Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiTake a deep breath. The nation has arrived at an extraordinary political moment. The Congress is about to instruct the President he should withdraw from the ongoing war. Yes, I know the fine print in the House and Senate versions has lots of wiggle room. But the congressional action is still breathtaking when you think about it, possibly without historic precedent.
I assumed it would take many months and numerous failed efforts for the new Democratic majority to reach this juncture. When House leaders kept softening their terms, I even thought it might be a good thing for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to lose the first time around. She would then be assailed by outraged Americans and get the message: stiffen up, this is not business as usual. I was mistaken. Many of the final details are disappointing, but the message has been delivered and received--get out of Iraq. It will rule politics until the American exit actually occurs.
Democrats did not create this new dynamic--it arose volcano-like from the American people--but Democrats have had the wisdom to embrace it. I remember the torturous struggle in the Sixties waged by congressional opponents--Republicans and Democrats--trying to end the war in Vietnam. Their first resolutions were mild and deferential, politely urging Lyndon Johnson to start negotiating for peace. They were rejected. Subsequent measures raised the ante, but it took years of frustrating failure to get Congress to speak clearly. By comparison, the shift in politics this time moved like lightning.
Democrats now have the Republicans in a political vise and will keep squeezing them. Let Bush veto whatever anti-war measure House and Senate finally produce. Let the president's GOP troops uphold his veto. Democrats will then rally for another legislative assault on the willfully blind chief executive. Each new roll call will stick it again to the Republicans. Do they want to stand with the public's common-sense grasp of reality? Or are they going to keep voting with the crackpot commander-in-chief and his delusional search for victory?
The guy in the bunker, unfortunately, may never get the message. That deepens the tragedy, both for America and Iraq. Each new needless death will deepen the hurt and anger. But it looks like George W. Bush will stick with denial, even as Congress keeps toughening its attempts to force withdrawal. I hope I am wrong about that, but a wise friend explained the logic of Bush's desperation politics.
Bush and Cheney, he said, are trying to run out the clock--keep this war going until they leave office and can dump the mess on the next president, very likely a Democrat. In retirement, the Bush crowd will then begin to sow the "if only" revisionism that blames Democrats or the media or the American people for a "loss of will." Sounds absurd now, but that is roughly what happened after the lost war in Vietnam. We could have won, "if only." Sad to say, many Americans came to believe it, especially resentful veterans seeking explanation for why they fought and lost.
Given all he has done to this country, Bush could do something truly valuable for history by accepting the blame in a stand-up way. Admit his great errors. Acknowledge the failure. This might ensure him a tragic but noble legacy. I am afraid there is nothing noble in the man.
© 2007 The Nation
28 Comments so far
Show AllHey Rebel Farmer,
As a fellow Oregonian, while I like Senator Smith and his "boldness" in breaking from his party and president regarding the war in Iraq, I'm still planning to volunteer on the campaign of whatever Democrat runs against him and I will vote against him. His change seems "politically convenient." If the war was still popular, he wouldn't change his mind. But with reelection around the corner, and his being a Republican in a Blue State, his career is more important than what he really feels about Iraq.
Why not get more serious about filing impeachment charges in the US House?
Myself:
You are on the right track! But it's just as important to stay on the tails of the Repubs. As one of my senators, Gordon Smith does not have much going for him in my book. But when he voted against his party and supported a timetable for withdrawal this week, I just HAD to e-mail him and let him know that support back home for his vote would far outweigh the political blowback he would receive from his party. He is up for reelection and knows that he will not be going back to DC if he continues to ignore the wishes of the voters.
The key has been that the web now allows voters to watch their every move. Money may talk real loud, but we the people can talk LOUDER! In conjunction with election and campaign finance reform, we are going to win this battle of taking back our democracy. It's not going to happen overnight, so we have to hang in there and keep raising the volumn.
Onward and upward!
I should add...Mr. Bush, stop traumatizing other peoples young children, by having them pull the trigger for you and your arrogant, xenophobic, crusading ideology!!!
In the meantime, while this back and forth volley ball is being played out as a political slight of hand, the meat grinder of the war machine continues to liberate innocent souls from their tattered and torn bodies! If you kill someone in the street with a gun, the murderer is apprehended and incarcerated, but under the guise of war, an illicit war for plunder at that, murder has now, mysteriously, been transformed into an acceptable idea and it's ok to even attach a timeline so that unabated murder is allowed a continuance to follow the twisted logic of this cadre of maniacal despots who remotely pull the trigger from the comfort of their desks. If you want to support the troops, send them the money for airplane tickets out of there now! They would all be grateful not to have to kill for an errant ideologue anymore!
Look…Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Feith, Armitage, Negroponte and all the others who play musical chairs with the appointed positions in the background of the unelected bureaucracy (unaccountable, there only to pleasure the president) they went in, murdered Saddam, a business partner turned sour, like Noriega, it's finished. Saddam is dead, he can't tell his dirty little secrets anymore so, stop trashing the countryside and proselytizing the population. What happened to, do unto others?
Under these circumstances, how can anyone in their right mind continue to justify the troops staying even one second longer with orders to kill for Bush's vainglorious megalomania? This regurgitated, mincing of words needs to stop! This is beyond outrageous! Bush, his war machine and the lust for empire neocon Oligarchs of the American government have washed this nation in the blood of shame.
Best wishes and hope
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tk1vEuhBuEU
When has Bush ever done anything "truly valuable for history"?
"......Bush could do something truly valuable for history by accepting the blame in a stand-up way."
When has Bush ever accepted the blame for anything?
indictments??
None of what little advancement has been made would have happened had WE, the righteously indignant, sat on our asses and kept quiet. We must keep the heat up on the Reps and ESPECIALLY the Dems! Let's not lose our heads...things do take time, but we have to push as hard as we can for even a little change.
Lets push the bastards - it beats the alternative!
Didn't mean to abandon this discussion last night. Went to watch my 16 year old son play in a jazz club in Pittsburgh.
We are in the midst of history. The dynamic now playing out is fluid and uncertain. With every faltering step the Dems take they are watching intently what the mood of the country is.
My overiding concern is Iran. Rove's tactic has always been to commit one audacious act after another and watch the opposition try to play catch-up. While we're all so intently focused on Iraq they continue to prepare to attack Iran. For a moment it seemed that some of the senior Senators from both parties understood this clearly.
Hey, I'm just an insignificant schmuck here in rust-belt U.S.A. Short of committing self-immolation on Pennsylvania Avenue I can't think of anything to do except write, call, and agitate. And I kinda like hearing my kid play Coltrane and Parker.
RichM - I share your frustration with the Dems. I think it would be really smart for Pelosi to curtail all funds for construction of permanent bases and the embassy-fortress in Baghdad:
1) To signal to the Insurgents that we're not staying, (so why blow yourself up today? Live to enjoy the victory party!)
2) To slap BushCo around. "Why are you squandering money on permanent facilities when you haven't accomplished the mission of pacifying the country?"
3) To win points with the folks in Yellow-Ribbon-Land. "That money will be better spent providing proper equipment for the troops in the field".
I don't think the Dems are morally superior. But I believe that all elected officeholders are extremely vulnerable to the 800 pound gorilla in the room - corporate media. What they did to Howard Dean, they can do to anybody. The slightest "gaffe" will be exaggerated, amplifed and broadcast non-stop to the voters back in the district.
If you want your Rep in Washington to demonstrate more "backbone", you're going to have to work to build public oppposition to the war back home.
Calling the Dems "feckless" does prod them to some extent, but it doesn't give them confidence to take a stand that the media is constantly describing as "cowardly and treasonous".
They'll only stand up against the war when they believe it won't cost them their job. This is called Democracy. It's hard work.
" I am afraid there is nothing noble in the man."
uhm, i don't think g.w. bush can be considered a "man". a "man" is treated as such by his fellows in the community. bush is treated like a child and he acts like one too. "man" hmph. gives all men a bad name.
Sorry-I meant that Rumy couln NOT be tried for offenses committed while in office. Oops...
The gang's all here!
Lobo: Rumsfeld just got let off in court for some of his crimes. Upshot? The judge didn't like it, but Rumy could be tried in court for crime he committed while in office. Only congress can make that happen and send this pack of jackels to jail.
Poet: I like what your saying. If we don't protect the only commons we have left, we the people will never be able to reclaim a government for, of, and by the people. Long live NET NEUTRALITY!
I also agree with many of you here. This whole government is a house of cards. The implosion will by exponential. Take out one card (Libby) and the structure is only marginally weakened. Then you slowly slip out the Gonzo card that may be aligned to the Rove card. At some point the Cheney card comes into play. Oops!
The issue with the bills for funding of the Iraq war is really weird. I personally don't want to get involved in all the triangulation and analysis. There are too many variables. What I have come up with is that when this bill gets to Shrub's desk and he vetos it, Congress is back to the drawing board. Only problem is those that voted for it (Dems $ Repubs)can't take their vote back. That to me means that they can't put forward another bill that doesn't bring this war to an end somehow. Given that scenerio, with another public outcry to end this gawd awful war, Congress will have to slam the purse strings shut on this war. The only funds that should be authorized is to bring the troops home and for clean up. What do ya think? Cool heh?...Well, I can dream can't I?
