"O" for 40! Now that's showing leadership!

[Damocles]

Good background, but not much there yet on the issues. Or at least not that I could find.

We met with him last night, spent about three hours questioning him.

He is against nation-building. Wants us out of Iraq as soon as we can give the government some stability, would not support any further incursions such as this one.

He is for a Balanced Budget Amendment. For border security on both the north and south borders, and doesn't fall for the "Fence" prop-up. Nor does he suggest as Tom does that we should deport over 15 Million people that are here illegally.

Any other questions? I'll answer what I can.

 

[Damocles]

They need some republican support. Help them get it instead of sitting around pointing fingers.

What part of "I am supporting somebody who can win, probably will, that will do just that..."

Says that I am not.

You are being foolish because you are emotionally invested in the people who are failing you.

They have a way to stop it now. Instead of voting on impotent measures they know won't pass for political points during a campaign year, do something!

I know I wouldn't vote for them again if I were a D. They are too weak to do what you asked them to do.

 

[Cancel7]

"He is against nation-building. Wants us out of Iraq as soon as we can give the government some stability, would not support any further incursions such as this one. "

Oh sorry, SF can't vote for him.

 

[Cancel7]

What part of "I am supporting somebody who can win, probably will, that will do just that..."

Says that I am not.

You are being foolish because you are emotionally invested in the people who are failing you.

They have a way to stop it now. Instead of voting on impotent measures they know won't pass for political points during a campaign year, do something!

I know I wouldn't vote for them again if I were a D. They are too weak to do what you asked them to do.

So they can't pass weak measures but they could pass strong measures?

 

[Damocles]

So they can't pass weak measures but they could pass strong measures?

They could simply not pass any funding measure at all. The war would lose funding. If they have the support to end it they say they do, they'd get nothing but support for their action.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1107/6845.html

Democrats remain stalled on Iraq debate

By: Jim VandeHei and John F. Harris
Nov 13, 2007 06:07 AM EST


As the congressional session lurches toward a close, Democrats are confronting some demoralizing arithmetic on Iraq.

The numbers tell a story of political and substantive paralysis more starkly than most members are willing to acknowledge publicly, or perhaps even to themselves.

Since taking the majority, they have forced 40 votes on bills limiting President Bush’s war policy.

Only one of those has passed both chambers, even though both are run by Democrats. That one was vetoed by Bush.

More at link...

The Democrats built their thin majority on too many conservative DINO's, it seems. It's better than a Republican majority, but without a majority of true liberals the Democrats can't do much.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

We met with him last night, spent about three hours questioning him.

He is against nation-building. Wants us out of Iraq as soon as we can give the government some stability, would not support any further incursions such as this one.

He is for a Balanced Budget Amendment. For border security on both the north and south borders, and doesn't fall for the "Fence" prop-up. Nor does he suggest as Tom does that we should deport over 15 Million people that are here illegally.

Any other questions? I'll answer what I can.

Thanks, I will probably PM them to you so that I do not accidently hijack a thread that has so much amusement potential.

That said, back to the thread.....

Damo why won't you do the Dems job and round up support from enough Senators/Representatives so that the Dems can get something done? It is tough on them having no backbone and all.

 

[Cancel7]

The Democrats built their thin majority on too many conservative DINO's, it seems. It's better than a Republican majority, but without a majority of true liberals the Democrats can't do much.

Well, I don't think you can ever expect to gain every single vote in any party on a bill, you know? But the dems deliver the overwhelming majority of them...where are the republican "moderates"?

Bring home some Republican votes, and you know who republican politicians listen to? Registered republican voters. so if they were getting enough of those phone calls, this shit ends.

That's why I blame republican voters.

 

[Damocles]

Thanks, I will probably PM them to you so that I do not accidently hijack a thread that has so much amusement potential.

That said, back to the thread.....

Damo why won't you do the Dems job and round up support from enough Senators/Representatives so that the Dems can get something done? It is tough on them having no backbone and all.

LOL.

They don't pay me enough.

 

[Cancel7]

See, SF will claim on one thread that “the dems” are facists who will throw out poor joe Lieberman over “one issue” and not even bother to look at him on the other issues.
Then on another thread, he will claim that Joe Lieberman counts as part of the “democratic majority” on an Iraqi war vote.

I mean, it’s really quite diabolical when you think about it…but it’s also dishonest on its face.

 

[Cypress]

What I find funny is any attempt to pretend that the majority that can't pass a bill they have "soo much support" for isn't a failure because the "big bad minority" is stopping them is funny.

War isn't funny, your attempt to put that on me is simply fallacious and aimed at making me "mad" at you. It isn't going to work because you and I both know that I was laughing at the weak excuses of the Democrats for not ending this thing and not about the war. That is projection from you on what you hope I was feeling, and not based in any reality we live in.

And as I said, if the support is there so strongly then any excuse for a majority to continue it is just an excuse. And a weak see-through one at that.

