Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dc_dux
If you dont see the value of private conversations among members of Congress regarding potential amendments to a bill then I just have to agree with Roachboys assessment of the "fantasies that enable your politics" ( link)
Perhaps you can answer my question....why is it political grandstanding for Democrats to do what the American people voted them in office to do? |
It is not. When members of Congress vote based on their beliefs or based on what they promised their constituents
, I think that is honorable. How do Democrats feel about funding and brining our troops home? I have asked this question before in different forms, never got an answer, I don't expect one at this point.
When Congress was considering the first bill, Bush stated what and why he would veto a bill. Congress sent a bill that would be veto'd anyway. Several weeks later, there is a leak in the media about a new bill. The information is leaked by unnamed sources who are not authorized to give any details. This is the most important issue of the day, and it is liekely to pass at the eleventh hour, possibly over a long holiday weekend to minimize news coverage. There is strategy at play here, isn't it? But, Bush will get what he wants, perhaps in exchange for a few political favors.
Here an interesting point of view from the editorial page of IBD.
Quote:
The Democrats Blink
INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY
Posted 5/22/2007
Iraq: When Democratic leaders dropped their demand for a withdrawal timeline this week, it was more than being outmaneuvered in negotiations. They left the president in firm possession of the moral high ground.
Related Topics: Iraq | Global War On Terror
Only a short time ago, Democrats were cockily promising they would send the president a pullout bill as many times as it would take, until finally he would have to relent. Just last Friday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi were insisting on a timeline in negotiations with the White House on a war funding bull.
But the tables have now been turned on congressional Democrats. All of a sudden, it is they who face a deadline: If Congress does not manage to pass a war spending bill that the president is willing to sign before the Memorial Day recess, Democrats become vulnerable to the charge of refusing to fund our combat troops.
And so, faced with the president's famous "stubbornness" (so often portrayed as a character flaw by liberal Democrats and the media establishment), Democratic leaders have been forced to blink, dropping their insistence that war funding be linked to a troop withdrawal timeline — even a nonbinding one.
Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards and others who pander to the party's liberal base are blasting the Pelosi-Reid cave- in. "Congress should send the same bill back to him again and again until he realizes he has no choice but to start bringing our troops home," Edwards said in a statement.
Democrats now have plans for a bill amenable to the president that would fund our forces in Iraq and Afghanistan up to the end of the fiscal year, a little more than four months from now. A minimum wage increase is likely to be included in the legislation.
This loss of nerve on the part of Reid and Pelosi amounts to a significant blow to Democrats for at least two reasons:
• Disunity in the Democrats' ranks. After portraying the congressional elections that brought them into power last year as a referendum on the Iraq War, those in charge of the new Democratic Congress cannot deliver a withdrawal, and have no stomach for repeated presidential vetoes of their funding cut-off bills.
Consequently, many of the 73 Democratic House members who make up California Rep. Maxine Waters' Out of Iraq Caucus have already begun to revolt against the Democratic leadership, announcing they will not vote for a bill not containing a deadline.
Rep. Lynn Woolsey, also from California and a caucus co-founder, warned that "This is a Republican bill, so it better be Republican votes that pass it."
Hard-core war opponents in Congress may soon be heard attacking Democratic leaders as much as they do the White House.
• Defeat is not a winning issue. Confronted with a president who will not back down in his support for victory in Iraq, it is now obvious the Democrats who run Congress are afraid to take him on toe-to-toe.
For all their rhetoric during last year's campaign about it being the will of the American people to cut and run, Pelosi and Reid were unwilling to make an explicit attempt to use Congress' power of the purse to follow through on their promises.
With Congress' poll ratings falling below 30% and registering lower than President Bush's, Pelosi and Reid may doubt the American public would be with them in trying to force a pullout.
It leaves the president looking committed and determined in his beliefs, while congressional leaders appear afraid to stand behind their own policies. Meanwhile, the liberal rank and file grow increasingly restless.
If nothing else, Pelosi's and Reid's concession gives Bush some political breathing space as America races against time to win in Iraq.
|
http://www.investors.com/editorial/e...64727642819830