Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why get upset with Senate Intelligence Committee Dems?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
troublemaker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-11-04 11:24 AM
Original message
Why get upset with Senate Intelligence Committee Dems?
All findings of congressional investigations are political and negotiated. That's just the reality of it. So going into this process Jay Rockefeller, being in the minority, had a narrow range of options.

He and other committee Democrats opted for a unanimous bi-partisan finding that there was no reason for the Iraq war. The Republicans on the committee unanimously found that Saddam had no WMD, was not seeking WMD, had no meaningful connection with al Qeada, and lacked the means to even threaten Iraq's neighbors. Because of that bi-partisan finding any suggestion that there was a legitimate reason for the war is now a fringe view. That's an immense political development.

What better alternative did the Democrats have? I've seen complaints about Democrats signing onto findings they disagree with. What's missed is that individual Republicans also signed onto things they disagree with. These things are negotiated.

I think Rockefeller did an excellent job politically and, though armed with only 8 votes to the Republican's 9 votes, got the better end of this deal. If this report was not unanimous it would be a partisan report and would thus have no impact, so it was vital for the Democrats to get a unanimous report. The Democratic price for unanimity was telling the broad truth about the war. The Republican price for unanimity is that Bush not be directly implicated. Essentially the Republicans were conned into giving up the war to "save" Bush, as if there is any possibility of politically separating Bush from the war. (I can't think of a more improbable or doomed strategy for Bush than trying to run away from the Iraq war)

A bi-partisan finding that the Iraq was a mistake is devastating to Bush. The fact that the CIA is blamed is politically irrelevant. No swing voter cares about that kind of lawyerly inside-the-beltway minutiae; it's Bush's war and Bush's CIA.

And, most importantly, the CIA is not on the ballot.

Our opponents are far from infallible. I think the Republicans got taken.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC