Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
- A Culture That Condones The Killing Of Children And Teaches Children To Kill
- Wealthiest Kissed, Weakest Kicked: Obama's Ugly 'New Deal' Offers to Cut Social Security
- Gun Lobby Speaks: We Need More Guns, Especially in Schools
- What If All the World’s Debt Just Went Away
- 'None Dead' in China: Sensible Laws vs. Maniacal Attacks
- A Culture That Condones The Killing Of Children And Teaches Children To Kill
- Wealthiest Kissed, Weakest Kicked: Obama's Ugly 'New Deal' Offers to Cut Social Security
- Remember All the Children, Mr. President
- Thinking the Unthinkable: On Mental Health, My Son, and Gun Violence
- Bolivia's Morales Calls for New Era of 'Peace and Unity' to Break Greed of Capitalism
Popular content
Today's Top News
Tough Talk, But Little Punch
Last November, Nancy Pelosi proclaimed, "The American people spoke with their votes and they spoke for change and they spoke in support of a new direction for all Americans . . . nowhere was the call for a new direction more clear from the American people than in the war in Iraq."
Pelosi, who would become speaker of the House as the Democrats regained the majority in both the House and the Senate, continued, "We know that 'stay the course' is not working. It has not made our country safer, it has not honored our commitment to our troops, and it has not brought stability to the region. We must not continue on this catastrophic path . . . The American people with their votes yesterday placed their trust in the Democrats. We will honor that trust. We will not disappoint . . . Democrats are ready to lead. We're prepared to govern."
Despite the proclamations, it felt like Pelosi was a speaker treading water. Her oratory was just as dramatic in a visit to the Globe on Monday. She painted a broad brush of responsibility for Iraq. "It was George Bush's war," she told the Globe. "It is now the Republicans in Congress's war. . . . This is a historic blunder of such magnitude that it boggles the mind."
But there was more than one person last November making firm declarations. Vice President Dick Cheney said just before the midterms that regardless of the elections, "the president's made clear what his objective is. It's victory in Iraq. And it's full speed ahead on that basis . . . the press may not like it. It may be controversial. . . . It may not be popular with the public. It doesn't matter in the sense that we have to continue the mission."
The Democrats have not yet forced Bush and Cheney to make any major changes in Iraq. All that Bush has proposed is to reduce troops from his "surge" levels, merely back to the quagmire levels they were before.
Pelosi talked without perhaps realizing she was in her own quagmire, straining to repeat and amplify what she said last November. She called Iraq a "war without end" and a "catastrophic blunder . . . I feel poverty stricken for the words to describe what a mistake this was for our country, for our national security, for our reputation, for our young people first and foremost."
The reality is that the Democrats remain poverty stricken to find the words that truly get Americans behind them to force Bush to get out of Iraq. While 70 percent of Americans disapprove of Bush's handling of the war in a recent CBS news poll, and 59 percent of Americans regard Iraq as a "failure" in a recent Associated Press-Ipsos poll, 57 percent of Americans in the CBS poll also disapprove of the way the Democrats are handling it.
The Democrats have not yet impressed the country. Last month, a CNN poll found that 55 percent of Americans thought the Democrat-led Congress has been a "failure." While only 33 percent approve of Bush's leadership in another recent AP-Ipsos poll, just 26 percent of Americans in the same poll approve of the way Congress is handling its job. That is down from 40 percent in April.
Pelosi, of course, solely blamed the Republicans for this. For example, she was asked why she reserves her harshest language on Iraq for Bush and the Republicans and spares top Democrats who voted to give Bush the authority to invade Iraq, such as leading presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. All Pelosi would say was, "I'm unhappy with everybody, Democrat or Republican, who voted for this war in light of what the intelligence said. But understand, this has been and is the president's war and I think the Republicans in Congress have now removed all doubt that they are now complicit."
Though the Democrats scored some domestic victories, such as the first rise in the minimum wage in a decade, polls show that Americans still see the party as complicit in the mediocre running of the country.
