The democrats have control of both the house and the senate now. After years of shouting from the peanut gallery its their turn to show the country what they can do. They will likely strong arm President Bush (Mr. Bush to you ABCnews viewers) and change the policy in Iraq.
I don't know if there is a special meeting some place for the liberals of America or not, but for the years while they were out of power crazy rumors would fly. For example about a month into the Iraq war every Dick and Harry on the street would tell me that we are going to war with Syria. Any day now! We are attacking them! It never happened. John Kerry had a "Plan" he never bothered to explain during his White House bid, nor after the fact to help his country.
I recall when Bush got reelected that many of my friends were so scared from all the talking points from the left, that they though that the day after election day everyone was being drafted. I know someone who actually was ready to go to Canada that week, and was almost having a panic attack the next day in fear the draft people were coming for him.
I am not knocking the democrats really I am not. But, lets face it one of the big issues they face is not only Iraq and terrorism in general. I want the troops home as much as the next guy, but is cutting and running the best option? Also, I fear they really do simplify the terrorism problem too much. Ignoring didn't work in the 90's, so I doubt it will work this time. They were always saying if they ran the show thing would be different. Well does that old saying go? Be careful what you wish for.
Just to ward off the lynching that will come upon me (I mean you FOXNEWS guy) I would like to say that I didn't vote this past election. Because, I am utterly feed up with politicians and both parties in general. I also didn't see a point, since my vote would not have matter in NJ anyway. Maybe that makes me a bad person, but again that's my right not to vote. Also, I do feel we need a change in this country, but considering the fact I didn't hear much from the left other than they think the right sucks I am pretty cynical.
Anyway here is a map to show the way America voted this past week.
9 comments:
This post is so ridiculously off-base I don't know where to start.
I know you've told me in the past that you don't listen to Limbaugh, but as far as I can tell, the only difference between the two of you is that he spells better and is a recovering addict, while you really love Michael J. Fox. Other than that, it's the same crap coming from both of you.
Oh, the other difference is that, unlike Limbaugh, I think you believe the things that you say. But I'm not sure that's something to be proud of.
We didn't ignore terrorism in the 90s. Just because it wasn't on the news every night doesn't mean we ignored it. There was the Millennium Plot, after all, which was successfully detected and prevented. The only time terrorism was ignored was between January 2001 and September 11, 2001.
And how come whenever you mention something that everyone around you seems to be saying, it's always completely insane. Who are these people you are talking to? I know that I, for one, was very nervous that the U.S. might invade Syria, or Iran. It was definitely an option on the table, and there were a lot of Republicans who were pushing for this vigorously. But I never thought it was a done deal. I also never thought that Bush would reinstate the draft. You say that your friends were scared by "talking points from the left"... once again, you're not describing the talking points of the Democratic Party. You're describing Limbaugh's lies about the talking points of the Democratic Party.
I don't have a problem with you not voting, Keith, but I think you need to be honest about why you didn't vote. You like to claim that you're this independent guy, but you're not, and you never have been. You're a Republican. You didn't vote because you knew your team was going to lose big, and you couldn't face that. It's no different, if you think about it, from fantasy hockey, when you dump good players from your team just because you're upset that the Flyers are having a bad year.
And if you want to hear a positive message from the left, get off your ass and google. The media was very careful about this. I never heard one reporter or journalist or TV host talk about what a Democratic Congress wanted to do until the day after election day. Suddenly, every single TV pundit was armed with a fact sheet of Nancy Pelosi's House Agenda, as if she had just made it up overnight.
She hadn't made it up over night. It's been available on the interwebs for ages. Just because the so-called liberal media didn't tell you about it doesn't mean it wasn't there. You just had to look.
Wow! You really thought that a change was not needed? You honestly thought that this congress and "Presdient" are doing a good job?
Keith, I have asked you numerous times on this blog to say one thing that this "President" has done that was either good for the country or handled correctly and you have yet to answer. I ask you again what has the Republican Party done that justifies them still being in power?