Lobo Gris
"And here no one is even demanding that he be tried under the criminal statutes, only that he be removed from office so that he can trundle off and enjoy his taxpayer paid for retiremnet before he does even more damage."
good point but with the number of enemies he has there's a good chance he might not…
jjjohnjj - your write, "Our job is to ... give the Dems the support they need to resist the pressure from mainstream news media." This makes it sound like the Dems are somehow made of higher moral stuff than the media. Actually, the very same forces drive & animate both of them.
The Dems are not "against the war;" they merely posture as such, because their voters expect it. But they have no real intention of ending the war, otherwise they would have cut off funding for it. And they would be explicitly saying that they believe it to be immoral, or unjust, or words to that effect.
Instead, they limit their criticism of Bush to his management of the Iraq War. And they support his basic narrative that the US is engaged in a great struggle against "terrorism." Many Dems argue that Iraq is a "diversion from the War on Terror," as though the latter were very valid, while the former possibly a mistake. They NEVER acknowledge (except for Kucinich) that control of oil has much to do with the war's true motivations. And it is well known (cf Chalmers Johnson, among others) that the US has built at least 4 enormous & very permanent military bases in Iraq. The Democrats never argue that these should be abandoned; or even make an issue of the bases.
The Democrats share Bush's longterm goals in Iraq: control of oil, & military bases. The rest of what they're doing is mostly theatrics -- grandstanding for the rubes, as it were. The only sincere portion of it is that they want a change of tactics -- not a withdrawal -- but they only want this to secure the same goals that Bush is seeking, via an alternative path.
The comparisons between the Vietnam War era and the invasion and occupation of Iraq seem expecially thought-provoking and true.
These similarities are explored in the article below:
‘Nam War, ‘Raq War: Similarities, Differences
Populist Party of America
March 19, 2007
http://www.populistamerica.com/nam_war_raq_war
Washington politics is a chess game, not an arm-wrestling match.
The Dems advance a pawn and lose it... but gain a more advantageous position for the next move.
The corporate press derided Pelosi's nomination of John Murtha to Majority Leader as a "political blunder". Actually, it was a shot across the bow of the White House.
The press ridiculed the non-binding resolution on the (surge) escalation as "meaningless". Actually it was a first step that allowed many Representatives to "test the water" of opinion back in their districts.
It's happening like Grieder says... step by excruciating step.
Our job is to influence opinion in our local districts and give the Dems the support they need to resist the pressure from mainstream news media.
Vince Lawrence March 29th, 2007 4:11 pm
"Lobo you need to lighten up a bit man. Most of us here agree the whole Admin. needs to be tried, convicted, and executed. Judge the possibility of that happening against what HAS happened. Iraq is a mess that whoever is in charge will have to deal with for a long, long time."
I don't know Vince. Is it the sheer magnitude of what has happened that drives people to inaction?
Here is what would happen to a civilian under similur circumstances:
"Involuntary manslaughter, sometimes called criminally negligent homicide in the United States or culpable homicide in Scotland, occurs where there is no intention to kill or cause serious injury but death is due to recklessness or criminal negligence."
A single instance of which brings a 2 yr jail sentnce.
In George Bush's case it would bring a sentence of 1,306,000 yrs.
Can anyone doubt that if a civilian was responsible for that many deaths and remained uncharged and free that the public would be completely outraged and demanding that heads roll?
And here no one is even demanding that he be tried under the criminal statutes, only that he be removed from office so that he can trundle off and enjoy his taxpayer paid for retiremnet before he does even more damage.
Lobo Gris
Greider is no fool, but my guess is that he'll turn out to be way too optimistic here. He still believes that ultimately, it's "the people" who rule in American politics, and that the Democrats eventually can be pressured to respond to the public's will. I don't believe either of these contentions holds water any longer.
If you look at Greider's rendition of the Vietnam experience (3rd para), he is claiming that eventually, Congress got tough, raised the ante, & began speaking "with clarity." That's not what happened. The war was understood to be lost by the time of Tet (1968), yet it raged on for years after that. Congress never spoke with clarity; what happened was that the US was driven out (after killing several million people & dropping chemical poisons all over a country which had never harmed us in any way).
Similarly, if you look at Greider's characterization of the Pelosi bill, it again suffers from unwarranted optimism, & is thus short on realism. He writes, "Many of the final details (of the bill) are disappointing, but the message has been delivered and received–get out of Iraq." This is not what the bill says. It is a strategy for continuing the war, then possibly changing the location of a limited number of soldiers 17 months from now. It allows the Democrats to posture as antiwar, without really being antiwar.
