This is supposed to be a make-or-break week in the conduct of the Iraq War. But politically, it's looking a lot like 2006 all over again.
Howard Fineman writes in Newsweek:
This was supposed to be a make-or-break week in the politics of the war. It is nothing of the kind.
Americans will go to the polls on Nov. 4, 2008 with basically the same Iraq policy in place as we have now. All of the rest is the sound and fury of political positioning. If the American people want to end this war faster, they will have to vote to do so—again, since that is what most of them thought they were doing in 2006.
President Bush can defend his policy by hiding out in his Constitutional cave. Were Congress to pass legislation cutting off funding for the war—the only real way to stop the conflict—Bush surely would veto the bill. It takes 67 votes in the Senate to override such a veto—way too high a figure for the 50 Democrats (don’t count Sen. Joe Lieberman) and their small band of Republican allies to overcome. Even getting a vote on such a measure would require ending a certain GOP Senate filibuster. That requires 60 votes—again, no way.
Bush and his strategists began their calculations with these numbers. Their intent never has been to win over—or win back—the country as a whole, but to use the “surge” and the credibility of Gen. David Petraeus to prevent defections from Republican ranks, in the Congress and at the grassroots.
A few months ago, it appeared crystal clear that the GOP was on the road to ruin because of Iraq. The Democrats, however, have been unable to capitalize on the GOP’s predicament. There simply is no way for them to accomplish in Congress what the average Democratic voter wants – and end to the war. That, in turn, has drained away what little credibility the Democratic Congress had with its constituents.
Bush, cold-blooded as usual, is moving to back the Democrats into a corner of their own good conscience. Having launched a war that has killed tens of thousands and left Iraq in ruins, he demands that Democrats not abandon the poor Iraqis to the “killing fields.” Having given Iran an opening in Mesopotamia, he insists that Democrats not abandon the region to the same Mullahs he managed to empower.
This was supposed to be a make-or-break week in the politics of the war. It is nothing of the kind.
Americans will go to the polls on Nov. 4, 2008 with basically the same Iraq policy in place as we have now. All of the rest is the sound and fury of political positioning. If the American people want to end this war faster, they will have to vote to do so—again, since that is what most of them thought they were doing in 2006.
President Bush can defend his policy by hiding out in his Constitutional cave. Were Congress to pass legislation cutting off funding for the war—the only real way to stop the conflict—Bush surely would veto the bill. It takes 67 votes in the Senate to override such a veto—way too high a figure for the 50 Democrats (don’t count Sen. Joe Lieberman) and their small band of Republican allies to overcome. Even getting a vote on such a measure would require ending a certain GOP Senate filibuster. That requires 60 votes—again, no way.
Bush and his strategists began their calculations with these numbers. Their intent never has been to win over—or win back—the country as a whole, but to use the “surge” and the credibility of Gen. David Petraeus to prevent defections from Republican ranks, in the Congress and at the grassroots.
A few months ago, it appeared crystal clear that the GOP was on the road to ruin because of Iraq. The Democrats, however, have been unable to capitalize on the GOP’s predicament. There simply is no way for them to accomplish in Congress what the average Democratic voter wants – and end to the war. That, in turn, has drained away what little credibility the Democratic Congress had with its constituents.
Bush, cold-blooded as usual, is moving to back the Democrats into a corner of their own good conscience. Having launched a war that has killed tens of thousands and left Iraq in ruins, he demands that Democrats not abandon the poor Iraqis to the “killing fields.” Having given Iran an opening in Mesopotamia, he insists that Democrats not abandon the region to the same Mullahs he managed to empower.
posted by Sid Cottingham | 6:49 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home