Quote:
|
Originally Posted by roachboy
ok so here's what i dont understand about the perception of the democratic party in the context of this congress. everyone knew from the moment the election returns were tabulated that the numbers in both houses were such that the democrats were not in a position to overturn the idiot logic of the war in iraq, the even more idiotic "war on terror" and the programs related to it unless the republicans were to stop voting in partyline block. everyone knows this.
if this is true, how did it come about that the democrats are being held to a test of their-----whatever-------mettle (or choose another stupid, subjectively-oriented rightwing meme to designate manliness) by their ability or inability to undo the entirety of the bushwar on "terror" and the ira debacle within that given that EVERYBODY KNOWS the numerical situation?
and if there really is such broadbased opposition to the war in iraq as everyone claims when discussing the democrats, then why is it that these same arguments are not being applied to the republicans--why is it that there is no complaining about the republican party's continuing the vote as a politburo-style bloc on party lines when it comes to legislation concerned with iraq and the other idiotic wars?
i oppose everything about the "war on terror" and have from the outset--but look at the fucking numbers people--where did the idea arise that these numbers (the composition of congress on party lines) did not matter?
it seems to me that the press coverage of this congress is unfolding entirely within a conservative rhetorical logic--generate ridiculous, unrealizable expectations about the opposition and then watch them encounter the self-evident (the numbers in congress) and then brand them failures because they were not able to somehow trascend the situation that EVERYBODY KNOWS obtains in the actually existing congress?
why the hell are any of us buying into this?
i mean think about it.
i am not a fan of the democratic party, the moderate wing of the singel american conservative party---but i really do not understand how it is that reality gets bracketed and labels attributed to the democrats when the fact is as i have said above--and again EVERYONE FUCKING KNOWS THIS.
so what is going on?
|
Isn't it pretty sad that the opposition party to the president would have to have about 80% of congress for them to "maybe" get us out of Iraq and end the war on terror. However, we're still supposed to support the Democrats.
About the Republican congressman, I think it's just a forgone conclusion that they are going to go along with whatever the decider says and nothing can sway them from that, even losing seats as was demonstrated in 06. It's almost more of a lost cause to try and change the Republicans then it is to get the Democrats to do what they said they would do.
Honestly though, am I missing something? Seriously why aren't the Democrats on strike filibustering everything and voting no on every piece of legislation until Iraq issue and war on terror is resolved. That's what a real opposition party would do even if they didn't have the house or senate which they have both.
THEY AREN'T EVEN TRYING, THAT'S WHAT IS SO DISGUSTING.