There are currently 8 users and 199 guests online.
Sen. Lamar Alexander seeking compromise on Iraq?
Submitted by R. Neal on Wed, 2007/09/12 - 9:56am.
Sen. Lamar Alexander, who is up for reelection, is posturingdistancing himself from Bush and the Petraeus report and getting some bi-partisan support:
"My answer is, let’s have a change in mission as rapidly as we can," said Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, who next year will defend a seat rated by CQ as "Republican favored."
Alexander and Ken Salazar, D-Colo., have jointly proposed changing the mission of troops from combat to support, to reduce the presence long-term and to increase political and diplomatic efforts.
Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., embraced Alexander’s proposal Monday as a model for bipartisan compromise because it calls for a long-term military presence in the Middle East.
This is the same Sen. Alexander that has voted with the Bush administration every single time on Iraq.
In related news, the Knoxville News Sentinel had an unbelievably absurd front-page above the fold big bold headline today that said "Bush to endorse troop removal" with the sub-head "Speech to outline plan to cut forces in Iraq by 30,000 with conditions." Those would be the 30,000 troops he sent over for the surge. Even Bush is distancing himself from Bush.
The sad thing is, people will buy this B.S., and will be talking about how Bush and the Republicans are doing something while Democrats are sitting around making up silly ads and arguing over whether we should surrender to Iran or al Qaeda.
Democrats need to start calling it like it is, and send all these creeps home that we can in 2008. We need to start by moving Alexander's seat from "Republican favored" to "in play." Who's going to step up to the plate? Democrats need to quit avoiding tough fights and waiting around for wounded candidates to run against.
Submitted by Factchecker on Wed, 2007/09/12 - 10:20pm.
Anybody hear Thomas Ricks on Fresh Air today? Pretty good! Also, Obama had what sounded like a pretty good interview on ATC(link...) this evening, though I missed most of it.
One of the things that drives me nuts is, How many major reports have we awaited over the last 4-1/2 yrs, only to have Dubya completely ignore them? (Except for this one, that is.) How is the Petraeus Report any more definitive and actionable than the Baker/Hamilton Iraq Study Group's, for example? Other than the fact that Dubya is finally hearing what he wanted to hear this time, of course. And after he has lowered expectations this far and gotten past the '06 elections too.
Petraeus is probably a pretty good guy, but his report is in effect his own job appraisal. What do you think he'd say about how well he's done his own job?
And part of the B.S. we rarely hear explained by the MSM is that they will HAVE to pull back the troops regardless, because the 15 mo. deployments will be up and the military won't have replacements.
I'll dissent a bit on this one. I think that by putting the US Congress officially on the record in favor of a change of course - as minor as the ISG is - it will still stimulate White House pushback and lots of negative press between the GOP in Congress (that might support the Lamar move) and the Administration. It allows those of us opposed to the war to drive the narrative by giving the necessary backing to this albeit incremental shift in strategy. From there the momentum cannot be stopped and we get closer to making withdrawal from Iraq an inevitability.
The strategy of shooting the moon up to now - demanding full withdrawal - has only hardened the GOP into a corner. That's only helped the Republicans to refine their talking points and hide behind General Petraeus. But make no mistake about it, General Petraeus does not support the findings of the Iraq Survey Group or Lamar Alexander's bill.
So, instead of pitting a united Dem majority - but not a veto-proof one - against a united Republican minority with Bush in the White House, we could get a united Democratic majority (if the Dems go along) against a completely divided GOP. Under that scenario Congress could actually pass - over a White House veto - the first genuine shift in Iraq strategy since 2003. With that process in motion, the next President (likely a Democrat) can continue the withdrawal and redeployment apace without being accused of "stabbing the US in the back" as all the Weimar Republicans are itching to do. Oh, and the strategy might actually work because it'll get Iran and Syria to help on our side for once.
Submitted by WhitesCreek on Thu, 2007/09/13 - 8:21am.
The strategy of shooting the moon up to now - demanding full withdrawal - has only hardened the GOP into a corner.
John Murtha proposed something sensible and got power slimed as a result.
Understanding the marketing aspects of a campaign of ideas is not that hard, but it does take a bit of organization. That's tough for a party of independant thinkers.
John Murtha proposed something sensible and got power slimed as a result.
I'm getting tired of the repubiclickers using our troops for their game of partisan political hardball. I hope everyone of them are booted out of office during the next election.
Anybody hear Thomas Ricks on Fresh Air today? Pretty good! Also, Obama had what sounded like a pretty good interview on ATC (link...) this evening, though I missed most of it.
One of the things that drives me nuts is, How many major reports have we awaited over the last 4-1/2 yrs, only to have Dubya completely ignore them? (Except for this one, that is.) How is the Petraeus Report any more definitive and actionable than the Baker/Hamilton Iraq Study Group's, for example? Other than the fact that Dubya is finally hearing what he wanted to hear this time, of course. And after he has lowered expectations this far and gotten past the '06 elections too.
Petraeus is probably a pretty good guy, but his report is in effect his own job appraisal. What do you think he'd say about how well he's done his own job?
And part of the B.S. we rarely hear explained by the MSM is that they will HAVE to pull back the troops regardless, because the 15 mo. deployments will be up and the military won't have replacements.
We'll put stock in what Sen. Alexander says the moment he casts his first vote against the White House's latest "Plan for Victory" in Iraq.
Brian A.
I'd rather be cycling.
I'll dissent a bit on this one. I think that by putting the US Congress officially on the record in favor of a change of course - as minor as the ISG is - it will still stimulate White House pushback and lots of negative press between the GOP in Congress (that might support the Lamar move) and the Administration. It allows those of us opposed to the war to drive the narrative by giving the necessary backing to this albeit incremental shift in strategy. From there the momentum cannot be stopped and we get closer to making withdrawal from Iraq an inevitability.
The strategy of shooting the moon up to now - demanding full withdrawal - has only hardened the GOP into a corner. That's only helped the Republicans to refine their talking points and hide behind General Petraeus. But make no mistake about it, General Petraeus does not support the findings of the Iraq Survey Group or Lamar Alexander's bill.
So, instead of pitting a united Dem majority - but not a veto-proof one - against a united Republican minority with Bush in the White House, we could get a united Democratic majority (if the Dems go along) against a completely divided GOP. Under that scenario Congress could actually pass - over a White House veto - the first genuine shift in Iraq strategy since 2003. With that process in motion, the next President (likely a Democrat) can continue the withdrawal and redeployment apace without being accused of "stabbing the US in the back" as all the Weimar Republicans are itching to do. Oh, and the strategy might actually work because it'll get Iran and Syria to help on our side for once.
John Murtha proposed something sensible and got power slimed as a result.
Understanding the marketing aspects of a campaign of ideas is not that hard, but it does take a bit of organization. That's tough for a party of independant thinkers.
I'm getting tired of the repubiclickers using our troops for their game of partisan political hardball. I hope everyone of them are booted out of office during the next election.
Adrift in the Sea of Humility
Post new comment