As for the terrorism issue, by ignoring the problem do you mean ignoring Clinton's outgoing warning that "Bin Laden is going to be your number one issue?" Do you mean letting Al Qaeda go unchecked and focus all your attention on Iraq (not a terrorist threat) until he flies planes into our buildings? Do you mean half-assedly going into Afghanistan and ignoring the Taliban as they come back into power? Do you mean ignoring all the intellignece and experts and starting a war with a country that could not/ would not attack us? Do you mean ignoring those same experts and fuck this war up so bad it makes Vietnam look like a walkthrough? Do you mean a President and COngress that has ignored common sense, civil liberties, laws, freedoms and morality for the past 6 years?
Pathetic
The person that talked about the draft was when I worked at MRS. He actually had print outs or how much it would cost to relocate.
Okay my 2nd thing is there is no way I would ever vote for Bush if the election was today. There is just no way. I am ashamed to tell people that I voted for him.
The way he has not listened to anyone for two years when things started going downhill is just wrong for the country. Part of me not voting is because of being greatly let down by someone I thought was the right choice. I am sure you won't belive me on this one, but I would not vote for him, and I regret that I ever did.
I don't think the reps. are "my team" I am glad they lost in a way because I think sometimes we need fresh blood in there. But, I find people that treat it like sports teams a little unsettling.
Its funny that you mention Micheal J Fox, because sometimes you have to accept some points on both sides and way what means more to you. I really am supporter of stem cell research so, if I did vote I likely would have had that in mind.But like I said, my vote didnt matter.
It is not my team, that is so insane. Maybe, I wasnt clear enough in my many shots I have taken at Bush on here, but yes I regret voting for him. But no way in hell I would have voted for Kerry at the same time.
Of course you both just attacked me instead of telling me why the democrats are going to save the day. Or talk about the pros and cons of just pulling the troops out ASAP. I didn't expect anything less.
Here you go Keith, the Dems plan for Iraq, first hit on google.
First I will give you the Republican plan:
Now the Dem plan according to Sens Harry Reid, Carl Levin and Dick Durbin:
"Our troops deserve a strategy in Iraq that is worthy of their sacrifice. That is why, for three years, Democrats have pushed the White House to lay out a plan for success.
"Unfortunately, the President has rejected our call, and instead, insisted America needs to "stay the course." With more than 2,050 Americans killed... more than $250 billion spent... and no end in sight after three years of war -- "staying the course" is no longer an option.
"Together, we can do better. Democrats have developed a very clear path forward. There are three areas we believe need to be addressed:
* First, 2006 should be a significant year of transition to full Iraqi sovereignty, with Iraqis taking more and more responsibility for their own security. It's time to take the training wheels off the Iraqi government. Iraqis must begin to run their own country. In 2006, the US and our allies must do everything we can to make that possible.
* Second, the Administration must advise the Iraqi people that U.S. military forces will not stay indefinitely in Iraq, and that it is their responsibility to achieve the broad-based and sustainable political environment essential for defeating the insurgency.
* Third, the President needs to submit - on a quarterly basis - a plan for success to Congress and the American people. This plan must specify the challenges and progress being made in Iraq, timetables for achieving our goals and estimated dates for redeployment from Iraq as these goals are met.
"Apparently, Republicans have agreed this is the approach we need to take, as they have essentially accepted our amendment.
"It cannot be understated that by accepting our amendment, both the Republican leader and the chairman of the Armed Services committee agree that the administration needs to come forward and explain to Congress and the American people its strategy for success and completing the mission.
"It's not easy for the President to admit mistakes. It's a lot easier for him to lash out at those who question his policies, but political attacks are not going to get the job done. Our troops have done their job. It's time for the President and this Republican-controlled Congress to do theirs."
###
UNITED STATES POLICY ON IRAQ ACT
Getting Answers to the American People on the War in Iraq
For too long, the Bush administration has failed to lay out a clear strategy for success in Iraq to the American people. Their rosy statements about the progress of the war are not matched by the conditions on the ground. In their few appearances before the Congress, the Secretaries of Defense and State have failed to answer the most basic questions about our progress in the war or provide even the simplest benchmarks by which the American people could measure our progress. Democrats are offering an amendment to the Defense Authorization Bill that holds the Administration accountable for its actions and requires it to present a real plan for success.