Pelosi promises that the Democrats are "taking off the gloves" on Iraq. It is clear that Americans would like to see more clearly what is behind the punch.
Derrick Z. Jackson's e-mail address is jackson@globe.com.
© 2007 The Boston Globe
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...

21 Comments so far
Show AllAh, Pelosi is just a jerk.
has history not shown that it's next to impossible to give up occupied territories?
Chomsky has raised an interesting point when he says that the crimes of the state are always white washed, those who are in or who have been in government will not bring them up.
by "taking impeachment off the table," Pelosi cleared the way for the (highly probable) war with iran.
Pelosi fails to mention that Congress holds the power of the purse and that they could end the war at any time by exercising it.
Congressional approval ratings are at 11% Ms. Pelosi.
Lobo Gris
Nancy Pelosi, America's answer to Marshal Petain.
Who's in power, Dems or money (gold)? From Shakespeare:
"Gold? Yellow, glittering, precious gold?
No, Gods, I am no idle votarist! ...
Thus much of this will make black white, foul fair,
Wrong right, base noble, old young, coward valiant.
... Why, this
Will lug your priests and servants from your sides,
Pluck stout men's pillows from below their heads:
This yellow slave
Will knit and break religions, bless the accursed;
Make the hoar leprosy adored, place thieves
And give them title, knee and approbation
With senators on the bench: This is it
That makes the wappen'd widow wed again;
She, whom the spital-house and ulcerous sores
Would cast the gorge at, this embalms and spices
To the April day again. Come, damned earth,
Thou common whore of mankind, that put'st odds
Among the rout of nations."
Congress should just cut the funding for the corrupt war.
Mark H. Hartmann
Congress should be tried for war crimes.
Then we will know who's innocent and who's guilty.
EZE: I just love it when you quote the greatest of bards...
The moment Democrats took over the House and the Senate, Iraq became their war in the public eye. But in my eye, they were all in it from the get go. They are not stupid, for if they are, they have no business holding public office.
Just about everybody, including the Congress, knew that intelligence was being cooked to fit the war policy. What they didn't know was that the war could go so badly. That's why most DemocRATS, including some presidential hopeFOOLS blame Bush's HANDLING of the war, but not the war itself. The rest is empty rhetoric targeted at the fools.
In the next election, people should kick out ALL the incumbents, but first they should make sure that tamper-proof voting machines are used.
Loveya Siouxrose.
It's not about Pelosy, just like it is not about Bush.
The Democratic party does not represent you and me; they represent the military industrial complex, big money, and the Israeli lobby.
Bush does not represent you and me; they represent the military industrial complex, big money, and the Israeli lobby.
hellodarling September 26th, 2007 4:52 pm
Congress should be tried for war crimes.
============
And don't forget, our troops should be tries for war crimes.
citizen____Some of the troops were aware of what they were getting into, which was killing for no good reason, but many were only kids who were suckered into the services with empty promises and are victims of George and his reckless policies. Congress has no excuse, as they had all the information , but made the wrong decisions and they are still enablers of the Bush Endless War. Maybe everyone that voted for a second term of the warmongers should also be tried, as they could have stopped the killing and destruction.
citizen1 September 26th, 2007 10:41 pm
"And don't forget, our troops should be tries for war crimes."
And mabe you should also be tried for war crimes because you are a citizen of the country that invaded Iraq.
The kids that enlisted did nothing more than believe the lies that leaders of the U.S. told all of it's citizens. Lies that were successful enough that 70% of the country believed them. About 30% still do.
And no one has ever been tried for war crimes for believing the lies of their leaders. The regular soldiers who fought for Germany were not tried for fighting in WWI or WWII. The Japanese soldiers were not tried for for fighting in WWII either. Neither the North or South Koreans nor the Americans were tried for fighting the Korean war. None of the VC, the North Vietnamese nor the Americans with the exception of Lt. Calley who actually participated in a war crime were tried for fighting in Viet Nam.
