Friday, January 12, 2007

The United States of Exasperation

Following the November 2006 elections which resulted in the Democrats regaining control of the house and the senate, there was a very brief period of celebration by their supporters who knew that the next two years of having to deal with an obstinate, obstructionist, ideologically-driven, veto-wielding president would not be an easy affair.

Bush spoke once again of bipartisanship when he saw the writing on the wall but to him that meant agreeing with the likes of Joe Lieberman whom he mentioned in his speech this week on the supposed 'new way forward' in Iraq. Lieberman is as much of a Democrat on that issue as John McCain - that is to say, not at all.

John McCain, the Republican presidential hopeful for '08 who keeps getting his face slapped by Bush yet always goes back for more. McCain's idea of a surge was to add 35,000 troops. Bush gave him 21,500. McCain wanted a ban on torture. Bush agreed and then signed a signing statement giving himself the right to define what torture is. McCain, who says he will never abandon his party which he idealizes as the party of Abraham Lincoln, cannot even see just much utterly this president has destroyed it. So, he continues to stand by his man in the White House out of a sense of duty to what, exactly? I don't think even he can answer that anymore. This is not the party of Lincoln anymore, Senator McCain.

McCain is not alone in his delusions though. Even though 70% of Americans oppose the announced 'surge' (which is anything but and which Rice has dubbed as an "augmentation" - something akin to plastic surgery, I suppose), 42% of Republicans are hanging onto the belief that an escalation of troops in Iraq will actually work with nothing but blind faith to back that up. Then you have right-wingers who oppose increasing the numbers, like Peggy Noonan whom Glenn Greenwald takes to task, but blame Bush's decision on the Democrats - completely ignoring the fact that the Iraq Study Group was in fact a bipartisan group that offered Bush several realistic options for dealing with the crisis in Iraq. But that doesn't fit with the 'Democrats have no plan and they just want to cut & run' meme.

In writing about the challenges for bloggers in '07, Hunter at Daily Kos concluded that this year will be one of endurance, considering that the punditocracy will continue to push those types of memes which he dubs the politics of sport. The pathetically purile pontificating pundits will certainly continue to push their partisan talking points but the real test of endurance, in my opinion, will consist of watching more coalition troops, journalists, and Iraqis being wounded, kidnapped, tortured and killed on a daily basis while those pundits and the Bush administration keep blaming the Iraqi government and their puppet al-Maliki for everything that goes wrong - absolving the Pentagon, the State Department, and the Bush/Cheney neocon cabal from any wrongdoing. After all, they sent more troops. The Iraqis should be grateful. Right?

The lack of trust in the Bush administration has hit an all time high. When rumours of a war with Iran are rattling not only ordinary citizens and journalists but US senators like Joe Biden, the exasperation level with this rogue US regime has peaked to the point where nothing is considered too impossible for it to dream up and recklessly implement. It has been and is capable of doing anything - no matter how illegal or ill-conceived.

It seems to me that the pundits who are already busy bashing the Democrats are simply not used to seeing a congress that is more than a rubber-stamp for Bushco's policies. That makes them nervous. And instead of embracing the independence of the three branches of government, they now find themselves facing a congress that is actually willing to hold the executive branch accountable. If they actually cared about America's future, they would cheerlead an expression of democracy that takes back some control for its citizens - that at least tries to challenge the imperial presidency. And, on that front, the Democrats face a steep uphill battle.

To that end, you have Harry Reid proposing a "symbolic" resolution against troop increases that will be met by a "symbolic" filibuster if it hits the floor. Then there's Russ Feingold who wants to cut funding for the war all together while Ted Kennedy wants any funding increases tied to congressional approval of Bush's plan. They should all get together with Republican Chuck Hagel who characterized the so-called 'surge' on Thursday thusly, "the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam, if it's carried out" and come up with a way to oppose this administration that has serious teeth. Quickly.

Whatever the Democrats decide to do, it has to be much more than "symbolic". They have power and they need to use it. Now. 70% of Americans are counting on them to do just that and so is much of the rest of the world which has had to watch with complete exasperation the failure of this US administration to take real control of this disastrous war in the best interests of everyone involved.

As commenter brat wrote here today:

I'm watching in utter horror as the US careens towards all out war in the Middle East. It's like we're in a car, with Bush and Cheney at the wheel, both drinking vodka, passing the bottle back and forth, all the while careening around corners and running numerous red lights.

And we can't get out of the damned car. We're stuck i [sic] in the back seat--with the child locks on.

No exit. And Bush has just floored the accelerator.

Someone needs to pull them over, impeach them and get on with it.

No comments:

Post a Comment