Posted on 05/23/2007 9:18:11 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Anti-war activists vowed they will have long memories about the deal Democratic leaders struck with the Bush administration this week on Iraq war funding, warning that they will exact retribution from lawmakers in both parties in 2008.
Enraged by what they considered capitulation by Democrats, anti-war leaders vowed to redouble their efforts at defeating the next funding request when it comes up as expected in September. The group MoveOn.org, which previously had been an ally of the Democratic leadership on the war issue, in a statement raised the specter of "in-district advertising and recruitment of primary challengers" as punishment for Democrats who supported the deal.
The group called on its 3 million members to help in a last-ditch effort to defeat the bill -- a campaign virtually no one on Capitol Hill expects to succeed. MoveOn circulated a flier among lawmakers' offices reading "Congress: Have some backbone. Vote No on the supplemental."
Others said they were surprised that politicians they had hoped would be allies did not show more spine in the showdown with President Bush. "Some of us were just stunned that the Democrats would go this far" in compromising with the White House, observed former Rep. Tom Andrews (D-Maine). "We were expecting more of a fight," said Andrews, who now serves as national director of Win Without War, a coalition of groups against the Iraq war. "It's as if the election never happened."
Rep. James P. McGovern (D-Mass.), a prominent opponent of the war, was similarly disappointed with the compromise House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) made with Republicans.
"I wasn't ready to fold," he said. "I'm upset that we're where we are on this."
Anti-war groups had been in daily contact with Democratic leaders over the war funding measure. Some had supported earlier versions of the bill that placed more constraints on the president.
The issue will also echo on the presidential campaign trail, where Senate Democrats such as Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) and Barack Obama (Ill.) will be forced to cast votes on the funding measure -- potentially setting themselves up for the same attacks now being rained on House leaders.
Some activists had privately feared that Democratic leaders were losing their resolve to stage a protracted fight with the White House over wartime funding. Pelosi had announced earlier that the House would not leave for the Memorial Day recess without a new funding bill, a signal to some of a looming defeat.
"When they put out that deadline, people realized that we were going to lose," said an aide to an anti-war lawmaker. "Everything after that seemed like posturing."
That move gave Bush the upper hand in negotiations, the aide said, since it allowed him to wait out the Democrats while continuing to oppose attaching more restraints on the funds.
"There was no question that this was going to be the end result," the aide added.
Liberal Democrats had already been asked to bend several times to support earlier versions of the Iraq bill. Although they had favored a hard deadline of the end of this year for withdrawing troops, many acceded to Pelosi's request to support a bill that included merely a "goal" to extract U.S. forces from the conflict in 2008. MoveOn.org supported the earlier bill, a risky move that drew the ire of other activists.
Many anti-war members resented that their leaders were now placing them in the situation of having voted for the Iraq spending bill before they voted against it, a charge famously lobbed at Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) during his 2004 presidential bid.
The ongoing debate has not been without small victories for the anti-war forces. Pelosi allowed a vote on an amendment offered by McGovern to withdraw troops within months. It failed, as expected, but it garnered 171 votes, many more than even McGovern had anticipated.
But that accomplishment was overshadowed Wednesday by the new proposal, which is unappealing to anti-war lawmakers on two counts: It lacks a timeline for troop withdrawal, and it provides funds for the war through the end of the fiscal year.
Liberal Democrats were offended when one of their leaders, House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Ill.) lauded the new bill, saying it "put an end to blank checks for war."
MoveOn pointedly disagreed. "The supplemental bill to be voted on this week won't end the war. There are no real timelines or real accountability for the Bush administration -- just a blank check for an endless war," Eli Pariser, executive director of MoveOn.org Political Action, said in a statement.
The aide to a liberal lawmaker suggested that Democrats conduct vigorous oversight of the war effort in hearings and other public forums over the summer in a bid to sway more members of Congress to oppose the war.
"We need to figure out which generals we can drag before Congress," the aide said.
Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.), one of the war's most determined opponents, sought a silver lining in the week's developments, asserting that the bill would assign blame for the war to the president.
"This is President Bush's war. This vote will make that clear," Woolsey said. "It will be passed by the Republicans. It's what the Republicans wanted."
Isn't that redundant?
Did I hear earlier tonight that Iran is holding a Soros employee?
Holding him as a consultant?
Too bad most of the left just don’t leave the USA. Go to Cuba or France or somewhere else they would be appreciated.
Got to prod the wife to lay in a weeks supply of the best poppers out there. This porker is not going to go quietly ... Bush stated two reason for the first veto, the timeline and the non-related pork. Putting all the non-related spending in the war funding bill leaves the donks wide open for another veto.
Budget discipline and spending restraints are not strong points of the woman who was supposed to clean up the house. Slavishly going along with San Fran Nan will get you a short career as a blue dog Congress-critter.
Sit back and watch.
heh...most likely. ;)
Hmmm. Just like in Iraq.
 |
Maybe it’s oxymorons.
 |
Or not!
The Democrats know exactly what they're doing. They're just pretending to be rattled. They've got Bush right in the palm of their hand. They're just biding their time. They're playing possum. They're not gonna count their chickens before they hatch. They're keeping their powder dry.
These Dems are a fearsome lot. They can only be pushed so far, see?
This goober is my representative, which explains why I never even bother calling him or Teddy the Swimmer or John Effin Kerry when I don't agree with what they do. It would be a waste of my time.
  |
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.