by stormbear, Mon May 21, 2007 at 06:02:36 AM EDT
by croweb, Wed Mar 07, 2007 at 07:25:34 PM EST
When I got involved in the '06 election campaigns to help elect Democratic candidates to Congress, no one could have convinced me that once in power a Democratic Party majority would take positions that serve to buttress the Bush administration war policy. Democratic candidates were vigorously voicing opposition to Bush's war and promising to force a change in policy, if only the voters would make ours' the majority party. My own incumbent Democratic Congressman put it something like this: I want to get us out of this national fiasco too, but to effect change in the war policy requires a showing of the peoples' will.
We succeeded in gaining the majority, and we made known our will by winning some elections against tremendous odds. For example, in the primaries, Connecticut Democrats showed that pro Bush war Democratic Senators were not wanted as party candidates, even if they were entrenched incumbents. And in the general election, Virginia voters showed that an incumbent Republican Senator being touted as heir to the Bush legacy would be voted out of office.
Efforts expended by Democrats in party politics were successful in showing that the people wanted out of Bush's calamity. But once in power, my elected party representatives began to orient themselves into positions that reinforce Bush's power and policies.
by RodSerling, Wed Nov 01, 2006 at 06:54:53 PM EST
This war perpetrated by criminals has only sacrificed the limbs, the futures, the lives of thousands. Hundreds of thousands.
And yet, the destruction can be seen in the faces of the survivors.
If there is a God, I cannot know what circle of hell is good enough for George W. Bush.
by goldkey, Sat Jul 22, 2006 at 09:47:01 AM EDT
Pre-emptive war in Iraq, incompetence and arrogance will be the legacy of this administration. They will go down in history as the worst administration in American history. George W. Bush will be remembered as the monster who started WWIII.
by RAULC, Thu Jun 08, 2006 at 07:29:51 AM EDT
I think we are having 2-3 GIs dying everyday and due to body armor, it looks to me as if the dead/injured ratio is 10:1, perhaps more; doesn't that mean that at least 20-30 GIs are being maimed everyday? Probably more? Aren't most of these veterans maimed for life? Nice price to pay while we decide what should be our next step.