Politics of Iraq V

by DemFromCT

The first four parts are here, and lay out the road to September.

So we've seen in this series that

Toothless legislation attracts votes, but doesn't get the job done. Legislation with teeth doesn't attract a consensus or a working majority (at this time) because there isn't one in Congress. (Part I)

[Focus on Chris Shays] Much of this is driven by the sense that the GOP as a whole is standing on the brink of a precipice for the 2008 election. Taking Ben Franklin to heart, they've decided to hang together in hopes they won't be hung separately. and part of that 'unity' is to divert responsibility away from themselves and try to, if not blame Democrats (Bush has tried that and failed) then at least get some bipartisan responsibility and make it a bipartisan mess. (Part II)

[Press coverage] Anything that happens now to advance the discussion is a bonus and worth going for. But when the press writes that this amendment 'failed' or that attempt 'did not succeed' put it in perspective. The Administration is losing support everywhere; it just takes time for the info to work its way to DC. (Part III)

Well, you don't need to be an expert to know that the GOP is backed into a September corner. In theory, if Bush were a normal politician, he'd use that as a pivot, blame the Iraqis and then start a withdrawal for which he'd take credit. Nixon would have done it in a heartbeat. Of course, a normal politician wouldn't find himself at 28% in the polls and ignore what that's doing to the party he supposedly heads. (Part IV).

What's happening now is that Washington is realizing the obvious. There's nowhere to go come September, so they're lashing out. While they ineffectually try to explore moving the goalposts or pretending we're winning (with no movement at all in the political process, that's absurd), they also figure the best defense is a good offense. And what better way to go on offense is to blame the Democrats in general, and Harry Reid in particular. The way it's done in DC is to turn to the GOP enablers, in this case David Brooks and Fred Hiatt. Frank's diary summarizes the Hiatt end of things:

If you read the Washington Post editorial titled "The Phony Debate"(and linked off the frontpage with the title "Democratic demagoguery on Iraq"), you come away with the idea that the current situation can be squarely blamed on Harry Reid, and that a solution could be found if only the Democrats were willing to compromise with Bush and the Republicans. It is a strange piece from the bizarro world.

Brooks' version of the same message can be heard on the real player audio of the weekly Shields-Brooks piece on the News Hour. Republicans want you to know that it's all Harry Reid's fault. This administration, after all, hasn't a partisan bone in its body and hasn't acted that way to gushing press admiration about their political genius for six years (reap what you sow, fellas, and explain to us again how smart you are).

What's really going on? An orchestrated GOP withdrawal, of course.

Political Retreat is No Easy Thing for GOP

...it's politics, not principle, that explains the seeming disconnect this week between the growing number of Republican senators who loudly distance themselves from the war, yet refuse to join Democrats in their antiwar votes. As Mr. Lugar, New Mexico's Pete Domenici and Ohio's George Voinovich, all successively bailed on the surge, the headlines built it up as a great Republican Rift, a "turning point" in the war, which would finally deliver Harry Reid the votes he needed for withdrawal.

Instead, Mr. Reid got a fizzling 52 ayes for withdrawal this week, and not a one from Republicans who'd so recently and forcefully criticized the war. The few senators who crossed to Mr. Reid's side were primarily those who'd long been griping about the war, say Nebraska's Chuck Hagel. The rest of the GOP war apostates were MIA.

Confusing as this might seem, it's also precisely what many of those Republican breakaways intended from the start. Mr. Domenici, New Hampshire's John Sununu, Minnesota's Norm Coleman--all are panicked about next year's election and desperately want Iraq off the table. But political retreat is no easy thing.

So what's the beef here? Harry Reid is not making it easy for the GOP to retreat, so they're pissed at him. They wanted the Lugar-Warner figleaf. They're desperate to get it, because the alternative is facing the voters and being put in an immigration bill-style bind. Their dwindling but noisy conservative voters want them to support Bush, but Senators know Bush is crafting a GOP debacle at the 2008 polls because this will lose the independents.

Virginia, usually a reliably Republican state in presidential elections, may become a key battleground in the 2008 election as broadly negative views among independents of President Bush and the war in Iraq have altered the presidential race.

And they know there's not going to be a sea change in 60 days, not with the Iraqi parliament on vacation.

Hyper-partisan politics as practiced for six years by Rove and Bush has just bitten the GOP in the ass. And you know, it couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of politicians. So, it's the GOP who has to decide: honestly debate the war and recalibrate the mission (because without you, Bush simply won't do it), or go down with the ship with Mr. 28%. The GOP Senators don't and won't like the choice, but American voters will be the first to tell them: who the hell cares? It isn't about you, and if you don't get that, you won't know what hit you in 2008.

Comments

[darclay]

Sounds about right. However cbs just stated that the Generals are now thinking that it may be Nov. before they will know if the "Surge" is working. LOL, whoed a thunk.

[DemFromCT]

yes, that's the "moving the goalposts" strategy. Delay, obfuscate, and hope things change.

For more concreate analysis of what reid did:

At the same time, Reid stunned Republicans when he shut down votes on alternatives that would have given them opportunities to back less forceful measures. The move locked a political escape hatch for GOP lawmakers, denying them opportunities to tell their constituents that they voted for legislation calling on the president to change course.

link

[Mimikatz]

Reid was smarter in retrospect than some of us gave him credit for, in blocking the GOP Senators' line of retreat. Now he has to hold firm in September that there is no vote on any Iraq amendments without Levin-Reed and Feingold-Reid, which, by September, are themselves going to seem inadequate.

