JIM WEBB AND HIS VOTE TO GIVE MORE MONEY TO THE DEBACLE?

I can't stand how the Democrats, my party, a party I am not leaving, just to clarify, continue to threaten Bush and the Republicans on the issue of war funding.

Then, at the moment of truth, they (the Dems) back down every time.

I am fully aware that the Democrats do not have the votes to overcome a fillibuster or override a veto, but if they are going to talk tough they need to follow through.

They could have at least voted against the "no strings attached funding."

With half of the Democrats in the Senate voting for the blank check/war funding, and 78 members in the House of Representatives as well, there is just no defending it.

What am I suppossed to tell the right-wing/pro-war element next time I'm confronted by them?  They will tell me, hey John, your Senator and Congresswoman voted for it.  How, as someone who is anti "Iraq" war suppossed to defend my elected officials who I voted for, who are voting with Bush.

And it is not a vote to "cut off funding."  It's a vote "not to give Bush a blank check" like the Democrats swore they would not do, then at the moment of truth, they all back down.

The Republicans would follow George w. Bush and Mitch McConnell to the gates of hell.

Reid and Pelosi condemn the blank check and half the Democratic members of Congress vote for it.

I know I'm in Philly now, however, I am running into a lot of people who are leaving the Democratic party because of this.

My RX for the Democrats would be unification & and standing together strong in solidarity.

when they know damn well they can't follow through.  I mean, I loved Jim Webb's line in his SOTU response last year about showing Bush the way, but...when Dem's don't actually "show him the way," of course people are going to be pissed. It's called the "revolution of rising expectations," I believe.

Very much for bringing attention to this on your VA blog.  I appreciate it.

Talk soon

- John  

John Bruhns echoes/mirrors my thoughts exactly.  Back when Gore ran for President I would be infuriated by his designed non-responses to almost all questions on major issues.  Drove my wife nuts complaining about this.  

Then Kerry ran and I again drove my much-better half to her computer room because of my anger over Kerry's non-responses to questions similar to those put to Gore.

But, being a loyal Democrat, I voted for both men and died the death of a thousand cuts as election results trickled in during both election evenings.

Now, believing from the start that Hillary was the better choice of the candidates, I again became pissed off over her stance on the war, her non-explanations of her stance and voting record so similar to those of Gore and Kerry, and her nebulous positions on other issues that I would vote for Obama in an instant, if he were the nominee.  I'm not such a fool as to believe the garbage spewed by Bill and Hillary Clinton-hater and basher, Chris Matthews (Hey, Chris, who could EVER match the moral uprightedness and courage of JFK--even with his failing back and constant pain he could take on the airline stewardesses and other bimbos pimped for him by his advance men--that's courage).

I recognize, as I've said before that a primary campaign is not the same as a Presidential campaign, and positions must be waffled and shifted in order to win the primaries.  But Hillary's votes and explanations about a war that I, a constant reader of the Washington Post, saw as immoral and unnecessary, based on solid reporting, not on opinion columns.  Yet she stood up for a vote authorizing this nit-wit to get 4,000 of our troops killed and thousands messed up for life.  Not to mention 100,000 innocent Iraquis killed.

At least Edwards apologized for his vote.  She won't.  I'm fed up with both of them for casting that vote because I know why they did cast it--they knew we'd easily send Iraq's forces to hell and they didn't want to look like fools on the wrong side.

I could even forgive that.  What gets me is just what pissed Bruhns off.  This blank check business to a man who utterly refuses to compromise his idiotic positions and then, in turn, is supported by so many Democrats after they exhibit, for show only, petulent indignation and spouted empty threats, that's anathema to me.

I'll again vote Democratic.  But with great anger and disgust toward a party that, except for the crumbs it throws us when they achieve power, sounds as corrupt as istheir  opposition party.

soccerdem,

Thank you for sharing your thoughts and getting them out in the open.  Hopefully, if more people like us are able to successfully convey our frustrations to our elected officials, maybe, just maybe they will get the memo and bring out the necessary change they promised us.