Bottom line, it isn't a war crime to believe what your leaders say even if it turns out to be a lie. It may not make you look but like the brightest person around but that isn't a crime either.
Lobo Gris
Minimum wage increase was a Dem victory? If memory serves, the increase was tacked on to the Dem's capitulation on a $120B Iraq spending bill.
The Dems suck. It's Pelosi and Reid's war now. And Hillary's in the news saying she intends to keep us there forever.
excuses, excuses, excuses.....
The war will not stop until you start condemning the perpetrators, i.e. the solders. They may not have known at the very outset of the war that it was illegal, but that veneer wore of within months, if not weeks. But of course you continue
to find excuses for "our" soldiers - I don't.
Those who voted for Bush the second time will be condemned by history, just like the Germans are for supporting the war. And I have no doubt I, even as a non Bush voter, will be condemned by some to be an American citizen. So, the best I can do right now is to open the eye of my countrymen as to who really are complicit:
Bush
both parties, dems and the repubs
media
soldiers
condemn and prosecute our soldiers for knowingly participating in an illegal war. Our soldiers are war criminals.
citizen1 September 27th, 2007 8:07 am
excuses, excuses, excuses…..
No excuses, just faulty logic on your part.
IE;
You work for a company painting toys. You hear a rumor that the paint contains lead. You ask your Boss about it, who has decided to cut corners and increase profits by using leaded paint, but he lies to you and says that no the paint doesn't contain lead. You believe him and continue painting the toys.
By your logic you are as guilty as your boss because you believed him when he lied to you.
It isn't a crime to believe lies
Lobo Gris
The present congressional stalemate benefits all Congresspeople. The Repug senators up for election can vote against the Iraq occupation funding bill ($205 billion) knowing that the safe seat Repugs will cover their backs by voting for funding.
Dems will cover their backs with the knowledge that "renegrade" Dems will vote with the Repugs. In this manner everybody can claim that they are "supporting the troops" and thus the occupation will continue.
We were lucky, as Democrats, to get the House and Senate in 2006 elections, even if the tipping point was provided by some voters who believed erroneously that we can walk away from Iraq either quickly or easily.
There is no better way for us Democrats to lose both Congress and The White House in 2008 than to criticize soldiers, slap Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reed, Hillary Clinton and others, and pretend we don't have to RESPONSIBLY clean up after Republican messes.
We win by appealing to sober mature citizens who will trust our judgment in matters of security, morality, social justice and the economy. Otherwise, you'll get Republicans (again), funded by corporations (again), who will win (again) on themes of being against Muslim terrorists, against abortion and against gays, and then continue governing (again for 4 or 8 years) exclusively for the benefit of their funders, the corporations. Let's wise up and not play the same dumb losing game (again).
Why do you blame the Democratic Congress? Democrats in Congress can only accomplish something when their legislation passes both houses and the President doesn't veto it. Bush is going to veto anything that comes to him from Congress if it was favored by Democrats.
The responsibility lies with the citizens of this country. Until everyone gets off their butt and votes a Democrat into the White House and a Democratic majority in both houses of Congress we're SOL. And even then, we will still have a Supreme Court stacked with conservatives who will be there for a long time.
dmia September 27th, 2007 1:19 pm
Why do you blame the Democratic Congress?
Because
#1. Nancy Pelosi has taken impeachment of the table, even before she was elected Speaker. All it takes is a simple majority vote to impeach which the Democrats have. Bush can't veto it and the Senate can't filibuster it. The Senate has to conduct the trial.
#2. The Democrats can end the war. All they have to do is deny funding. They don't even have to let a funding bill out of committee. And if it does come out they can defeat it again with a simple majority. It never goes to the Senate for filibuster or to the president for veto
So saying they can't stop the war is bogus. They have the power to stop it they just refuse to use it
Lobo Gris