What I find funny is any attempt to pretend that the majority that can't pass a bill they have "soo much support" for isn't a failure because the "big bad minority" is stopping them is funny.

I don't think trying to stop a war is funny.

but, this is really easy for me Damo:

1) I agree with you that its pathetic that Dems can't get more than 90% of their member to do something to end this war.

2) I also think that given your alleged harsh opposition to this war, that you'll support, or vote for candidates who will be supportive of a redeployment or withdrawl from iraq in short order.

Can you agree to that?

 

[Cypress]

No, they'll sit back and say "dems can't end it, squawk, the dems can't end it squawk" LOL!

Fucking do something about it man. Jesus, this shit really pisses me off.

Me too.

 

[Cypress]

Thanks, I will probably PM them to you so that I do not accidently hijack a thread that has so much amusement potential.

That said, back to the thread.....

Damo why won't you do the Dems job and round up support from enough Senators/Representatives so that the Dems can get something done? ...snip.

Becuase Damo opposes the war supposedly, that's why he should do it.

 

[Cypress]

Well, I don't think you can ever expect to gain every single vote in any party on a bill, you know? But the dems deliver the overwhelming majority of them...where are the republican "moderates"?

Bring home some Republican votes, and you know who republican politicians listen to? Registered republican voters. so if they were getting enough of those phone calls, this shit ends.

That's why I blame republican voters.

You get a dozen GOP senators, and 70 or so GOP house member, and a bill mandating redeployment from iraq gets passed. Its that simple. No war has ever ended without bipartisan support. Not vietnam, not Korea, not somalia, not lebanon.

 

[Damocles]

What I find funny is any attempt to pretend that the majority that can't pass a bill they have "soo much support" for isn't a failure because the "big bad minority" is stopping them is funny.

I don't think trying to stop a war is funny.

but, this is really easy for me Damo:

1) I agree with you that its pathetic that Dems can't get more than 90% of their member to do something to end this war.

2) I also think that given your alleged harsh opposition to this war, that you'll support, or vote for candidates who will be supportive of a redeployment or withdrawl from iraq in short order.

Can you agree to that?

I think pretending to try to stop a war when they have the ability to actually do it isn't "funny" as in "ha-ha" funny, I think it is funny as in play politics funny.

 

[Damocles]

And I think those who support them giving them excuses for their lack of action is funny as in "ha-ha" funny.

 

[Cypress]

And I think those who support them giving them excuses for their lack of action is funny as in "ha-ha" funny.

I don't find "lack of action", by either side, particularly humourous at all. I find it extremely sad.

I just saw this Documentary called "Body of War, about a wounded iraq war vet who comes home and becomes an anti-war activist. Its a very human story, about his life, his marriage, his family, his disability, and how it all relates to the war and his feelings about it. The dude is paralyzed from the neck down, and can't even make love to his wife. I nearly balled like a baby watching it. So, no I don't think any of this is funny. Niether the war, nor the attempts to end it. That's just me however; I'm sure I've expressed inappropriate humour myself, at times.



I see the only way of ending the war, is in a bipartisan fashion. Dems have been weak assed, and republicans have been war apologists. That's the only realist way to end it, and I'm not interested in Democratic apologists, or republicans who want the war to go on forever.

 

[Bonestorm]

I think pretending to try to stop a war when they have the ability to actually do it isn't "funny" as in "ha-ha" funny, I think it is funny as in play politics funny.

But they don't have the ability to do it. That's the point. I know you'd rather avoid my explanation for why they don't have the ability than deal with it but please stop with the BS. It's tiresome.

 

[Damocles]

I see the only way of ending the war, is in a bipartisan fashion. Dems have been weak assed, and republicans have been war apologists. That's the only realist way to end it, and I'm not interested in Democratic apologists, or republicans who want the war to go on forever.

This I can live with, it at least recognizes problems within your own party. The ones I have problems with are the ones that are willing to forgive any inaction and pretend it is only the other side that has fault.

And as I have stated, that is not the only way it can end. They can simply refuse to pass any funding for the war at all. It would end. They don't even need any "veto-proof" majority, they don't need any of that to end this. If they are committed to only "ending" it then they can.

Thankfully I see Ds have a realistic idea of ending it without the mess that it would leave to just simply stop funding it. I shouldn't promote an idea I would never support.

 

[Bonestorm]

This I can live with, it at least recognizes problems within your own party. The ones I have problems with are the ones that are willing to forgive any inaction and pretend it is only the other side that has fault.

And as I have stated, that is not the only way it can end. They can simply refuse to pass any funding for the war at all. It would end. They don't even need any "veto-proof" majority, they don't need any of that to end this. If they are committed to only "ending" it then they can.

Thankfully I see Ds have a realistic idea of ending it without the mess that it would leave to just simply stop funding it. I shouldn't promote an idea I would never support.

Damo - You're a clown. To cut funding and abandoning the armed forces in the middle of a conflict is disgraceful, let alone electoral suicide. Yet, you drop the "simply" in there. There something simple around here alright.