May 06, 2007
The Beginning of the Undoing of the Democrats
You could see it coming. Democrats should have been careful with the partnerships that they forged in recent elections, as they put short-term gains over long-term considerations. Now, the Democrats could be locked into an agenda dictated by radical-left organizations, with money and influence, that the Democrats are not otherwise inclined or able to make into law.
MoveOn.org is not going away and the Democrats are going to have to appease them to get their desired support, or incumbents could face stern opposition in the primaries from more radical candidates who could win the nominations but get clobbered in the general elections.
WASHINGTON, May 4 — Every morning, representatives from a cluster of antiwar groups gather for a conference call with Democratic leadership staff members in the House and the Senate.Over the last four months, the Iraq deliberations in Congress have lurched from a purely symbolic resolution rebuking the president’s strategy to timetables for the withdrawal of American troops. Behind the scenes, an elaborate political operation, organized by a coalition of antiwar groups and fine-tuned to wrestle members of Congress into place one by one, has helped nudge the debate forward.
But there are tensions in the relationship between the groups, which banded together earlier this year under the umbrella of Americans Against Escalation in Iraq, and the Democratic leadership.
On Thursday, leaders of the liberal group MoveOn.org, including Tom Matzzie, the group’s Washington director who also serves as the campaign manager for the coalition, sent a harshly worded warning to the Democratic leadership.
“In the past few days, we have seen what appear to be trial balloons signaling a significant weakening of the Democratic position,” the letter read. “On this, we want to be perfectly clear: if Democrats appear to capitulate to Bush — passing a bill without measures to end the war — the unity Democrats have enjoyed and Democratic leadership has so expertly built, will immediately disappear.”
The letter went on to say that if Democrats passed a bill “without a timeline and with all five months of funding,” they would essentially be endorsing a “war without end.” MoveOn, it said, “will move to a position of opposition.”
I hate it for them.
Posted by Woody M. at May 6, 2007 02:50 PM | TrackBackThe letter went on to say that if Democrats passed a bill “without a timeline and with all five months of funding,” they would essentially be endorsing a “war without end.”
The Democrats were pretty complicit in the war in Iraq and despite whatever rhetoric you may hear, they will continue to be so. We are in state of "war without end." Enjoy it!
Posted by e. nonee moose at May 6, 2007 04:08 PM
"without end" is a long time, moose. It feels that way to all of us because the American people - and peaceful nations in general - have an attention-span of about 4 years. But I said five years going in, and expected there to be serious annoyances in Iraq for 10.
All of this is a problem for the Democrats. The usual conservative take is to say "they made their bed, let them lie in it," but I find that petty. (Even as I think it myself I find it petty).
There are varieties of Democrats, and even those who oppose the war do so for differing reasons. Minorities and government union people are angry that domestic issues do not dominate the discussion and the war is simply the opportunity for that. Building and manufacturing union folks are not anti-military, but they tend to be isolationist. Arts & Humanities liberals tend to be reflexively anti-war and anti-military. It is from this last group that the unreasoning enraged are drawn.
The enraged are a majority of the angry liberals;
angry liberals a majority of liberals overall;
liberals a majority of the active Democrats;
active Dems a majority of the Party;
the party a majority of Democratic voters. Through this long chain the enraged come to believe they are more numerous than they really are. But those at the end of the chain don't agree with them anywhere near as much as they believe. Because the lines are not sharp, they can delude themselves into thinking that most of the country feels much as they do.
Angry conservatives have a similar chain of association that convinces them that most of the country agrees with them, BTW.
I had a point here somewhere. Ah yes. The Democrats fear to cut themselves off from the enraged for fear of a chain reaction that drains the energy away from the angry, which in turn will drain from A&H liberals, etc. They hope to get the warmth and energy from this fire without the danger.
Posted by Assistant Village Idiot at May 6, 2007 05:00 PM
For the health and well being of our country, there's nothing better that could happen than for the unreasonable in either party to find themselves marginalized. This is a perfect example of the most unreasonable of them all pitching a fit and withdrawing their support from the few reasonable ones left in their party.
I think a lot of Democrats are thinking twice now as they watch Nancy and Harry turn into the circus clowns they alwyas were. I've even talked to a couple of Democrat friends who are showing support for Republican candidates they would have eschewed only a few months ago because, in their own words, they see a danger in a Democrat Administration coupled with the Democrat Congress we have now.
In short, a couple of them are actually worried more about their taxes than the war.
Posted by Oyster at May 7, 2007 06:16 AM
Personally, no matter which road they choose, they will fail, as to side with moveon is going to be political death, and to oppose them, will mean death as it will expose them as being controlled by moveon.
Posted by Smokey at May 7, 2007 08:12 AM
