“We’re going to come back, regroup, find a consensus position,” a senior House Democratic aide said Friday, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the continuing negotiations. “People are unhappy with the war. We have to conduct oversight. We have to push the president in a new direction. We have to find a way to do that that makes the caucus comfortable, and I think we can.”
During his conference call, Senator McConnell suggested that Republicans might counter with their own plan to force Democrats to vote for or against cutting off financing for the troops entirely. “We have only one option, and that is to decide whether or not to fund the mission,” Mr. McConnell said.
But Democrats say they intend to make the debate about the military mission, not the money.
“McConnell presents a false choice,” said Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York. “The overwhelming majority disagree with the mission that this fighting has devolved into, which is policing a civil war, and what we’re looking at is far more in consonance with what the American people want.”
Sen. Schumer evidently is not paying attention to "what the American people want". The public is "unhappy" not about the war itself, but the lack of apparent success. If Sen. Schumer consults Congress.org where there is an opinion pole INRE the House Resolution 54% of those participating, and contacting their representatives to say so, are actually more "unhappy" with the House Resolution. Only 46% of opinion poll respondees say they support the House in their attempts to micromanage Iraq.
To add fuel to the fire in our "poll happy" world, this result echos two polls last week from THe Moriah Group, and Investors Business Daily. Now, I'm not much of a poll person myself because I find it absurd that you can ask 1000 Americans anything, and assume it is an accurate portrayal of the entire nation's opinions. But hey... when playing the poll of the pols game, surely three similar results has to stand for something. Like perhaps Congressional wishful thinking?
It might further be noted that few to none of the MSM is spending much coverage on these polls, who's results challenge their heretofore confident "most Americans...." BS.
Instead Congress goes the extra mile to mask their true intents of thwarting any chance of success in Iraq.
Representative Joe Sestak, a Pennsylvania Democrat and retired three-star admiral, also expressed criticism of the Murtha plan, saying that Congress should not meddle in tactical matters but should concentrate on setting a date for withdrawal of all forces from Iraq.
In the Senate, where at least four Democrats are running for president, each with an Iraq plan, Democratic leaders are pursuing a plan to repeal the war authorization and replace it with language narrowing the military mission. Democrats concede that the plan to revise the authorization, backed by Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., Democrat of Delaware and one of the presidential candidates, is unlikely to garner enough votes to pass, but they hope to pick up enough Republican votes to embarrass Mr. Bush.
I can only ask this of Mr. Sestak. What is setting a date for withdrawl of all forces but an obvious attempt to meddle in tactical matters? Surely troop presence is a tactical strategy.
The 2007 mid term elections was a very slim win for the Dems, and those elected with the "D" behind their name were more moderate in nature than the House leadership of Pelosi, Murtha, Biden and ilk.
They would do well to pay attention to how they are interpreting public opinion, since this is their "god" for action. Americans do not see losing as an option.