Democrats Back Down On Iraq Timetable

[antiimperialist]

Source: Washington Post

President Bush and congressional leaders began negotiating a second war funding bill yesterday, with Democrats offering the first major concession: an agreement to drop their demand for a timeline to bring troops home from Iraq.

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/02/AR2007050201517.html?nav=hcmodule

---

If this is true, We have been betrayed by the Democratic Party.

[jaysunb]

1. consider the source & frame...

n/t

[rodeodance]

5. Timetables are DROPPed-----no matter the source.

[antiimperialist]

6. Article says Feingold will not back down

unless the second version of this bill includes "a binding approach to ending the war."
It's also said that Democratic leaders are resigned to losing these liberal Democrats.

[bluestateguy]

2. Revenge of the Pink Tutu wing of the Democratic Party

If they weren't going to stand their ground, I would have rather them just have given Bush the money in the first place. That at least would have been taking a consistent stand. This is the kind of prevaricating that causes people to say that the Democratic Party does not stand for anything.

[no_hypocrisy]

3. And . . . . what is * giving up in reciprocity of the Dem's relinquishing the timeline?

*Crickets chirping*

*Crickets chirping*

*Crickets chirping*

[primavera]

33. Exactly

White House officials are also looking to benchmarks as an area of compromise, but they want them to be tied to rewards for achievement, not penalties for failure.

In other words, the make no compromise whatsoever.

[no_hypocrisy]

4. Dupe. Sorry.

[Glorfindel]

7. But look! The Senate voted 94-0 for protection of PETS!!!

They know what's important, all righty. Damn the soldiers, protect the cats. Hooray! :sarcasm:

[unkachuck]

8. "We....

....made our position clear. He made his position clear. Now it is time for us to try to work together,"

....in other words, now that we've given up ending this war, let's give bushco what they want so they won't be mad and blame us....

....strong, firm, resolute leadership like this has made the Democratic Party what it is today....

[kimmylavin]

9. Oh, for Pete's sake!!!

Way to be firm, guys.
You have NO REASON to roll over for President Asshat - what the hell is wrong with you???

[rodeodance]

29. 08

[Le Taz Hot]

38. Then what?

Watch and see if they STILL don't cave to the Republicans. It's their specialty.

[msongs]

10. cowardice in action nt

[mzmolly]

11. I don't believe this, look at the actual quotes by Dems.

"But make no mistake: Democrats are committed to ending this war." ~ Nancy Pelosi

......

Already, liberal Democrats think that public opinion and circumstances in Iraq are on their side, and they view benchmarks alone as far too weak. House Appropriations Committee Chairman David R. Obey (Wis.) has repeatedly told Democratic leaders that he would not report a war funding bill out of his committee that he could not support. Pelosi is also reluctant to embrace such a compromise until she sees how far congressional Republicans are willing to bend.

[antiimperialist]

12. Good point. This is speculation by the WAPO reporter

At least in part, this is speculation. We don't know for sure what the Democratic leadership will do.

[mzmolly]

15. Well it seems there is mucho speculation in this direction?

And, I'm not doubting that Dems will do something stupid ;) I'd just rather wait for it to happen before I "give em hell."

:hi:

[jarrodwvoh]

13. The American people have spoken! Enough lies, grow a backbone D's! My 1st post

[Judi Lynn]

45. Welcome to D.U., jarrodwvoh.

:hi: :hi: :hi:

[sjdnb]

14. Can we UN-elect them NOW?!?!

The people want timelines...the people want this war ended.

Just WHAT will it take for our reps in DC to understand this?

MSG TO REPS - Both Dems and the GOP ... every poll shows we want this over asap!

Are you either too stupid, too cowardly, or too "invested" to get OUR message!

[Zhade]

16. This BETTER be untrue, or I'm backing off my support for them.

Waiting skeptically to see if the Dems intend to end this crime...

[still_one]

22. The only real alternative the Democrats have is to bring up articles of impeachment against them

This will immediately move the focus of the MSM away from the talking points of the administration, and focus on WHY ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT ARE BEING BROUGHT AGAINST THEM

There is more than enough evidence to start the process, and as more and more is brought to the public, more PEOPLE will be demanding it

[nodehopper]

35. Kucinich is already trying...as usual, he is the only one doing the right thing, it seems

[still_one]

41. I agree, and the momentum will build /nt

[Heathen57]

17. Why do I have the sinking feeling

that the "moderate" Democrats will finally roll over and play dead just like they have done in the past?

The Emperor has already declared he will veto anything that has any language that will end his precious occupation of Iraq. Does Pelosi really think he will compromise?

[antiimperialist]

25. John Edwards says: send the same bill over and over again

On withdrawal, Edwards again shows more decisiveness than Hil and 'bama.

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/05/02/ap3679370.html

[MGD]

27. Yup, he sure does. I wasn't leaning towards Edwards but he has shown some backbone here

He has inched into the lead as far as my vote is concerned.

[Le Taz Hot]

39. He didn't when it counted.

I.e, the IWR.

[Thor_MN]

30. Thor_MN says same except 75% of the $$$s and 3 month shorter timeline

Second verse, same as the first.

