Disgusting
Another in my irregular series of Letters to the Editor of the SF Chronicle that most likely won't get published:
Editor --
So after putting up a modest fight with a petulant president who refuses to compromise on the issue of bringing troops home from Iraq -- something that nearly three-quarters of all Americans want, as shown consistently in recent polls -- the Democratic-controlled Congress decided it was somehow the better part of valor to cave in to the craven bully and give him exactly what he wanted all along ("Dems bow to Bush on funds for war," Chronicle, 5/23). Thank you, Speaker Pelosi, Senator Reid and your colleagues for selling us down the river. Remind me why we voted for you again -- I thought it was to help bring the bloody occupation of Iraq to an end. Apparently it was simply so you could continue the rubber-stamping process of the previous Republican Congresses in acquiescing to the criminal excesses and inept policies of the worst president in history.
I'm disgusted with all of them.
Love, Generik
(Cross-posted at The Generik Brand.)
Editor --
So after putting up a modest fight with a petulant president who refuses to compromise on the issue of bringing troops home from Iraq -- something that nearly three-quarters of all Americans want, as shown consistently in recent polls -- the Democratic-controlled Congress decided it was somehow the better part of valor to cave in to the craven bully and give him exactly what he wanted all along ("Dems bow to Bush on funds for war," Chronicle, 5/23). Thank you, Speaker Pelosi, Senator Reid and your colleagues for selling us down the river. Remind me why we voted for you again -- I thought it was to help bring the bloody occupation of Iraq to an end. Apparently it was simply so you could continue the rubber-stamping process of the previous Republican Congresses in acquiescing to the criminal excesses and inept policies of the worst president in history.
I'm disgusted with all of them.
Love, Generik
(Cross-posted at The Generik Brand.)
posted by Generik at 1:14 PM
BARBARIAN Contributors
4 Comments:
Remind me why we voted for you again -- I thought it was to help bring the bloody occupation of Iraq to an end.
Did anyone really believe that was possible, given a) the tiny margin in the House (and tinier margin in the Senate, b) the certainty that Bush will veto anything that would actually move toward that goal, and c) the certainty that even if he didn't veto it he would render any such bill void with signing statements?
I'm not thrilled with the latest development, but the reality is (as it has been all along) that we aren't getting out of Iraq until we have a new president.
I'm still waiting for somebody to explain to me, in short words so I can understand it, how the Dems suffer if Bush continues to veto Iraq funding bills with hard timetables.
I'm still waiting for somebody to explain to me, in short words so I can understand it, how the Dems suffer if Bush continues to veto Iraq funding bills with hard timetables.
I'm with you, mrgumby. I don't understand why the Dems felt they had to bow to Bush's will. Just keep sending him bills he will veto, and then let him explain to the American people why he won't fund the troops. We (the 70+% of us who want the troops out of Iraq) would have stood on the side of the Dems in this fight, and Bush would have looked increasingly weaker and more isolated. As it is, he (and his dwindling band of sycophants and supporters) can crow that he is the tough guy who outlasted the Dems and forced them to knuckle under. I hate that.
I don't think the Dems caved so much as made a devil's bargain on their minimum wage legislation.
They didn't have enough votes for either. And they probably figured they wouldn't win this round on the war funding so they struck a bargain that Kucinich called 'minimum wage for maximum blood' .
The making of politics is ugly and so is the making of sausage...
Post a Comment
<< Home