Democracy Arsenal

« Can't We All Just Get Along? | Main | Leader of the "Anbar Awakening" Killed »

September 13, 2007

The Dems 'Rodney King' Strategy
Posted by Michael Cohen

The Washington Post has a rather dispiriting piece this morning about the Democrat's changing political strategy on Iraq.

Instead of trying to force the Senate to vote on more aggressive and politically potent anti-war legislation the Democrats are now going to take a more pragmatic approach and offer bills that will 'hopefully' get the Senate closer to 60 votes and break a potential GOP filibuster. Yet, the article does not identify a single Republican who is now willing to change direction and cast a vote against the current policy in Iraq.

Sure, there are plenty of quotes from GOPers questioning the President's strategy (and I use that word loosely) but this quote from Gordon Smith sums up the situation:

"I'm not alone in my feelings, but so far I'm fairly isolated in terms of manifesting them with a vote," said Sen. Gordon Smith (R-Ore.), one of the party's few on-the-record war dissenters.

And then there is this from Jeff Sessions:

"I think Republicans, like a lot of Americans, are worried about how things are going. They're hearing mixed results. They don't believe everything that comes out of the State Department or the Pentagon or the White House. They're thinking critically."

With all due respect to these esteemed public servants; blah, blah, blah. How much longer do we have to read about "frustration" among Republicans about Iraq without seeing any of them actually casting a vote for a change in policy?

And then there is this pathetic quote from Harry Reid:

We're reaching out to the Republicans to allow them to fulfill their word . . .A number of them are quoted significantly saying that come September that there would have to be a change of the course in the war in Iraq.

Talk about a thin reed. Why Reid thinks that now the Republicans are going to change course, after basically telling them 'we're going to reduce the political pressure on you' is beyond me.

Here's the rub: No matter what the Congress passes, the President will veto it. So 60 is not the magic number - 67 is; and there is no way the Dems are going to achieve that goal. So my question is why not keep applying the political pressure? Why not make the GOP defend a policy that has about 30-35% support in public opinion polls?

I understand that Democrats love to pass legislation as a sign that they are getting something done. But if it has no chance of getting past the President's veto pen what exactly is the point? Believe me, if I thought this approach would have any success in changing course in Iraq I'd be all over it, but there doesn't seem to be any real evidence that Bush will acquiesce to legislation that changes our Iraq strategy. The only possibility of change is if Republicans grow some political courage and turn against their President. Letting them off the hook is not the way to accomplish that goal.

At the very least, applying maximum political pressure on some of the Senators up for re-election might actually clear some of these jokers out of the Senate - not only increasing the Democratic majority, but teaching these folks about the nature of representative democracy.

But instead Democrats are taking the Rodney King approach - 'can't we all just get along.' Its just further evidence that when it comes to wielding political power, Democrats don't get it.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451c04d69e200e54edc94488833

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Dems 'Rodney King' Strategy:

Comments

How about a filibuster from the fearful, fumbling, feckless and frightened flunkeys of the left? If they're going to go down in flames at least they could get a few rounds off--it's better than abject surrender.
-----------
Many Americans are familiar with the filibuster conducted by Jimmy Stewart, playing Senator Jefferson Smith in Frank Capra's film Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, but there have been some famous filibusters in the real-life Senate as well. During the 1930s, Senator Huey P. Long effectively used the filibuster against bills that he thought favored the rich over the poor. The Louisiana senator frustrated his colleagues while entertaining spectators with his recitations of Shakespeare and his reading of recipes for "pot-likkers." Long once held the Senate floor for fifteen hours. The record for the longest individual speech goes to South Carolina's J. Strom Thurmond who filibustered for 24 hours and 18 minutes against the Civil Rights Act of 1957.
http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Filibuster_Cloture.htm

Hi payday loan toronto acquaintance longshot draw trips hard figure mobile phone ringtones t fishhooks greek push fast fax loan no payday finger queens handicapper pat railroad million!

his friends thank him very much for introducing them the cheap rs gold.


I hope i can get rs gold in low price.
i buy runescape for you.

let us meet in the eve online isk. Let me comfort are the game have a cheap eve isk.

I like to play Asda Story, because I like its name, also I like Asda Story gold. You can buy cheap Asda Story gold; it is so easy and convenient.

Thank you for your sharing! I like i very much!

I tried to think so, but i found it was not as the same in the actual process. As you mentioned, I still have doubts, but really thank you for sharing!

The comments to this entry are closed.

Emeritus Contributors
Subscribe
Sign-up to receive a weekly digest of the latest posts from Democracy Arsenal.
Email: 
Powered by TypePad

Disclaimer

The opinions voiced on Democracy Arsenal are those of the individual authors and do not represent the views of any other organization or institution with which any author may be affiliated.
Read Terms of Use