'enry the 8th trumps Mad King George.

[nodehopper]

37. is edwards really lagging in polls, as per that article?

I thought I read a poll recently that showed that he was the only one of him, hillary and obama who would beat a republican nominee?

[Exiled in America]

18. I'm sorry....but what did you all actually THINK was going to happen?

I'm shocked at all the shock. :(

[rodeodance]

28. oh-I think most 'knew"-----yet it is hard to accept in the end.

[Triana]

19. DAMN them! WHY didn't they just SEND THE SAME BILL back?

And let dickhead veto it again.


And again.


And again.


And again?


....on and on ad infinitum. That way it's HIS fault the damn funding doesn't get passed!


WHAT is the matter with these pink tutu spineless damn jellyfish?

:mad:

[IndianaGreen]

20. Democrats don't have to do shit! Just let the money run out!

I am happy to see John Edwards join MoveOn in a rally demanding that Congress remains steadfast in opposition to the war by not giving in to Bush and sending a similar bill back.

[still_one]

21. The truth is the MSM gets its talking points from this administration

Even though we won in 2006 it will be a moot issue when the media will distort it with the "Democrats do not support the troops"

I doubt we will get much air time to tell the truth

There is only one way out of this, and to have the media move their attention away from the RNC talking points, and that is IMPEACHMENT

There is enough evidence that our involvement in this war was based on lies. Time to stop the games and impeach NOW

[Screwfly]

23. At the very least

If congress can't stop funding for the military in Iraq they should at least stop funding the Iraqi government. The idea that a country swimming in oil needs foreign aid from the United States is absurd.

Let 'em go barrow money form a bank or something. Its rapidly getting to point were its either fund the lousy Iraq war or cut way back on social programs here.

[still_one]

42. The sad and very real fact is that there is NO ACCOUNTABILITY for that money

[Algorem]

24. fake democracy.war pigs rule.

[MGD]

26. Any Senator or representative that concedes this point is ineligible for my vote in 2008. EOM

[deutsey]

31. We live in a political world, where peace is not welcome at all.

It's turned away from the door to wander some more
Or put up against the wall.

Bob Dylan


:evilfrown:

[missTheBigDog]

32. I'm confused

Someone help me out here. Isn't it in Bush's best interest to get something worked out? I mean, if there is no bill at all, then there is no troop funding. If there is no troop funding, then we would have to withdraw by default. I would think he would be the one making the compromises right now, rather than the other way around.

What am I missing here guys?

[nodehopper]

36. bush is arrogant and our democrats have no spine. hence they concede and he doesn't. bully wins.

[Le Taz Hot]

40. You are missing

that apparently these guys are perfectly OK with the fact that thousands of more people will die. I'm sickened.

[nodehopper]

34. pathetic. No spine, just as expected. I am so sick

of the "you have to understand they are doing what they can" excuses. What a heaping, steaming pile of sh*t.

[ginnyinWI]

43. disagree!

The Dems have no reason to "betray" us. They are simply doing what it is possible to do. One old trick is to ask for much more than you ever hope to get. Then settle for half--which is what you expected in the first place. It is * who is being played here.

[depakid]

44. Pravda framing the issue

Whatever the case- it's not a good idea to respond to anything one reads in the Post.

It's not only NOT a credible source- but it's a cowardly publication full of far right enablers who egged on the war from the outset.

[eppur_se_muova]

46. As long as were getting somewhere ... let's give up.

Who buys that argument?? The Dems should send the bill back with no changes (except maybe some war profiteer pork trimmed out, if they can manage that) and let The Commander Guy™ announce he's still not going to fund the troops.

[Heidi]

47. Kick.

:kick:

[robcon]

48. Democrats Back Down On Iraq Timetable

Source: Washington Post

"President Bush and congressional leaders began negotiating a second war funding bill yesterday, with Democrats offering the first major concession: an agreement to drop their demand for a timeline to bring troops home from Iraq.

Democrats backed off after the House failed, on a vote of 222 to 203, to override the president's veto of a $124 billion measure that would have required U.S. forces to begin withdrawing as early as July. But party leaders made it clear that the next bill will have to include language that influences war policy. Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.) outlined a second measure that would step up Iraqi accountability, "transition" the U.S. military role and show "a reasonable way to end this war."



Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/02/AR2007050201517.html?referrer=email

[hippiechick]

49. GOD DA**IT!!!

:mad: :nuke: :mad: :nuke:

[AndyA]

50. Cowards.

The Dems know what the American people want.

They know the war was based on lies.

They know the answer is not military, but political.

They know our troops are dying every day.

They know there are things here at home that the Iraq money could be spent on—important things that have been neglected like repairs to critical infrastructure for our country; health care for its citizens; security for our ports; money for the FDA so we don't die from eating tainted food imported from other countries.

I am ashamed that the Democrats don't have the spines to stand up to this man and the GOP. They have the majority of the American people on their side, they know it, and they STILL won't do what we want them to do.

