The times they are a-changin'
Does anyone else appreciate the complete irony of the politics around the Senate resolution against the President's unpopular Iraq strategy?
Right before the Congressional election in 2002, roughly a year after 9-11, with Bush and the Republicans at their highest point in the polls, Democrats found themselves facing up to the politically difficult vote authorizing the war in Iraq. With at least one eye on politics, a significant number of them, (no names here,) voted to authorize the Iraq invasion.
Now, here we are a little over four years later, the same war still going on, and another vote/referendum is coming up in the Senate. Now it is Republicans who find themselves on the political underside worrying about the political implications of not voting against the war.
Also: How different would the politics be if the Dems didn't control the Senate? A couple thousand votes in Virginia and we have Cheney as the tiebreaker,
Right before the Congressional election in 2002, roughly a year after 9-11, with Bush and the Republicans at their highest point in the polls, Democrats found themselves facing up to the politically difficult vote authorizing the war in Iraq. With at least one eye on politics, a significant number of them, (no names here,) voted to authorize the Iraq invasion.
Now, here we are a little over four years later, the same war still going on, and another vote/referendum is coming up in the Senate. Now it is Republicans who find themselves on the political underside worrying about the political implications of not voting against the war.
Also: How different would the politics be if the Dems didn't control the Senate? A couple thousand votes in Virginia and we have Cheney as the tiebreaker,
posted by mikevotes at
8:41 AM
4 Comments:
They aren't changing all that much. The frickin Warner-Levin turd of a compromise added language regarding no funding cuts for the war. This is the type of language that puts the Dems in an awkward political position.
I think the benefit of these resolutions is to have the debate. I'm not sure the details of the non-binding resolutions matter that much as long as the public sees them as "We oppose the escalation." Hopefully, there will soon be debates and votes that actually DO something... but I'm not looking to the senate for this, not with such a slim divide.
By
-epm, at 9:54 AM
I agree that they do nothing concrete, but I think they do matter. The broader politics of these measures will have implications down the road. They shape public perception and make it clear that Bush is really acting on his own.
(Remember that most Americans don't "nerd" the news the way we do, and a resolution presented as "Senate against the war" may land a blow with those who don't watch closely.)
Mike
By
mikevotes, at 10:09 AM
As a Virginian.....You're all welcome! :)
By
zen, at 12:04 PM
From a Texan who does his part but it doesn't matter, I utter a hearty thank you.
Mike
By
mikevotes, at 1:37 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home