A dangerous game of 'chicken' for DemocratsDemocrats are "playing chicken?" They should "compromise" by doing exactly what Bush wants--pass a "clean" supplemental bill? They will be blamed for abandoning troops in the field? They should ignore polling showing public support for timetables and withdrawal? This is so anti-Democratic, it is barely even triangulating. This is basically just a stream of Republican talking points on Iraq that seeks to divide the Democratic Party, sprinkled with a few neo-liberal hawk talking points like "Democrats must continue to criticize the prosecution of the war" without ever mentioning that the war was a bad idea or that withdrawal is a good idea.
By Doug Schoen | April 23, 2007
DEMOCRATS and Republicans in Washington are headed toward a showdown. At issue is how to provide an additional $100 billion in supplemental funding to support American troops in Afghanistan and Iraq. Congressional Democrats are intent on passing legislation that will include a requirement -- or at least a call -- to bring the troops home next year. President Bush insists he will accept no such provision, even if it means vetoing legislation that would provide badly needed money for the troops in the field. The American people, he maintains, will fault Democrats if that happens.
In short, the politicians in Washington are playing a high stakes game of chicken -- one whose outcome will change the balance of power and have a profound effect on the 2008 presidential elections.(...)
Democrats should not be misled by polls showing that most Americans support the idea of cutting off funding for the war unless benchmarks of success are reached. Of course they do, in the abstract. But Bush's counterargument -- that Democrats are prepared to undermine troops in the field -- will be a powerful one, in part because it is far more concrete than Democrats' complex, poll-tested plan.
In short, Democrats would do well to compromise. If that means accepting a "clean" supplemental funding bill, so be it. While Democrats must continue to criticize the prosecution of the war and the Bush administration's failure to promote political reconciliation, they should also recognize that the public has not yet elected a new commander in chief.
|
|
|
Permalink :: 12 Comments :: Post a Comment
|
In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.
If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.
