Democrats' War Opposition Not a United Front?

[papau]

"Last week's emotional congressional debates over Iraq demonstrated the rise of antiwar sentiment among Democrats — and the challenge the party faces in converting that impulse into a unified alternative to President Bush" ..... "It's not clear how many other Democrats will reach so far in the weeks ahead (....there are only 60 co-sponsors for the Jones (R-N.C.)/Abercrombie (D-Hawaii) resolution that only requires Bush to formulate a plan by the end of this year for removing American troops from Iraq and to begin that withdrawal no later than Oct. 1, 2006).

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-assess20nov20,1,5347669.story?coll=la-headlines-politics&ctrack=1&cset=true

Democrats' War Opposition Not a United Front
Party lawmakers who have rallied around a general push to pull troops from Iraq still disagree on what remedies to offer, if any.

By Ronald Brownstein, Times Staff Writer


WASHINGTON — Last week's emotional congressional debates over Iraq demonstrated the rise of antiwar sentiment among Democrats — and the challenge the party faces in converting that impulse into a unified alternative to President Bush.

<snip>
But while the week's events demonstrated rising Democratic hostility to the war, they also underscored the party's continuing divisions over what alternative to offer — and whether to present a specific alternative at all.

<snip>
Clifford D. May, president of the conservative Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said: "Democrats can certainly reinforce their brand identification as the party that cannot be trusted in the midst of a national security crisis. That is a real danger for them."

Largely accepting that logic, almost all centrist Democrats and much of the party's foreign policy establishment believe that a specific timeline or deadline for removing American troops would undermine stability in Iraq and hurt the party politically. During last week's debate, Democratic foreign policy leaders like Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.) repeatedly insisted that the party's proposal did not establish a timeline for removing American troops.

<snip>

Until Murtha unveiled his proposal Thursday, Sen. Russell D. Feingold (D-Wis.), a possible 2008 presidential contender, had adopted the most aggressive position among elected officials: Feingold has urged Bush to withdraw all American troops from Iraq by the end of 2006, although he has softened his demand somewhat by describing that as a "target date."
<snip>

[Democrats_win]

1. Lets see how the Republicans are supporting the war.

Just because it´s 20 years later, don´t make the mistake of thinking Republicans support this war with their feet. The chickenhawk Republicans are raising a new generation!

Bush´s 10 relatives who could serve aren´t. Coors, one of the founders of the Heritage Foundation, isn´t sending Scott Coors either. Scott Coors appeared in a recent photo in the newspaper showing off his home and his muscles which he isn´t lending to the Army. He could join, but I guess the real estate game is more appealing. Honestly, he should be ashamed.

[MADem]

2. I do not think the divide is as great as some like to play it

The Democratic position goes from "well, we are there, let us finish the job" to "NOW, NOW, get OUT, NOW!!!"

But Democrats acknowledge that we were lied to, bamboozled, bullshitted, and conned, and had we known that, we would not be there in the first place!

But hey, they love to portray us as at each other's throats...it ain't playing so well anymore, though. We are more united now than ever.