The proof of the pudding will come in a few weeks, when Bush vetoes the bill. Then we will see whether the Dems simply give him the money with no strings attached. My bet is that they'll do exactly that, saying "We can't cut the funding while our troops are in the field."
Having lived through the 60's and early 70's as well as today, I think Vince Lawrence has a point. These things tend to explode exponentially like a nuclear pile reaching critical mass.
After 8-9 years very suddenly Spiro Agnew resigned and entered his nolo contendre plea for bribery and then Nixon went flying off the White House lawn in the Marine 1 luxury helicopter and many of the Watergate cockroaches went directly to jail.
We are close enough to that point now to almost taste it and it has only taken 4 years to reach this point. What we really have to watch out for is the maintenance of net neutrality because it has been the glue that has held our tribal villages together despite fierce opposition by those wanting us to cower in fear and isolation.
Lobo you need to lighten up a bit man. Most of us here agree the whole Admin. needs to be tried, convicted, and executed. Judge the possibility of that happening against what HAS happened. Iraq is a mess that whoever is in charge will have to deal with for a long, long time.
It's very possible Greider is right about the lizard brain political calculations of the Republican leadership. I guess they haven't realized they aren't wearing any clothes. Iraq is not Viet Nam and this is not the same country it was in the 60's. Don't these fools know they're going to lose more seats in the next election? Just look at the stupid smirk on Mitch McConnell's face.
My patience wore out a long time ago too, but in retrospect there is some merit in Greider's analysis. The opposition does truly understand the audacity and single-mindedness of the Bush cabal.
Lobo Gris -
It may come down like Greider predicts, with an ever tightening political vise. Be patient.
Suppose the beltway pundits are all correct with their whip counts and their insider information? Bush vetoes the current bill with its withdrawal deadlines, and the Dems can't muster enough votes to override.
Just suppose the next step is minimalist: repeal the 2002 Authorization for Use of Military Force joint resolution on Iraq. Period.
Declare the repeal takes full force and effect within 45 days, unless a new Use of Force authorization (written by the White House and the GOP) is passed. Period.
If Little George plans to just run out the clock and carry on with the military occupation of Iraq as though nothing has happened here, what is the consequence when the first batch of Iraqi civilians dies as collateral damage?
Hmmmm. That's murder. That's a real high crime in my book.
For all the sound and fury and legitimate tactical disagreements over making "the perfect into the enemy of the good", weasle words, and so forth, I agree we should all maybe take a deep breath and appreciate the significance of the moment.
If George Bush's use of vetoes on emergency funding bills with withdrawal committments and other Democratic legislation keeps painting the White House further and further into a corner, impeachment for that criminal obstinance - waging unlawful war, along with let's say authorizing torture and illegal domestic NSA wiretapping - becomes just that much easier to accomplish.
First things first, methinks.
Lobo,
I am now seeing the wisdom behind the impeachment of Bill Clinton. As if in a bad movie, the psuedo-conservatives had created an atmosphere in which any attempt to impeach this incompentent of a president as if it was childish revenge. No matter what the truth behind it, the facts that would lead to it, it can be easily dismissed as not an act of saving this country but as an act of vengence. That is their defense. Look at the way Bush defends all his actions, he really doesn't justify them he accuses the other side of playing politics. Obviously Bush had been in a coma for 14 years. You have to admit that this is a brilliant strategem for someone incapable of governing. It's not his fault, it's the fault of those who oppose him. Now he is waiting for his get out of jail free card. Again.
Well said, Lobo Gris, well said!
"But the congressional action is still breathtaking when you think about it, possibly without historic precedent."
Breathtaking? We have a President and an executive branch that has lied to get us into a war. A war that has resulted in over three thousand American deaths, 23,000 American wounded, half so severely that they will live with their disabilitiies the rest of their lives, and hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis. A war that the President has used as an excuse to spy on American citizens and violate their civil rights, the 4th, 5th, and 6th amendments to the constitution to be more specific. A war that the President has used as an excuse to abrogate our responsibilities under the Geneva conventions. A war that the President has used as an excuse to detain thousands without charges or the right to challenge the reason for their detention.
The only thing that is breathtaking here, and it is breathtaking, is the fact that we have a Congress that is unwilling to impeach him and remove him from office after incontrovertible proof has come to light of such blatant and egregious offenses. Offenses that not only defile the man himself but the office of the Presidency and the United States itself.
Lobo Gris
Steve, I believe you.
In addition to the strategy of blaming others for the fiasco in Iraq, we also need to watch out for secret operations that will not need congressional approval. The Bush Administration is full of people who were involved in the Iran Contra scandal and the secret funding of death squads in South and Central America.