DEMOCRATS OFFER THE FOLLOWING ASSESMENT ABOUT THE WAR:
Our troops and their families deserve the respect and gratitude of the American people for their service and sacrifice. The Administration has said that as the Iraqis stand up, we can stand down. Democrats believe we should see a significant transition to full Iraqi sovereignty in 2006 so that our troops can begin coming home. We also believe the Iraqi people must understand that the U.S. military will not stay in Iraq indefinitely; they must achieve the political stability necessary to defeat the insurgency.
THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION MUST PROVIDE A PLAN:
It is essential that the Bush administration submit an unclassified strategy for success in Iraq to the Congress and the American people specifying how and when our troops can begin coming home.
An Assessment of the Bush Administration's Actions to Achieve Progress in Iraq.
The Bush administration must provide information on its efforts to convince Iraq's communities to make the necessary compromises for a political settlement; efforts to engage the international community to help stabilize Iraq; efforts to strengthen the capacity of Iraq's government ministries; efforts to accelerate the delivery of basic services; and efforts to train Iraqi security forces so those forces can protect Iraq on their own.
An Assessment of the Compromises Made by the Iraqi People to Achieve the Broad-Based and Sustainable Political Settlement.
An Unclassified Report to Congress and the American People.
The Bush administration has classified most significant information about their Iraq war plans and kept that information from the Congress. The President should submit to the Congress and the American people an unclassified plan for success in Iraq. We deserve to know the conditions we seek to establish, the challenges we face in achieving these conditions, and the progress we are making. This report should also include:
* The number of Iraqi battalions that must be able to operate independently or take the lead in counterinsurgency operations
* The number of Iraqi special police units that must be able to operate independently or take the lead in policing
* The number of regular police that must be trained and equipped
* The ability of Iraq's Federal ministries and provincial and local governments to independently sustain, direct and coordinate Iraq's security forces
The Benchmarks for Success. The Bush administration must also provide benchmarks by which their success can be measured. This includes the criteria by which to measure the progress being made and a schedule for meeting these conditions.
A Plan for Bringing Our Troops Home. As it lays out a clear strategy with benchmarks, the Bush administration must also provide a campaign plan with estimated dates for the phased redeployment of our troops from Iraq as each condition is met, with the understanding that unexpected contingencies may arise.
While that's not exactly what I would call a definite plan, it's miles closer to a plan than the current administration has attempted to get.
Keith: The most important thing to come out of this election is the fact that Americans more or less all came out with an earnest desire to show that Washington DC must not merely be the clubhouse for the political branch of some insane coalition of radical right wing business and religious groups. Which is to say, this election gave us hope that someone may get up and start addressing issues. I'm very sorry if the changes haven't come fast enough for your tastes, though it's kind of hard to blame the new Congress for that, since the Democrats don't even have their leadership in place yet and a couple of jurisdictions are still counting votes.
Drew/Jay:
I started to voice my concerns regarding the Dems slightly less vague Iraq policy, but it turned into War and Peace so I deleted it. I suggest that we get drunk so I can school both of you in mid-east politics. By the way, Keith, I just want to know if Ted Haggard is one of your heroes as well
I had to google his name to find out who he even was. So, I am going to go with no on that one.
We should bring Ed out too for drunken round table discussion.
Honestly, you two should be doing the Iraq blogging.
Again, my original point was they better have a plan. Not just being blowing a lot of smoke to get into office.
I don't know I think running out the back door and say "The hell with this" is a plan either.
Mike, that would be a pleasure. All I know is what I get from the news and the internets, which I imagine barely scratches the surface of what's really going on. It would be great to talk to somebody who knows a lot more about this stuff.
The honeymoon is already over!
Murtha wasn't voted in as No. 2, even after Pelosi stomped for him. Now that the midterms are over the Dems probaly view his whining about losing wars as a liability.
The Dems voted Pelosi in, but that's just to placate all of the rabid liberals who hate America anyways. Now that we have control of Congress I think that we'll hear alot less extremist rhetoric.
In order to get anything accomplished with a Republican president, we are simply going to have to become more moderate and even keeled.
Post a Comment