House Dems face uphill battle over Iraq -Pelosi does not have her ducks lined up.

[rodeodance]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070309/ap_on_go_co/democrats_iraq;_ylt=AuUm09hDoidc3WSA4Vb_5NSMwfIE
House Dems face uphill battle over Iraq

By ANNE FLAHERTY, Associated Press Writer Fri Mar 9, 8:07 AM ET

WASHINGTON - House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (news, bio, voting record), her party deeply divided and holding only a narrow majority, faces long odds in passing legislation that would bring troops home from
Iraq before the 2008 presidential election.


Pelosi, D-Calif., has pitched a plan that would pay for the war in Iraq but demand that combat troops leave by Sept. 1, 2008.

The proposal immediately triggered a veto threat from the White House and rebukes from Republican leaders who predicted the GOP would unify in opposition.

Rep. John Murtha (news, bio, voting record), chairman of a House Appropriations military subcommittee, said he was optimistic the effort would make a difference despite the difficulties. "This is going to start the end of the war," Murtha, D-Pa., told NBC's "Today" show.

Most troublesome for Pelosi was dissent within her ranks, with several conservative Democrats saying it may go too far and liberals saying it did not go far enough. Her counterparts in the Senate also did not step forward to support the proposal, offering instead legislation that identifies March 2008 as a goal, not a demand, for withdrawal.

[Monkeyman]

1. Blue Dogs will cross over with Replugs

[orleans]

2. but if all this is attached to the funding of the war and they vote

against it then they will be voting against funding also.

[jaybeat]

3. Sounds like MSM redirection "The *real* story is 'Democrats in Disarray'"

After all, the story couldn't be "80% of Americans think Bush is WRONG on Iraq," or "Poll: Democrats in Congress Too Timid in Going After Bush" or "Dems in Congress Trying to Move Fast Enough for Constituents".

No, no, those could *never* be the REAL story.

Hey, look over there! It's Anna Nicole Smith's estranged puppy dog!

[Jim Sagle]

8. 'Democrats in Disarray' has ALWAYS been the story.

Sometimes it's been true, sometimes it hasn't. But it's always been the story.

[Larry Allen]

9. In this case it's true.

But the responsibility is with the leadership. Pelosi's problem, which she is far from mastering, is that as leader her "constituents" are House members, not the American people.

But with everything she does to "get votes", she tends to lose it with the people.
Just what the heck is "re-deployment"? And what does "progress" in Iraq mean to the American people if it is not clear whether we are getting out or not? And how does asking the Liar in Chief to "certify" "progress" by this date or that date resonate with the American people who can't tell if we're getting out or not?

Pelosi should take a more philosphical attitude towards the Will of the House, while taking the will of the American people, (and the Generals and the GI's for that matter) dead seriously. The simple 180 day safe orderly phased withdrawal plan, featuring full funding for the troops while turning security over to the Iraqis, is dead on center with the American people and the military, even though it may be dead on arrival with House members.

The Speaker should run that one up there first just to see how and by how much she would have to fudge to get a majority vote. Meanwhile, the dialogue between House members and their constituents could be working itself out without her necessarily being involved.

[Jim Sagle]

13. Unmitigated balderdash!

[LiberalFighter]

4. Pelosi could do a PR stunt

Line up some fake ducks and shoot them with her shotgun

or to please the NRA folks... use an assault weapon

[Vidar]

5. A bazooka & the giant wooden duck from Holy Grail's witch scene.

[keopeli]

6. "holding only a narrow majority"? This is what you call bad journalism.

The Dem majority in the House is quite sound, and stronger than Republican majorities in the past 12 years.

This is not Dems in Disarray or "infighting". This is consensus building - it's one of the things we Americans do best (believe it or not).

Peace

[Matariki]

7. "her party deeply divided and holding only a narrow majority"

:rofl: dream on wingnuts!

[bemildred]

10. If the losers want to keep losing in 2008, they can "stay the course".

Ms Pelosi hasn't got a thing to lose by banging the gong until they get kicked out or decide to do what their constituents want done.

[humbled_opinion]

11. The Political Game

I may be guilty of giving too much credit but in this case Bush is not stupid.

He will not withdraw troops and be the loser in Chief. He will go down burning if need be, but I see a different scenario building. Think like Rove.

The surge which got the Democrats to do exaclty what the Administration wanted that is to attempt legislation to make this personal against the Presidents decision. Why else when every talking head counseled against a surge and opted for a withdraw and support role. Why else would he so adamently go against common sense. The only thing I can think of as always he is making the rules. America wants out of this war and Bush will eventually give them that. That way he can say it worked. Benchmarks are working. Surge has supressed violence enough to start phased draw down etc..

But doing it on his timetable makes him appear the victor and the Democrats appear weak for opposing it. This is becoming political gamesmanship and the first one to flinch will lose. It appears that the Democrats are becoming the flinchers.

just my 2 cents and I expect to get flamed have at it.

[humbled_opinion]

The Political Game

I may be guilty of giving too much credit but in this case Bush is not stupid.

He will not withdraw troops and be the loser in Chief. He will go down burning if need be, but I see a different scenario building. Think like Rove.

The surge which got the Democrats to do exaclty what the Administration wanted that is to attempt legislation to make this personal against the Presidents decision. Why else when every talking head counseled against a surge and opted for a withdraw and support role. Why else would he so adamently go against common sense. The only thing I can think of as always he is making the rules. America wants out of this war and Bush will eventually give them that. That way he can say it worked. Benchmarks are working. Surge has supressed violence enough to start phased draw down etc..

But doing it on his timetable makes him appear the victor and the Democrats appear weak for opposing it. This is becoming political gamesmanship and the first one to flinch will lose. It appears that the Democrats are becoming the flinchers.

just my 2 cents and I expect to get flamed have at it.

[humbled_opinion]

12. The Political Game

I may be guilty of giving too much credit but in this case Bush is not stupid.

He will not withdraw troops and be the loser in Chief. He will go down burning if need be, but I see a different scenario building. Think like Rove.

The surge which got the Democrats to do exaclty what the Administration wanted that is to attempt legislation to make this personal against the Presidents decision. Why else when every talking head counseled against a surge and opted for a withdraw and support rolw. Why else would he so adamently go against common sense. The only thing I can think of as always he is making the rules. America wants out of this war and Bush will eventually give them that. That way he can say it worked. Benchmarks are working. Surge has supressed violence enough to start phased draw down etc..

But doing it on his timetable makes him appear the victor and the Democrats appear weak for opposing it. This is becoming political gamesmanship and the first one to flinch will lose. It appears that the Democrats are becoming the flinchers.

just my 2 cents and I expect to get flamed have at it.