"In a setback for the Democrats...." "In a setback for the Democrats...." "In a setback for the Democrats...." Seems every time you turn on the telly or pick up a paper--or even read on the Internet--these words dominate coverage of the goings-on in Washington. The Dems try to tax Big Oil to pay for alternative energy programs. They lose. The Dems try to tax gazillionaire hedge funds hotshots so upper middle-class taxpayers don't get nailed by the Alternative Minimum Tax. They lose. The Dems try to expand the children's health insurance program. They lose. And of course, the Dems try to attach timetables and limits to the new funding for the war in Iraq. They lose. Given that most of these positions are supported by most Americans, one might wonder why the Democrats keep failing. But George W. Bush keeps outmaneuvering Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. It's looking like the Ds are the Putz Party.
Yeah, I know the Democratic argument: we face those obstructionist, filibuster-waving GOPers who march in lockstep with Mr. Obstinate in the White House and, still, we've raised the minimum wage, passed the 9/11 commission recommendations, boosted fuel efficiency standards for vehicles, and reprogrammed billions that Bush wanted toward our budget priorities. But there is the matter of the war.
Once again, the headline in this morning's papers: Senate Approves Iraq War Funds. On the No. 1 issue of this Congress, the Democrats have utterly failed. They triumphantly came into office pledging to end the war, and they have not even managed to slow it down. The Democratic base is right to be peeved. And the Dems cannot blame the media for noting this continuing failure. On this point--the key point--they look hapless and impotent. Sure, there are structural impediments, such as that Senate filibuster and the presidential veto. But the Democrats have not figured out how to lose successfully. If you don't have the votes, you don't have the votes. Math is math. But there are ways to frame debates so that you win (somewhat) by losing. And on Iraq--and the other matters listed above--the Ds haven't done that.
Perhaps it's easier said than done. The Monday morning quarterback always has 20-20 vision. But the Democrats missed a chance early on to have a simple up-and-down vote on war funding that would have established that Bush and the Republicans (with a few Democrats) were keeping the war alive despite the Democrats' best efforts. Which would mean that the Democrats needed more Democrats in Congress. But the various pirouettes and legislative mechanisms the Democrats have tried have been confusing and, worse, ineffective. And their messaging has been inconsistent: we're standing firm....oh, no, we're not....now this time we really will....well, we don't have the votes...and so on.
Fair or not, the Democrats cannot hide their war failure behind press releases touting their successes on other fronts. A House Democratic chief of staff explains: "It's like you call in a contractor to fix your roof, he doesn't do it, but he tells you, 'now you're sink is working fine.' Okay, but you wanted to him to fix the roof and he promised to fix the roof and he didn't." The roof is the Iraq war.
Being in the majority can be rough. There are expectations and obligations. In 1994, after the Democrats lost Congress, Representative Barney Frank told me he was looking forward to being in the minority: "It's more fun." Would Pelosi and Reid agree now? In any event, after Congress clears out of town, these leaders and the rest of the Dems ought to start thinking how to have a better year in 2008. You think they know there are elections next November?
![[RSS]](http://67.192.49.194/templates/images/rss_icon.gif){kind=icon}
Comments
DC,
The democrats need super-majorities in both houses and a democratic president - then they will . . . . .
Do the same damn things they have done all along.
Nothing, no law nor bill has passed without support from the democrats. That means the occupation of Iraq, the "Patriot act", military commissions, wiretaps, torture, and the mess the economy is in.
Sure it would be so easy to blame one party or the other but we all know the truth, it is both parties.
This is why the whole idea of a left- right paradigm is so wrong, it is not nor has it ever been one party versus the other, it is us the "people" versus them the "politicians" - the populace versus a government run amok.
The law of unintended consequences will apply, I wonder if anybody can trust their government when their actions are so contrary to the will of the populace?
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary. “
~ H. L. Mencken
Posted by: capt
| December 19, 2007 12:15 PM
I have to disagree DC - the dems arent failing to frame the debate. the "liberal" media always frame the debate - and they always do it to make dems look bad. Glenn Greenwald is all over it, as usual. http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/
who cares about hair cuts, diner tips and campaign songs? NOT THIS KID!
Posted by: Richard
| December 19, 2007 4:37 PM
Turnabout is, indeed, a cruel turn of events.
Think - Republican consternation at Democratic block of judicial nominations, 2001 through 2006.
Think - Democratic consternation at Republican block of every piece of key legislation, all of 2007.
Something about what's good for the goose is...
Posted by: Tomcantu
| December 19, 2007 5:30 PM
"Pride goeth before a fall."
Posted by: David B. Benson
| December 19, 2007 6:01 PM
"In a setback for the Democrats...." "In a setback for the Democrats...." "In a setback for the Democrats...."
or more rightly:
"In a setback for America...." "In a setback for America...." "In a setback for America...."
Posted by: capt
| December 19, 2007 9:04 PM
Corn has a point. The Dems are not as good obstructing legislation as the Repubs are. The media has their favorite narratives and the Repubs are better at feeding it with their propaganda.
Let's find out who destroyed the CIA torture tapes. How many more there are. How many detainees were tortured. Who authorized it. The CIA was smart enough to require WH authorization on a case by case so they wouldn't be left holding the bag. How many times Cheney and Bush watched them even as they continue to deny.
Why did Bush want to bomb iraq with a nuclear bunker buster when he knew they stopped their uranium enrichment in 2003?
Let's find out how many meetings Abramoff had in the White House.
How many more female american civilians were raped, had their rape kits stolen, and no investigation by DOJ, State, or JAG.
Turns out the President has been illegally wiretapping EVERYTHING since before 9/11. I think we need a trial but people like Pelosi and Corn think this is best solved through politics. Our government is lead by people with no respect for the rule of law, let's solve this how?
Posted by: Neil
| December 19, 2007 10:31 PM
"In a setback for the Democrats...." I don't think so the democrats couldn't even get a majority of their members to vote "ney" And the four: Clinton, Biden, Obama, and Dodd couldn't even bother to show up to vote (what did the corporate funded jets break down, did they oversleep, WTF)? So I say the democrats got just what they wanted. Take a look at the vote here! At least McCain had the balls (and the work ethic) to show up and vote. This vote was not a failure of the democrats in the senate. It is what a majority of them wanted.
"Republicans, Democrats, they all forget the facts........"
~Jeff Tweedy (1993 Anodyne Sire Records)
Posted by: uncledad
| December 19, 2007 10:55 PM
Neil:
"Our government is lead by people with no respect for the rule of law, let's solve this how?"
Well if we all answered that question honestly we'd get locked up wouldn't we?
Posted by: uncledad
| December 19, 2007 11:10 PM
"We in America do not have government by the majority. We have government by the majority who participate."
~ Thomas Jefferson
*****
Even then . . .
Posted by: capt
| December 20, 2007 12:17 AM
"The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it always to be kept alive."
~ Thomas Jefferson
Posted by: capt
| December 20, 2007 12:19 AM
Post A Comment