Your friend,
John Bruhns

WE need to put the pressure on our politicians. Call Webb, Call Warner and Goode et al. Granted, they never answer but it is up to us to stand up and tell them how thoroughly pissed off we are-at them and at the party in general. Just imagine if we had a majority leader like Feingold or Dodd instead of Reid.

Just imagine what might be done. And of course the Blue Dogs need to be voted out.

leftofcenter,

Very well said.

Your friend,
John Bruhns

also voted to stick with "pay as you go" rules, which I strongly support.

The House voted 352-64 on Wednesday to delay an expansion of the alternative minimum tax. All 64 ''no'' votes came from Democrats who wanted the $50 billion cut in anticipated revenues to be offset, either with spending cuts or tax increases on wealthy groups. They were dismayed that the party had abandoned its no-deficit-spending pledge.

The point is, the Democratic Party needs to be a big tent party.  Personally, I'm not going to agree 100% with anyone on anything, but as Ronald Reagan said, somebody who is 80 percent my friend is not my enemy.  Obviously, I'd rather have Progressives -- Democratic, Republican, Green, Reform, whatever -- than Conservatives in every district.  Until that happens, I'll stick with the 80 percent rule.

http://patrickmurphy.house.gov

A blue dog, Iraq veteran, and Congressman with the courage to vote no on the "blank check" and "no strings attached" war funding.

..on MTP that we are leaning toward being a facist country.
We are run by the big corporations. The media runs the stories they want and ignores the important ones.
What happend to Jim Webb? Our soldiers are being held hostage in Iraq. They are not the casualties cause the soldiers are NOT going out on patrol.
What are they doing? Sitting on a base and...
Bring them home NOW. I will vote for no Dem anymore who doesn't stop this insane money pit called Iraq.
The media consistently has Mr. 20% on TV sounding off on drivel like he is making news. The guy is out of his everlovin.
Call your rep or senator and tell them. OUT NOW.

I did see and hear Ron Paul on Meet The Press.  And while I totally disagree with most of his policy issues, with exception to the war in Iraq, I thought he was very candid, clear, and straight forward in every answer he gave to Russerts' questions.  It was one of the most honest performances I have ever seen from a politician.  But when he says we should do away with the DOE, IRS, etc ... he kind of loses me there.

However, you comment:

"Call your rep or senator and tell them. OUT NOW."

If enough people do that , they will get the memo.  We just have be smart and professional about it.  If we conduct ourselves properly we can and will be effective.

I very much admire and respect your passion for ending the war in Iraq.

Your friend,
John Bruhns  

Anyone who knows me knows I'm with Edwards, here is just glimpse of why I am supporting Edwards 100%

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

On Iraq:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

- JB

but John, how do we be professional and get the word to our representatives. I write letters, call, email, fax, sign petitions. I have been to marches in DC and the media doesn't cover it.
So... what now? I look forward to your response.

I think if they won't carry out the mandate given to them by the American people in 06', a mandate that they used as a platform to get elected, and a mandate they agreed upon -- they should be ousted in the primary elections.

I know a lot of people will find that offensive, but I'm not on this earth to handle politicians with kids gloves.

2006, in my opinion was an election to "CHANGE COURSE IN IRAQ."  However, I do concede it was not the only issue.  But it does supersede all other issues.

Until we stop wasting billions, that will add up to trillions of dollars, we can't take care of the issues here at home that matter to Americans.

So if candidates run on a platform of change, but deliver no change, why trust them and vote for them again.

Webb, eventhough I disagree with his vote has been consistent.  He never advocated for a date certain for troop withdrawal, and never said he would vote against funding -- to my knowledge anyway.  

Having said that I am still very disappointed in him, for voting for a "BLANK CHECK."   There is no sugarcoating.

The Democrats didn't have to "cut the funding" , but they sure did not have to make threat after threat that "Bush won't get his money without conditions" , then fold like a cheap suit when Bush threatens to veto their legislation.

They should have kept their word that they would not give Bush any money without limitations on how he could spend it.

They failed us.

If your member of Congress is ignoring you on this mattter.  They don't deserve to be in office, and remember on election day.  We need to find candidates with backbone and the courage to do what is right , and unseat these "do nothings" that are just collecting a paycheck they don't deserve.

... and now we have a debacle in pakistan. jeezua.