The squeeze on the GOP is worse than you portray it, though, with generals this am saying that the surge has to continue into next summer (with what troops, he doesn't say).

The line here is that we finally have the correct strategy (after Rumsfeld and Casey, the "small footprint" guys, are gone), so we have to let it work. But Casey was trying to protect the military. It isn't clear where these generals are going to get the troops, except for this item that the number of sailors and airmen in Iraq has greatly increased over the last year or two, filling in combat roles that the Army normally would do.

We often rail about the spineless Dems, but truly the GOP takes the invertebrate prize here. Jellyfish is too complimentary a description. The voters had better hold them accountable.

[Mimikatz]

Another comment--there is much talk about the fracturing of the social/religious conservatives from the GOP moderates, but I think another very important fissure we are seeing is the split between the authoritarians and the "leave me alone" wing of the GOP. They are mostly here in the West. They have defected to Independent in droves, and are now in the process of going over to the Dems, if the Dems will play with a light enough touch. This could really bne the fatal fracture, because it is happening in areas with growing population, like AZ and CO.

[Dismayed]

A hand well played by Reid, and I think played even handed and morally. This was smooth old style politics handled to bring out true color and hurray for Harry.

The Republicans are going to get a rude lesson in the dangers of Goosestepping to the beat of Chairman Bush, during the next election.

At every opportunity, they should be asked if they are going to represent the will of the people or continue to GOOSESTEP to the adgenda of a party that seems to have taken on a communist style of governance.

I've been giving some thought to the use of language to illuminate truth in this struggle and "Goosestepping" is a word that should be used to describe republicans at every turn. The word represents a universal image of totalatarianism, be it communist, facist, eastern, or westen. It also speaks to what they are doing - acting blindly in unison - goosestepping. It's a powerful word that can be used without slipping into more tired, easily dismissed, and less understood words such as fascism.

On a more wingnutty front - I've been considering the term "Chairman" for Bush. It occurs to me that for this generation evocation of Communism is more appropriate than that for Fascism. Consider a phrase, "Watch what you say Chairman Bush may be listening" Imagine that on little signs popping up all over America. It would get the point across loud and clear. We need to find ways to evoke the feeling from Bush's actions that people were programed to feel when our "enemies" of the recent past exhibited the same behaviors.

I'm not great at the detail and research stuff as many of you are, though I greatly enjoy the benefit of your talents. I tend toward the more abstract.

With our disadvantage in the press, we're going to have to get very sharp in the message wars. The public gets the war, but this 5th amendment stuff just doesn't seem to be sinking in with the average citizen. The idea of leveraging past american propaganda to communicate our current internal threat more emotionally through more clever use of language started bubbling in my head this morning, so I thought I'd throw this out for digestion, perhaps it will be found helpful and take root.

I wonder what it cost to print little signs? - I feel an experiment coming on.

[mullah cimoc]

mullah cimoc say blogman him just slave for master in tel aviv.

so obedient slave boy. how many israeli sympanthy movies watching in him life this dumb and foolish boy gay.

here the question for ameriki brainwashing victim;

1. How long israeli survive without usa triubte payment each year? A: maybe one year, maybe one months.

2. Am usa public opinion important for get congress pay the tribute? A: yes, not so important him bribe but still important.

3. am intel malpractice for him israeli spy and agent not controlling usa media for make ameriki sympathy? A: yes, him israeli intel work for israeli not like usa intel which also work for israeli.

4. How israeli agent him controlling usa public opinion this question of slave of master in tel aviv? A: read, inside the company, a cia diary by phillip agee for learn basic.

for all this reason neocon spy him trickameriki for kill and torture him muslim and the mass murder iraki. faking the wmd intel and controlling the executive of ameriki.

for true and good info contacting now:

[email protected]

also: usa woman become the slut if take LBT (low back tattoo). Ameriki father need protect him daughters.

[big brother]

Mimikatz
You put it clearly. Impeachment elimnates executive priveledge and opens access to WH and other government records BUSHCO is hiding. With DOJ in pocket the stonewall of congressional oversight will continue. The senate vote exposes the rats and holds them accountable at the national podium televised, the MSM will be hard put not to come clean to America. The world will be watching closely as well. It is a new ball game politically.
Yes the Repubicans will try to move closer to center and a new crop will be ready to replace those with political baggage. And the gullible electorate may give the new crowd a chance if they are not beating the neocons drum. But with Impeachment hearings and oversight committee gearings their is no political cover for the republicans, Impeachment is a kind way of removing these crooks, then the criminal proceedures can start in 2009. Watch them head back into the sewers.
The WH stonewall on needed legislation is another can of worms for Republicans as they have a voting record to defend. They should have put the administration on a leach instead they will be held accountable for the damage done to the Republics reputation and the national treasury. The recess in August gives Bushco manuevering time, do not let that happen.

[Dismayed]

Someone please tell me that the Senate did not vote 98-0 that "Iran has conducted acts of war against the US."

Is that true? How could these numbnuts not see that's like handing Chairman Bush and President Cheney a warrant to start a war?

Seeing things like that really undermine my confidence that congress has any earnest desire to rain the chairman and his goosesteppers in.