The End Days of the Cult of Republicanism.
By Tom | October 18, 2007
Poll after poll shows that while Republicans proclaim themselves the mainstream, large majorities of Americans side time and time again with positions taken by Democrats. SCHIP is but the latest example. This disconnect is one of many signals that foreshadow the end of the GOP.
Republicans once were a political party. Once, there were liberal Republicans. There were the likes of Edward Brooke of Massachusetts, Lowell Weiker of Connecticut, John Lindsay of New York, Nelson Rockefeller of New York. There were moderates, like Gerald Ford of Michigan and Everett Dirksen of Illinois in the party.
Today Republicanism is a cult. Followers adhere to a rigid set of beliefs that admit no exceptions. The diverse set of viewpoints is gone, and the previous constraint on wingnuttery left with it. The Republican garden is choked with noxious weeds that cannot survive for long, let alone sustain a political movement.
Topics: Politics | 1 Comment »
Dodd’s looking better.
By Tom | October 18, 2007
I know he’s a real long shot, but Sen. Chris Dodd is looking better and better as a presidential candidate. Today he put a hold on the pending FISA legislation, after it became known that Senate leaders had caved on giving telcos retroactive immunity for illegally divulging telephone records at the request of the White House.
Where the hell were Sens. Clinton, Obama, Biden on this?
Voting for a bill and then later claiming that had you known you were being lied to you’d have done it differently is NOT leadership. Opposing a bill when you can’t really vote on it, then voting the wrong way when you CAN vote for it is NOT leadership.
Sniping at a dangerous bill in emails to supporters to raise money is NOT leadership. If you can’t vote against it, organize against it.
Topics: Politics | No Comments »
Not again. Please.
By Tom | October 18, 2007
Dear Senator Webb
Please don’t do this again. Look at the FISA bill you’re going to be asked to vote for. Find the best expert on Constitutional law you can find, and ask for a thorough briefing. Don’t take anyone’s word for what’s in the bill or how badly it’s needed. On this topic, the people you trusted let you down and they’re about to do it again.
This isn’t about terrorism or 9/11 or Al Qaeda. The White House and the spymasters wanted these powers six months before 9/11 and before Al Qaeda was a blip on the radar screen. In August, they lied to you. They’re lying to you again.
Put a hold on this monstrosity. Filibuster if you must. Vote no, no matter what.
This bill has nothing to do with fighting terrorism or national security. It’s unnecessary. It’s abusive. Voting for it violates your oath of office.
Stop this madness now.
Topics: Virginia Politics, Politics | No Comments »
Yes!
By Tom | October 3, 2007
Yesterday, Rep. David Obey (D-WI), chair of the House Appropriations Committee, laid down a marker. At a news conference, he said the following:
“I would be more than willing to report out a supplemental meeting the President’s request if that request were made in support of a change in policy that would do three things.– “Establish as a goal the end of U.S. involvement in combat operations by January of 2009.”
– “Ensure that troops would have adequate time at home between deployments as outlined in the Murtha and Webb amendments.”
– “Demonstrate a determination to engage in an intensive, broad scale diplomatic offensive involving other countries in the region.”
“But this policy does not do that. It simply borrows almost $200 billion to give to the Departments of State, Defense, Energy, and Justice with no change in sight.
“As Chairman of the Appropriations Committee I have absolutely no intention of reporting out of Committee anytime in this session of Congress any such request that simply serves to continue the status quo.”
About time.
This is the one option the Democratic Congress has always had, and that never, ever, depended on having any votes, let alone enough votes.
The logic is simple. No money can be apropriated, event a supplemental for the war, without a bill. No bill, no money. You want a bill, then start changing strategy. Period. No arguments, no back door, no nothing.
Can Bush & Cheney continue to press ahead with their plan to dump their war on the doorstep of a new president? Sure. But at an ever increasing cost to other Pentagon budget lines. But so what? The guys at the top of the military hierarchy love this war so much, they can sacrifice for it.
Topics: Iraq, Politics | No Comments »
This isn’t Viet Nam.
By Tom | October 1, 2007
I’ve had the great good fortune to grow up and live through the last half of the 20th century and now part of the 21st.
That means that I’ve seen, and taken part in the discussion about, both Vietnam and present day Iraq. I participated in neither, in the sense of being part of the U.S. military. When Vietnam was raging in 1970 I was in college. I could have been drafted, but wasn’t. I didn’t enlist but did nothing to avoid the draft other than apply for the student deferment to which I was entitled under the law. It was granted and by the time I was again eligible to be drafted, there was a lottery and I wasn’t called. All of this is important to say because I want it to be clear that I had no particular strong feelings about military service, one way or the other. I didn’t serve, but had circumstances been slightly different I would have served to the best of my ability without regret.
I did oppose the war in Vietnam as I oppose this war in Iraq. I see the similarities between the two conflicts. The biggest similarity is that both were/are an attempt to use the military to achieve what were essentially political ends. Didn’t work in the 60s and 70s. Isn’t working now.
The object of this post is to talk about the differences I see between Vietnam and Iraq. And the differences lie mainly in my experience of both and more particularly, of the opposition to both.
Topics: Iraq, Blogging, Politics | No Comments »
« Previous Entries Next Entries »