Let the Voters Decide
Somehow, I don’t think this story is what they meant when they coined the hrase ‘Let the voters decide.’ Here’s what’s happening:
By the time Congress finishes a supplemental spending plan for the Iraq War, senior Democrats say, it is likely that voters in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina will have made their choice on White House hopefuls.
The “Super Tuesday” primaries probably will be over, too.
That political calendar, combined with the reality of how hard it is for Democrats to get left and center to agree, has caused some senior lawmakers to conclude that Congress will soon end up letting the parties’ presidential candidates take the lead on Iraq policy.
“The outcome of the presidential primaries will help to bring focus to the debate on Iraq in Congress,” said Rep. John P. Murtha, D-Pa., chairman of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee.
House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer, D-Md., agreed, saying, “There’s no question that the presumptive presidential nominee will carry a lot of influence on the Iraq debate.”
In other words, Reps. Murtha and Hoyer agree that they’re done taking heat for the Iraq war and that they want the Democratic presidential nominee to take the heat. They’re also hoping that the rival factions, aka the DLC and MoveOn.org, can reach an agreement on how to declare defeat. That isn’t likely to happen because MoveOn.org sees the DLC as Republican Lite. They’ve used the term heretic in characterizing the DLC, too. This won’t sort itself in that process by a long shot.
Murtha, a close adviser to Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said he has advised the leadership to put off the supplemental spending debate until early 2008 to allow time for Democrats to form more consensus on Iraq.
They can wait until they’re ice-skating in Hades before a consensus is reached within the Democratic Party on Iraq. It ain’t happening. PERIOD.
In fact, I’ll predict that John Murtha will become politically radioactive before Democrats reach consensus on their Iraq war policy.
The Democrats’ stalling is meeting with resistence from both sides of the aisle:
But the push to delay action on funding has run into flak from liberal Democrats, who fear they are losing votes for their position.
“I would like to see the showdown now, rather than waiting until next year,’’ said Judiciary Chairman John Conyers Jr., D-Mich.
Some Republicans also criticized the notion.
“I’d like to see the Democrats move the supplemental as soon as possible. They should not be playing politics with this,’’ said Eric Cantor, R-Va., the chief deputy whip.
The Democrats’ waiting until the new year is an attempt to have the presidential campaigns be the top story. Democrats don’t want the Iraq debate to be the topic of conversation if it’s possible. That tactic won’t work. Too many people have too strong of an opinion on the subject to let go now.
Clinton, New York’s junior senator and the front-runner so far for the Democratic presidential nomination, said on “Meet the Press” on Sept. 23 that she would vote against the next supplemental “because I think that it’s the only way that we can demonstrate clearly that we have to change direction.”
But she has also distanced herself from proposals that would rapidly reduce troop levels and end the war next year.
In other words, she triangulating on Iraq. That’s foolish. Triangulation worked for Bill because he was forever dealing with nothing issues. Hillary isn’t leading because she’s pandering on the biggest issue of our generation. That isn’t a profile in courage. It’s a profile in political pandering, something that the voters won’t forget. (I know they won’t because I’ll join with other bloggers of the Right Blogosphere to remind them or her pandering and indecision.)
Technorati Tags: Hillary, DLC, John Murtha, MoveOn.org, Steny Hoyer, John Conyers, Nancy Pelosi, Eric Cantor, Election 2008
Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog
October 1st, 2007 at 5:48 am
[...] Larkin wrote an interesting post today on Let the Voters DecideHere’s a quick excerpt [...]
October 2nd, 2007 at 9:56 am
Wait, wait, wait!! The dems don’t have a consensus on Iraq?!? I thought their whole reason for existing and getting elected in 2006 was to retreat? How can they now say they don’t have consensus?
Can you say reality?
October 5th, 2007 at 5:07 pm
[...] Original post by Gary Gross [...]