(Crossposted at myleftwing
)
As far as I’m concerned, Senator Obama yesterday let the cat out of the bag: the Democrats are going to capitulate and let President Bush have his ‘clean’ Iraq supplemental bill. Okay, even if that wasn’t or isn’t the plan, ‘progressive’ Obama’s statement gets the capitulation bandwagon off to a roaring start.
Thanks, thanks a helluva lot, Senator.
Markos among many others has rightly criticized the inept politician (best interpretation) / war enabler (worst). But now, let’s clean up some business and admit that Big Tent Democrat over at talkleft was right on this, and the Harry Reid / Nancy Pelosi cheerleaders were wrong.
BTD has long predicted that either Bush will sign the present bill (after he discovers (he would be the last to do so (other than “binding language” David Sirota)) that its troop pull-out deadlines are mythical) or, especially now, will veto it knowing the Democrats will capitulate. The second option has to be preferred now, since Obama has relieved Bush of any doubt over whether the Democrats will stand ‘firm’ against his veto.
So now, if Bush signs the supplemental, he just gets the money. But if he vetoes, watches the Democrats capitulate and then signs the clean bill, he gets the money AND gets to watch congressional Democrats perform their excruciating ritual, “We are Weaklings in the Age of Terror.”
Has there been any dailykos criticism of Big Tent Democrat the last two, three weeks for his not hopping aboard the Supplemental Funding express? Yes, just a little, here and there. And how about David Sirota? Guess he’ll be the last guy to find out what many (including BTD) expected and based their analysis on, that the Democrats, even a vaunted ‘progressive’ like Obama, would stand soft not firm. Here’s Sirota still optimistic a couple days ago:
The real centrists are people like Ellison, Nadler, Doggett and the other antiwar Democrats standing firm – and at least judging by their public statements, it’s clear that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid understand this basic truth. Their public statements also suggest that they understand that they have a mandate to stand firm against President Bush, if he vetoes the entire bill when it reaches his desk. It will be up to us, the progressive movement, to help sustain and solidify public pressure and support for these leaders to follow through on ending the war.
Nope, don’t think so, and BTD never thought so. The ‘progressive’ pressure game is over before it started, General Obama has gone soft.
In contrast, here was BTD on March 24:
I think we all know what is going to happen — the “firm” date for withdrawal, August 31, 2008, will become a “goal.” And this “goal” was once December 31, 2006, then 2007, now 2008.
And earlier, on March 14 (emphasis added):
You want to stop the Iraq Debacle you can not fund Bush’s war. To pretend that there is another way is an insult to the intelligence of the American People. That is why I (And I speak ONLY for me) urge opposition to the House Dem Leadership/Blue Dog proposal, as it is a travesty that does nothing to end the Debacle.
He was right. He is right still. Now will we progressives act to de-fund rather than fund the occupation? Filibuster, 41 Senators, keep it simple.
