The Democratic Capitulation Act of 2007

7:11 pm EST May 22nd, 2007 | News | 10 Comments

charlie brown and lucy playing football

They never learn. They just never f*cking learn. They get the majority and they still act like they’re in the minority. It’s ironic that right before Memorial Day they vote to give this president a blank check to send more good men to Arlington Cemetery.

STOP THIS WAR.

The only reason the Democrats aren’t going to suffer electorally for this is because next year is a presidential year, and a Democratic president must end the war or suffer punishment like impeachment.

But I don’t get the Democrats. I just don’t get them. They’ve added almost a whole Friedman (until September) and what do they think is gonna happen then? The right will claim the surge is working even though it isn’t, they’ll request six more string-free months, and more Americans die for no damn reason.

Makes me sick.

Topic:

Related Posts

«
»

10 Responses to “The Democratic Capitulation Act of 2007”

  1. nogo war says:
    May 22, 2007 at 8:53 pm

    no wait..by golly..in Sept. the Dems will stand up..no really..
    After all if we do not have the votes to override a veto why vote just to placate those that voted for change to defund this war..(and of course the majority of Americans).
    The Dems that support this better prepare for a serious Primary challenge..

  2. Sachem says:
    May 22, 2007 at 8:56 pm

    We will be at war with Iran before the next funding bill.

    Feel the draft from the right.

  3. Walter says:
    May 22, 2007 at 10:28 pm

    It’s almost as though they’re not really anti-war and are just acting like it to get votes.

  4. Chris Andersen says:
    May 22, 2007 at 11:29 pm

    The battle was lost the minute the Democrats allowed this debate to be framed as “funding the troops”. The correct frame was “funding Bush’s war”.

    Democrat’s don’t know messaging.

  5. tdraicer says:
    May 23, 2007 at 12:29 am

    That the war would continue until Bush left office was decided in November 2004, and November 2006 didn’t change that. Bush won’t pull out regardless of what the Dems do (and though most Dems want to end the war, they barely hold the Senate and are hardly united). I wish for political reasons the Dems hadn’t caved, not because it would change things on the ground in Iraq-as I said, Bush won’t leave, period-but because it may hurt their voter turnout in 2008. But the real blame for our being there until 2009 lies with those voters who voted for W. in 2004.

  6. Dugger says:
    May 23, 2007 at 9:38 am

    And Hilary said she would end the war as Pres., BUT SHE DIDN’T SAY WHEN (end of second term?)!

    Hey, you guys are supposed to be happy. You’ve got a Dem Congress.

    How ’bout the Nader option? He’s tanned and ready.

  7. Wellstone says:
    May 23, 2007 at 10:26 am

    I’m only unhappy that more American boys are going to keep dying for nothing.

    Politically, I think this is maybe the best we can do right now, and it’s really not that bad.

    It does hang the war around the neck of the GOP: Everyone agrees that it IS Bush’s war, and that it IS the GOP part of the Congress that enables him.

    If I’m a GOP Rep or Senator from a swing state, or have a contested election fight on my hands, this is one of the worst possible outcomes for me.

    Instead of allowing me to sidestep or find plausible deniability, it keeps Bush, Mr. 30% approval, tied to my re-Election campaign’s neck like an albatross for the foreseeable future.

    It’s going to affect my fundraising down, I’m going to have to go off-message to answer tough questions on where I stand, and I’m going to have ever-angrier and more frustrated constituents with nothing for me to offer. And my primaries are only short months away!

    I would have to think Bush is killing me. And the Dems are playing Bush’s vanity and arrogance like a fiddle.

  8. Anonymous says:
    May 23, 2007 at 5:00 pm

    More Kool-Aid, Mr Wellstone? Lets not forget, Dems voted for enabling the war and thereafter have voted consistently to sustain it.

  9. Nimrod Gently says:
    May 23, 2007 at 6:19 pm

    I think what probable Frank is trying to say is this.

  10. Wellstone says:
    May 24, 2007 at 10:48 am

    No, Frank, I’m not playing that game.

    See, SOME Dems voted to give the Preznit the authorization to use military force in iraq, autorization he begged for and demanded, and misused.

    But a strong MAJORITY of Democrats voted NO, and all regret having given him that book of matches.

    This is Bush and the GOP’s war. No matter how much you Rethugs wish it weren’t so, and no matter how much you try to smear Dems with the blood on your hands.

    But my point, again, which you never addressed, is that Bush’s present stance on Iraq, the #1 concern of Americans, is KILLING the GOP.

    The GOP scum are trying desperately to use brown people and Immigration as a way to make Iraq less of a #1 concern, but those damn dead soldiers keep coming…