Whoopsie
Ed Morrisey discusses an article in the New York Times that, if anything, paints an even more bleak portrait for the Pelosi-Murtha cut and run pork festival - er - spending bill than the one I linked in the WaPo.
The Democrats thought they rode to power on a wave of anti-war sentiment, but they have discovered that their victory had much more to do with Republican failures than with Democratic platforms. Most of their new members come from center-right districts where Democratic messages about corruption and abuses resonated — but where they see Congress' role in Iraq as limited at best. Boren represents a typical Democratic pickup district in that respect.
Now that the Democratic leadership has gone on record as wanting to limit options for victory in Iraq, Nancy Pelosi and company find that these new representatives will not play along with them. The Blue Dogs understand that timetables represent nothing more than defunding efforts under another name. They will not vote for anything that smells of defeat and retreat, and their numbers indicate that the Democratic supplemental — even filled with hometown pork for those on the fence — will likely fail.
It isn't a good idea to count chickens early, of course. But if this bill fails to pass, it will be a major blow against Pelosi. She will have squandered a lot of voter good will and internal political pull. We'll see how the actual vote goes, of course. I continue to maintain that contrary to the assertions of Pelosi and her pal Murtha, the Democrats were not given a mandate to lose a war. If they find that out the hard way, so be it.
Other Links to this Post
-
Wake up America-Question Their Humanity — Thursday, 22 March , 2007 @ 11:57 am
By psmarc93, Thursday, 22 March , 2007 @ 11:45 am
If the bill doesn’t pass, it’s not because people aren’t for ending the war. The problem is a sizeable number of elected representives (both Republican and Democrat) are being heavily pressed by their citizens to end it MORE quickly than this bill allows — the resulting rift between Pelosi’s bill to continue funding and those who want the funding to stop now may stop this bill altogether. Although this rift benefits the MINORITY opinion that this civil war in Iraq can be somehow “won” and that the incompetent administration should be trusted to “win” it — it doesn’t change the fact that 2 out of 3 Americans want the war ended — too bad the House memebership doesn’t reflect the reality of the represented in this case.
By Robert, Thursday, 22 March , 2007 @ 12:21 pm
If you’re going to blame Murtha and Pelosi for losing a war that was lost before they came to power, could we credit them for enabling our wins in WWI and WWII?
Nice job on the Iraq War. Lost to a bunch of tennagers. Very impressive.
By gil, Thursday, 22 March , 2007 @ 8:24 pm
The Democrats were given a mandate to stop the war.
But good Democrats would not mind at all if you Republicans continue to stop us from ending this war. I like to see the Democrats in full absolute control in 08 you see. Problem is that a lot of people will die while Republicans keep on “winning” the war with saliva.
You are the ones loosing here Republicans.
By the way just curious…. You “win” by letting al Malaki and the Shiite control Iraq??? Would they not run to Iran ??? The answer is yes absolutely, but your brains can’t process such complexity of ideas.
Republicans I recomend you guys buy Middle East wars for Dummies like pronto !!!