Breaking Faith with Voters
22 June 2007 12:01 am by Taylor Marsh
Let me explain something, because some people just aren’t getting it. The Democratic Congress is at 14% and there’s a reason for it. And you don’t have to be an expert in reading polls to understand it. But not everyone is to blame for it.
The problem isn’t with Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
It’s not with Rep. Obey.
It’s not with Democrats who are against the war and voted against the supplemental.
It’s also not because we don’t have a big enough majority or that expectations were raised too high. The only way anyone could have expected immediate victory on getting out of Iraq is if you couldn’t count. Democrats don’t have the numbers. No kidding. That’s especially true when you have Democrats breaking with what the people voted them into Congress to do and doing the opposite of what we promised.
When I talk about Democrats failing the leadership test on Iraq it’s not because
most aren’t talking a good game. It’s that their votes on the recent supplemental
didn’t represent their rhetoric. It’s that simple. You cannot say you are for
ending the war then vote to continue the funding on the supplemental because
you’re scared someone might say you “don’t support the troops.”
Pelosi voted against the supplemental. She did all she could. My beef is not
with her.
The trouble is with Democrats that talk about the war being wrong and our presence being a big part of the problem, then voting for the supplemental. I’m talking about
Rep. Murtha and others, but what Murtha did was particularly galling, especially after all of his posts and his TV appearances. I’m talking about Senator Harry Reid, Senator
Joe Lieberman (of course), as well as Senators Reed and James Webb, though there
are others.
No one needs to remind me that Democrats have a slim majority in the Senate.
I’m well aware of that fact. I also don’t expect Democrats to get us out of
Iraq with the current numbers we face. However, I and many, many other Americans who helped put the Democrats in a majority, however slim, absolutely do expect every single Democrat
to support the policy to end the war, which includes voting against a ridiculous
supplemental that continues the escalation, because being accused of not “supporting the
troop” is too much for a politician to take. Need I remind everyone that our armed forces are cracking?
Voters put Democrats in office for many reasons in 2006, but the primary reason was to bring about a change of course on Iraq. That means every vote must go to that end. When it doesn’t it breaks faith with what the voters put you in office to do. Again, that doesn’t mean Democrats will win the day at first, because, again, we don’t have the numbers. But at least our leaders can stand up and say Democrats all voted against the supplemental, keeping the promise of the 2006 election. Anything less is not good enough and the American people sense it and are disgusted.
Feingold has it exactly right, so here he is one more time.
“I’m pleased that Senator Levin and Senator Jack Reed have finally come
to the conclusion that a timetable for redeployment with a hard deadline is
what we need to safely redeploy our troops from Iraq,” Feingold said.
“But I’m disappointed that Senator Levin chose to announce his
shift by disingenuously suggesting that the Feingold-Reid plan would somehow
cut funding for troops in harm’s way. Senator Levin knows full well that the
plan I introduced with Majority Leader Harry Reid, and which was supported
by a majority of Senate Democrats, would end funding for the war in Iraq only
after our brave troops have been safely redeployed out of Iraq. It
is time for Senator Levin and Senator Jack Reed to drop their opposition to
the Feingold-Reid plan to safely redeploy our troops by March 31, 2008, and
then end funding for the mistake in Iraq.”
No one in the Senate or House or the Democratic Party has any intention of
hanging the troops out to dry on funding. That’s a bogus argument that only
serves those people who do not have the courage of their convictions. But this crap is being served up by our own. How many
times do we have to make this point? The troops will have all the equipment
they need throughout the redeployment. Period.
The reality is that the American public voted Democrats into office in 2006
because they made the case against the Iraq war. Unfortunately, now some of
those very same Democrats are saying they are against the war and they will
continue to fight to change the policy, all the while they’re voting otherwise.
Again, this doesn’t include leaders like Speaker Pelosi and others. But it does
include a good number of Democrats who are saying they want out of Iraq while
voting otherwise. You can’t say the Iraq war is hurting this country then continue
to support the escalation through voting for the supplemental, which Senator
Reid, Rep. Murtha and others did.
Clear?
We haven’t even gotten to the second part of the Iraq issue, which hangs over the current fight like dense fog. The fact remains that
Democratic voters need to brace themselves, because all of the top tier candidates
will keep forces in Iraq for some time after we begin redeployment, only to perform different tasks. No one is prepared for that right now, but it’s coming. Making
our candidates say otherwise is a mistake, because it’s not true. It also sets
us up for the same situation the Democratic Congress is experiencing right now. Promising something that cannot possibly be delivered, because you have no intention of voting for a full draw down of forces. It’s again talking one way, but governing another. You’ve been warned.
