and death. This is about men and women whose lives are on the line and it's about war. And the American people have given the Congress a mandate and it's really crucial that the Congress stand up to this president and end this war."

[chimpymustgo]

1. He's absolutely correct.

Congress must stand up to B*sh and bring the troops home.

[frogcycle]

2. agree

they MUST keep the pressure on. They have the high ground; the polls show the country agrees they have the high ground. The spoiled baby in the wh will yield, gradually, never admitting it, claiming "this is what I meant all along" when he finally signs something, or he'll sign it with a "signing statement" and make a big fuss that nobody buys except the remaining brownshirts who still think he is their hero.

[frogcycle]

3. i still think the best way to absolutely box him in

is to pass a bill mandating a pay-as-you-go plan - taxes on defense contractors and oil companies, plus cancellation of the cuts for the rich. A formula that says, in no uncertain terms, that the entire enterprise is, as of this minute, a not-for-profit enterprise.

There is no case that can be made against that. He would have to accept it or else admit that he intended all along to destroy the country for the benefit of cronies. And if he signed it, the motivation for prolonging the thing would go away. The simple fact is that everything they say about "they'll follow us home" and all is just a smokescreen and they know it. They want the war machine to keep being fed, because all these for-profit "war service" companies like Blackwell and Halliburton NEED it. They have stockholders holding them accountable for "growing the business" like any other corporation. The military downsizes in peacetime, mothballs battleships, closes bases, etc. Private corporations don't want to do that. They need more wars, more occupations, to keep their businesses growing.

This is what is REALLY driving this seemingly stubborn, pigheaded position. Anyone who has worked in a large company where decisions are made based on the boss's options plan rather than what is right, even what is good for the company long term, knows this.

The "privatization" of war (along with most of the rest of our government) starting in the Reagan dynasty, has handed ALL strategic thinking over to those greed-driven super-capitalists who are building the McMansions. We have nearly completed a return to feudalism. The "nobility" live in the castles, and the rest of us are the serfs.

The Democratic Party needs to confront this openly. Too many of them are ALSO feeding from that trough. In reality, this prolonged occupation, horrific as it is, is only the tip of a much larger iceberg - that being the demise of our democratic form of government. It may already be too late.