The spectacle of antiwar activist Cindy Sheehan being forced to leave the House chamber in advance of President Bush’s speech last night is sad. But far sadder is the stubborn unwillingness of the Democrats to confront Bush’s illegal, immoral, and failing war in Iraq.
A one-sentence quote from today’s New York Times says it all. Referring to Senator Harry Reid of Nevada and Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, who spoke in advance of Bush’s speech, the Times noted: "The Congressional leaders steered clear of the Iraq war in their remarks before the speech."
That is, they "steered clear" of the central focus on the Bush administration’s tenure and the heart of Bush’s speech last night.
Meanwhile Tim Kaine, mindlessly repeating the party’s “there is a better way” slogan, managed to avoid Iraq, too, noting only in passing that Bush’s pre-war intelligence was bad and that the Pentagon had failed to provide enough body armor for the troops. So I guess it would be okay to fight an illegal war of aggression against an oil-rich state, as long as we provide the troops with body armor.
None of the Dems bothered to suggest any solution for Iraq. I take that as a sign that the Dems intend to fight the battle of 2006 without taking on Iraq.
Comments (4)
Your blog is right on Mr Dreyfuss.The fact is that this INVASION of Iraq is ILLEGAL and IMMORAL. (Calling it a war only seems to justify it.) The murder of innocent civilians is immoral and unforgiveable.Note, I do not blame the troops.They are pawns. This administration and that of Tony Blair share the guilt. Yes Saddam is a murderer, a tryant, and maybe a madman but that does not make the war legal.Not just the Dems are AWOL. This is not a partisan issue,at least it shouldn't be. Where is the mainstream media? Where are the Republicans of conscience? Where the hell are the people? Spread democracy my ass. There should be a huge outpouring of rage both in the US and the UK.
Posted by alfred grate | February 1, 2006 12:42 PM
Posted on February 1, 2006 12:42
I'm afraid you're right that the Dems intend to fight the battle of 2006 without taking on Iraq. What is their problem? Polls are showing a majority of the people are unhappy with the war, and a majority believe we were misled into the war. The Dems should be speaking for that majority - and I'm one of those people.
It's very frustrating. The GOP stands together even in the face of negative public opinion and the Dems just tippy-toe around the issue. Who's left to speak for us?
Posted by Kathy | February 3, 2006 5:57 PM
Posted on February 3, 2006 17:57
I would either have to assume that the Democrats are either a sub-party to the Republicans, or they know quite well how incredibly dangerous these guys really are. If these criminals who hold the White House hostage and have held the White House hostage for the last fortythree years can get away with the massive crimes that they ARE getting away with, without ANY OPPOSITION what-so-ever, then it must be because they just kill whomever opposes them. Are they assassinating leaders around the world? I think they are and in some cases, they are trying. Every Cheney/Bush Administration member should be imprisoned for the duration of their lives without the possibility of parole.
Posted by Blaise Gauba | February 5, 2006 3:01 PM
Posted on February 5, 2006 15:01
War, what war. I thought that the congress had the power to declare war. When did they do so? They gave the Resident authority to use millitary force to protect the citizens of the US, go after terrorists, etc., etc., etc. but I have yet to see a declaration of war. Did I miss something?
Posted by bushburner | February 8, 2006 3:26 PM
Posted on February 8, 2006 15:26