:mad:

[woodsprite]

54. I saw a pic of all three (Pelosi, Reid, and Chimp) on the news

this a.m. and thought something didn't look right. Reid and Pelosi looked like something was stuck in their craw and they had these half smiles pasted on their faces. You know how real smiles reach your eyes and light up your face? Well, that's not the kind they had on in that pic.

[rodeodance]

57. they just had some wind knocked out of them. Very subdued.

[Kikosexy2]

68. time to bombard...

Reid & Pelosi with calls, emails, etc. and remind them again and again why we're not happy with this....demand that they do their jobs, remind them they work us, the American people...show them how pissed we really are....

[Le Taz Hot]

51. Grrrrrrr!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:argh:

Tell me again why we were so happy when these guys took over.

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[msongs]

53. who will be the first to post republican talking points in this thread? nt

[Dogmudgeon]

56. The Washington Post (in the OP)

The press is playing us.

We are out of procedural options for the time being. The press is playing it as a victory for our Glorious Maximum Leader. However, it's going to keep coming back. Then the press will say that we're all loons.

The inning has ended. The "game" has not.

--p!

[Kerry fan]

55. Maybe after June.

I knew they were after the oil but I didn't realize the extent.


Bush's Petro-Cartel Almost Has Iraq's Oil

http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/43077/?page=1

[BlueJac]

58. Gutless at best.............

Why don't they all quit......jelly fish without backbones get squished.



What was the vote in November, oh yes we voted for more of Bush's bullshit and a gutless congress.

[Dhalgren]

59. Oh well...It was a pretty little dream while it lasted...

[Doctor_J]

60. Sure glad we worked so hard to get a Dem congess

Say good-bye to the republic for which we once stood. A 30% approval dunce under investigation for 10-20 high crimes gets his way.

It's hard to explain how depressing this is.

[dkofos]

61. No negotiations with TERRORISTS

[bushisdirt]

62. President Piece of Garbage wins once again, but this time a

very important win. I can see Pelosi backing down...but Reid? Just don't get it. The Dems have moved into a Lose-Lose situation. If Iraq turns worse, they will get blamed for the resulting American deaths. If Iraq turns better, Bush and the Neocons will be seen as finally pulling it out.

[Neoleonidas]

63. I don't understand why they don't fight being portrayed as wimps.

Maybe there is a reason K-Street cannot hire anough Democratic lobbyists fast enough.....they are pliable?

Dunno. I'm new here. I'll learn.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

64. Hold Your Fire...

Let's play real politics here. Pelosi and Reid don't have the votes to override a veto. And while my personal preference is to keep sending Bush the same bill until Republican congressmen break with the Bush Administration, there's no gaurantee that they'll crack anytime soon.

An alternative approach is to present Bush with a bill that includes specific benchmarks (that the Iraqi government won't be able to meet - we all know this) and require a pull-out if the Iraqi government can't or won't defend itself. It's possible that we may end up with the removal of U.S. troops at roughly the same time (by the end of 2008). On a purely poltical level, it would cause the Bush Administration to admit failure in the middle of the 2008 election. Bonus!

[MGD]

65. Those with the loudest anti-war voices have been painted as the extreme left wing and, as such,

we have been isolated, alienated, and falsely marginalized in order to create the illusion that the majority of Americans support George Bush, the war in Iraq, and the course America is set on today. I don't think the the antibush/anti-war sentiments are limited to the far left by any means; however, the radicals are always the loudest voices in any crowd which tends to create fallacious perceptions. All I have to say is let's sort this out at the primary elections in 2008. 2008 needs to be an up or down vote by the American people for or against the war on all election fronts. There are no other issues.

[leftofthedial]

66. scum

voting doesn't work anymore

our republican democracy is 100% dysfunctional.

it's time for a major change

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

67. And what is YOUR opinion on this? -nt

[0xDEADBEEF]

69. Move On

IIRC, the bill that was vetoed, was to FUND the Iraq war effort. Without a funding bill, Shrub can order troops around all he wants; they just don't have the ability to follow his orders.

So he vetoed a perfectly good funding bill. Leave it at that. Move on to something more important than funding the Iraq war.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

70. (1) They're already promising another funding bill, one that funds and doesn't have nasty things

like withdrawal.

(2) I'm still waiting for the OP's take on this.

[goodhue]

71. of course its true

and while disappointing it is no surprise

[young_at_heart]

72. " Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the president to explain to us what the

exit strategy is.” (4/9/99)

"I think it’s also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn.” (6/5/99)

“It doesn’t make any sense to have a timetable. You know, if you give a timetable, you’re — you’re conceding too much to the enemy.” (6/24/05)

In 1999, George W. Bush criticized President Clinton for not setting a timetable for exiting Kosovo, and yet he refuses to apply the same standard to his war.

[MGD]

73. By the time we're done lowering the victory bar, we'll be defining victory as 50 K dead US soldiers

and a bankrupt America. They have recently begun redefining victory once again as it has become evident that a Democracy in oilraq is a highly unlikely proposition. They're basically saying that a non-democratic theocracy will be acceptable now.

[Barrett808]

74. TPM: Pelosi And Reid's Offices Deny WaPo Story

Washington Post article is FALSE!!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x812737