Senate Democrats and the Iraq War
The Senate rejected by a vote of 93-6 a call for withdrawing US troops by the end of the year.
In reality, the troops should be withdrawn sooner than that--immediately, in my view; but the Democrats managed to overwhelmingly cast their votes with the Republicans. The AP article reports that "Democrats decried the debate as a sham. They said Republicans promised an open discussion but, instead, stacked the deck in their own favor by limiting debate to 10 hours and barring any amendments." Nevertheless, what kind of amendments would the Democrats offer? In fact, the article points out,
Contrast that with what third party left wing candidacies are advocating. For example, Todd Chretien, the Green Party candidate running against Diane Feinstein for the US Senate in California, has this to say on his web site: "If elected, my first act will be to introduce a Senate bill to bring all the troops home immediately". (Emphasis added.) Note his use of the word "immediately". Marsha Feinland is running against Feinstein on the Peace & Freedom party ticket; her party's website has this to say: "The Peace and Freedom Party calls for an immediate end to the military occupation of Iraq, the withdrawal and return of all U.S. troops, and the immediate release of all prisoners of war and detained civilians." (Emphasis added.) Note again the use of the word "immediate".
The lesson is clear: if leftists want to vote for peace in Iraq, they should not cast their vote for the Democrats.
In reality, the troops should be withdrawn sooner than that--immediately, in my view; but the Democrats managed to overwhelmingly cast their votes with the Republicans. The AP article reports that "Democrats decried the debate as a sham. They said Republicans promised an open discussion but, instead, stacked the deck in their own favor by limiting debate to 10 hours and barring any amendments." Nevertheless, what kind of amendments would the Democrats offer? In fact, the article points out,
In both the House and Senate, Democrats appear to be divided into three camps. Some want troops to leave Iraq this year. Others object to setting any kind of timetable. A number of them want the United States to start redeploying forces by year's end but don't want to set a date when all troops should be out.The Democrats don't know what they stand for with respect to the war. Yet, among all those diverse opinions, notice that none of them said anything about an immediate withdrawal from Iraq; the best we can hope from them is a continuation of the occupation and war for another six months.
Contrast that with what third party left wing candidacies are advocating. For example, Todd Chretien, the Green Party candidate running against Diane Feinstein for the US Senate in California, has this to say on his web site: "If elected, my first act will be to introduce a Senate bill to bring all the troops home immediately". (Emphasis added.) Note his use of the word "immediately". Marsha Feinland is running against Feinstein on the Peace & Freedom party ticket; her party's website has this to say: "The Peace and Freedom Party calls for an immediate end to the military occupation of Iraq, the withdrawal and return of all U.S. troops, and the immediate release of all prisoners of war and detained civilians." (Emphasis added.) Note again the use of the word "immediate".
The lesson is clear: if leftists want to vote for peace in Iraq, they should not cast their vote for the Democrats.
Post a Comment