Democrats Can’t Get it Right ... (Democrat are struggling, their leadership is disliked)

It’s been nearly a year since Democrats stormed into Congress with campaign victories all across the board in the 2006 midterm elections. By picking up 30 seats in the House of Representatives and five seats in the Senate, the Democrats regained control of both houses of Congress for the first time since 1994. Furthermore, the Democratic Party gained control of the majority of governor’s mansions and state legislatures for the first time in a long time. So you would think that after all those years of impotence, all their newfound power, and a craving to get back at George W. Bush, Democrats would get some things done in 2007. Instead, with only a few months remaining in the year, they’ve done essentially nothing.

Aside from passing most of their 100-Hour-Plan in the first week after taking control, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and the Democrats just haven’t had much of a positive impact on the country. The few things that they did accomplish (federal minimum wage hike, student loan interest rate reductions, lobbyist legislation, and “pay as you go” laws) never really grabbed the interest of the American people. Although, most of the legislation in the 100-Hour-Plan was positive, its impact on the public has yet to be felt. With a 26 percent approval rate (Associated Press, 9/13/07), the Democratic-led Congress is not just treading water, they are sliding down a slippery slope.

As it looks now, the Democratic Party is going to have very little impact on the most important issue facing our country -- the Iraq War. It seems that they won’t be able to pass any meaningful legislation on the war until after the presidential primaries occur early next year. This is because most Republican lawmakers have continued to support President Bush’s Iraq strategy -- despite predictions from the left -- and aren’t likely to cross party lines until after the primaries end next June. John Murtha (D-Pa.), a Vietnam veteran and war critic who chairs the appropriations subcommittee overseeing defense spending, recently predicted that “as soon as the primaries are over, you're going to see Republicans jumping ship.” Even if this prediction holds true, it does not matter; for if the Bush administration can hold down support until late next summer, they will have succeeded in handcuffing the Democratic Party and in getting the war support they want and need.

Obviously Democrats have tried to pass legislation to bring our troops home and effectively end the war. However, because of the President’s power of the pen, the party in power has been rendered essentially powerless. So although they like to blame the GOP for stopping their efforts, Democrats should only blame themselves for failing to work in a bipartisan manner. Had they proposed sensible legislation on the war, Republican lawmakers would have been more than happy to join hands with their colleagues across the aisle. If you don’t believe me, just check the numbers. President Bush’s approval ratings have been holding steady in the low 30’s for awhile now, so being offered a way out from Bush’s hole, would be a gift for most Republicans looking to be reelected. The other issue with war legislation involves conservative and moderate Democrats who are unwilling (or unable) to speak out about their disdain for the war, because of fears that their conservative constituents would see it as abandoning the troops and Commander In Chief in a time of trouble. Despite the fact that most Americans want us out of Iraq, there are still people (mostly in the Midwest and South) that believe we should stay the course and continue fighting until we achieve total success.

The fact is the Democrats are struggling and it should come as no surprise to anyone. Their leadership is disliked by the majority of Americans, GOP members, and even congressional Democrats. Party members are torn over how to fix the mess in Iraq, and legislation coming from the left has left much to be desired. Furthermore, liberal groups like MoveOn.org are doing nothing to help their political party of choice by purchasing ads in the New York Times that question General Petraeus’ integrity. And finally, the majority they hold in Congress is so slight, that they don’t have the power to play the bully. All of this, plus the upcoming presidential elections have hurt the image of the Democrat-led Congress, or at least made us all forget about them.

Whatever political progress the Democrats can scrounge up over the next few years will be too little, too late if they can’t find a way to stop the war. The majority of Democrats in this country believe the 2006 midterm elections gave them a mandate to stop the war, and they have yet to see their elected officials take advantage of that position. Thus, although the Democratic Party has led the way on a few important bills, and may do some good work in the future, they are still, and will continue to be, the Do-Nothing Democrats.

re: the Democratic Party is going to have very little impact on the most important issue facing our country — the Iraq War

BS! They are having a devastating impact on the Iraq war. Just ask anyone who has lost a loved one, or one of the thousands of brave warriors who have lost a limb or their eyesight if they feel the near-treasonous behavior of the Democratic congress, and their minions in the MSM, have had an impact on the war.

You will NEVER, EVER convince me that we wouldn’t have been a whole lot closer to accomplishing our goals in Iraq were it not for the constant, never-ending flow of encouraging words to our enemies in Iraq, and around the world.

Is it any wonder the Dems haven’t been able to accomplish anything of importance when they’ve spent every waking moment undermining our forces in the WOT?

Words can simply not describe the utter contempt I have for those who have given aid and comfort to our enemy while our troops are fighting and dying on the battlefield. I would happily spit in the face of any one of them given the opportunity, so here’s a virtual spit in the face to whole pathetic lot: PATOOIE!

There I feel better.

This post says it all.

Backed by none other than Hollywood and MoveOn.org, the Democrats ran on the notion they could get back at Bush with impeachment hearings and repealing the (much needed) tax cuts which incidentally, prevent those 'evil' rich Corporate CEOs from outsourcing jobs to places like India and instead employ Blue Collar Americans who have a need to feed themselves and their families. But of course, that's a minor detail which escapes these nitwits like George Soros who have deep pockets.

It certainly is true that never in the history of this country has the contempt for Congress been so deep. Both parties have done little or nothing to bolster the confidence of the American people, what with trying to pass off Amnesty for Illegal Immigrants as reform, and their reluctance to allow the U.S. Military to fight and win the War On Terror.

That certainly gives me no confidence or comfort at all.

This is because most Republican lawmakers have continued to support President Bush’s Iraq strategy --

So does Hillary -

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

I want to go back to this Hillary sound bite, folks. I'll tell you, all of you leftists out there, those of you in the anti-war movement who think the Democrats are your boys on this and you're going to do this and that and you're going to get 'em out of there and troops are coming out, and Mrs. Clinton is going to make sure they come out, I want you to listen to this, two things about it. A, she said in this answer everything I predicted that she would say, but she's beating me to the punch in terms of I didn't think she would say this until she's president. I told you that there's no way Hillary is going to take troops out of Iraq if she's elected. There's no way she's going to saddle herself and the party with defeat of the US military and the United States of America. No way it's going to happen. Dirty little secret. Democrats don't know it, the anti-war crowd, the kook blogosphere on the left, doesn't know it.

What else did I say? I said she would say, "Well, we don't know what the Bush administration held from us. I don't know what I'm going to inherit. I had no idea what the situation was going to be." Sort of like Clinton's tax cuts. He led everybody to believe he was going to cut taxes, and after a month, "I worked harder than I ever have in my life. I just can't find a way to do it. The Bush administration, there's some things that I learned when I got in here I didn't know were going on in the economy, we just can't do it." Same technique will be employed here, and she admits it. So here's the question again. Remember, now, this is what the Democrat Party thinks the '06 elections were about, in which she was reelected. "Can you pledge that all US troops will be home over the course of your first term as president?"

HILLARY: You know, I'm not going to get into hypotheticals and make pledges because I don't know what I'm going to inherit, George. I don't --

RUSH: Stop the tape. There it is. She's already making pledges, though. She's already told Petraeus she doesn't believe what he's saying about the situation in Iraq. Keep that in mind. As you hear the rest of this bite, she doesn't believe what Petraeus has said, she doesn't believe what Bush is saying, there's no reason to be there. We ought to bring the troops home. We need to start now bringing the troops home. Now, listen to the rest of this.

HILLARY: -- know and neither do any of us know what will be the situation in the region, how much more aggressive will Iran have become --

RUSH: Stop the tape. What does that matter? It doesn't matter now, Mrs. Clinton, it doesn't matter to Chuck Schumer, doesn't matter to Dick Durbin, doesn't matter to you now, or Harry Reid, why will it matter when you're president what Iran is doing? Here's the next sentence.

HILLARY: -- what will be happening in the Middle East, how much more --

RUSH: Stop the tape. What does that matter? Doesn't matter now. What do you mean, keeping troops there when you're president will depend on what's happening in the Middle East? Why does that not matter now, Mrs. Clinton?

HILLARY: -- more of an influence will the chaos in Iraq have in terms of what's going on in the greater region.

RUSH: Why does that matter now? Why does that not matter now? Why is it only going to matter when you're president? The chaos in the region, chaos in Iraq, that apparently is of no concern now to you or your party. Why will it be a concern when you are president?

HILLARY: -- we have pushed Al-Qaeda in Iraq out of their strongholds with our new partnership with some of the tribal sheiks, or will they have regrouped and retrenched?

RUSH: She's talking about the surge here, and they're saying the surge failed. Why does it matter whether our partnership -- what do you mean, Al-Qaeda in Iraq? I thought Al-Qaeda wasn't in Iraq, Mrs. Clinton. I thought this whole thing was bogus, Bush lied. My, my, my, how things change when you are asked questions of what you're going to do as president. And every bit of this, never forget, my friends, I, El Rushbo, the all knowing, all seeing Maha Rushie, predicted this very answer. She just beat me to it by a year-and-a-half.

END TRANSCRIPT

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.