Mark Shields on the Iraq War Vote

By: Lowell
Published On: 5/25/2007 10:11:22 PM

Mark Shields is one of the best political analysts out there; I respect him greatly.  In addition, Shields is a strong, passionate Democrat.  When Mark Shields talks, I listen carefully.  Anyway, tonight on the PBS NewsHour, Mark analyzed the Iraq War funding vote (bolding added by me for emphasis):

...I think anybody who pretends to be surprised at the outcome, frankly, does not understand the United States' political system. I mean, we don't have a parliamentary system. If we had a parliamentary system, the Bush administration would have fallen last November, because there was a vote of no confidence in that election, both in Iraq and in the president.

But we have a presidential system. He's elected for a term. The Democrats had a majority. They did not have enough votes to overturn. Without any change in the administration's policy, the president was going to prevail in a showdown over funding troops.

But I think the debate is there. I think Republicans now have made it pretty clear that September becomes the crucial moment for them. They're not going to go much further in continuing this unanimous, loyal support to the president and to his policy in Iraq. And I think that's where we are. And September reality becomes big casino.

In other words, there's hope that this supposed "defeat" will turn to victory - a major course change - in September.  What happened yesterday should be seen as part of a slow process, an extremely frustrating process, but an unavoidable process given our system of government ("the worst one ever invented, except for all the other ones?")
By the way, when it comes to Iraq, Shields explains that rank-and-file Democrats want to get out of Iraq, but they do NOT want to cut off funding for the troops:

...the New York Times-CBS poll yesterday showed three out of four Americans believe the war is going badly. One out of two believe it's going very badly. Now, three out of five say we never should have gone there.

Yet when they asked, "Should we pull out right now?" One out of eight says, yes, cut off funding. So, I mean, what you're really talking about is, you know, a very small percentage of people who are quite vocal, who are, I'm sure, sincere, but they are not anywhere near a plurality, let alone a majority.

In sum, the American people have strongly concluded that the Iraq War is a debacle, but they overwhelmingly do NOT want to cut off funding.  In contrast, many liberal activists want to do whatever it takes - including cutting off funding - to get us out of Iraq.  There's a definite tension there, and a big part of what we're seeing play out right now politically.

Anyway, the bottom line is that we now move on to September.  We also move on to the key battle on this issue: persuading Republicans to pressure President Bush that it's time for a major course correction in Iraq, that the current policy is categorically - and DISASTROUSLY - not working.  If that happens, my prediction we'll start to see significant movement this fall on Iraq.  If it doesn't happen, I definitely don't think we'll see much change for the better until we get a new President, hopefully a Democrat, on January 20, 2009.  Let's hope we don't have to wait that long.

Comments



Shields Is Exactly Right (Lee Diamond - 5/25/2007 10:16:25 PM)
The shrill left is not helping matters.  I will not give another cent to MoveOn.  They are ridiculous.


Unfortunately, the Commander in Chief (Lowell - 5/25/2007 10:29:30 PM)
has a HUGE advantage when the country is at war.  Doesn't matter if it's FDR, LBJ, or Commander Codpiece (Dubya).  I'm not sure what any of can do, excpet to fight really hard for the White House and Congress in 2008.


On "... fight[ing] really hard for the White House and Congress in 2008." (john4_SamRasoul_2008 - 5/26/2007 8:13:34 AM)
Hello Lowell,

You are exactly right about that, and in sitting Congressperson Bob Goodlatte (R-VA-6th); we have a straight down the line Bush II Régime supporter.  Ordinarily Congressman Goodlatte is untouchable.

But in the 2008 race there is to be a promising opposition in Candidate Sam Rasoul (D-VA-6th).  For more information please go here: < http://www.sam2008.c... >



White House About to Change Course? (Lowell - 5/25/2007 10:35:50 PM)
According to the New York Times, it looks like the White House may change course on Iraq pretty dramatically:

The Bush administration is developing what are described as concepts for reducing American combat forces in Iraq by as much as half next year, according to senior administration officials in the midst of the internal debate.

It is the first indication that growing political pressure is forcing the White House to turn its attention to what happens after the current troop increase runs its course.

So, what was all this about the Democrats being defeated?  I don't THINK so!  :)



They've been saying that for the last 2 years... (Tom Joad (Kevin) - 5/26/2007 6:18:30 AM)
"We'll pull out by 2006...mid-2006...by the end of 2006...no make that the begining of 2007...2008?" Republicans are playing stall ball with Iraq. They want to lay this withdrawl on the feet of another administration. Pretty sick if you ask me considering Bush is using our troops as human body shields for his policies.


Yes, the Bush Administration appears to be (Lowell - 5/26/2007 7:40:57 AM)
trying to hand on as long as possible, preferably until the end of their Administration so they can pass this fiasco onto the next President.  Very responsible of them, huh?


I agree (Pain - 5/25/2007 10:40:06 PM)
What is rather striking is that McConnell already came out and said that come fall, the republicans are going to be looking for a change in direction. 

That to me says they want to steal back any democratic victory by saying 'oh, our bad, sorry'.  We can't let that happen.  We need to drive this stik up the fat hogs ass, so to speak.

I don't know how we proceed, but they can NOT be allowed to shift focus to them being the saviors here.  That can not happen.



Exactly, that's the ballgame right there. (Lowell - 5/25/2007 10:50:11 PM)
I saw McConnell, and that guy is one clever mother******.  I just hope the Dems have people on their side who are just as clever if not more so.


Mark Shields (Gordie - 5/25/2007 11:55:48 PM)
Harry Reid and the rest of this splineless group of Democrats can do all the Republican spin they want, but they all sold the voters down the drain. There is only one way to show these spineless group the message and that is to show them the door.
November '06 I wished for all incumbants to be defeated. It would give the Democrats absolute control of both houses and would have gotten rid of a bunch of lying spineless corporate yes men and women. Since that did not happen, I was thankful the Democrats got control but at what price. Reid and the rest of them are going to blow it with their stratagey to win the WH in '08. "We will never back down" Ha. The first little bit of spine from the WH and they back down.
The heck with Moveon. I am with Edwards all the way. He was right to keep throwing a similaer bill back into Bushes face. He would have signed it. This war is too important to him and his War Monger buddies. Heck they all have to get their pensions build up for the next 30 years when they are out of control of the WH and Congress. But if we don't get rid of the Corporate backing Demo's, things will never change. Reid and Kennedy are on top of the list. They are selling out our Government, SS, Health System, etc. for a bunch of voters who cannot even vote.
OBama and Hillary wait till the bill is pasted and then vote NO. Talk about spineless, safe thinking individuals.

Slowly I am backing Edwards and hoping he wins it all. It sounds like others are getting scared of Edwards. The spin against him is starting to flow from other camps.



I'm sorry you feel that way (humanfont - 5/26/2007 12:43:26 PM)
I'm disgusted by Edward's plan to use ordinary guys in the field as part of a game of political chicken.  I hate this war as much as the next guy, but until we errode support in the Republican ranks, this strategy isn't going anywhere. The zero sum politics of the Bushies only works so long as the other side is willing to be the patsy.  Now Bush has the money, the Republicans are further associated with this war.  He can't run video all summer of troops getting killed cause they don't have what they need.  This fall he won't be able to blame the lack of funding for a failure of his strategy, and push for a second surge.  Folding isn't a bad strategy when you are out of position and you have a weak hand.  Democrats will be in a solid position this fall.  Nothing in Iraq will change for the better.  The election calendar will be in place, and every Republican will be trying to figure out how to support a withdrawl bill that gets us out by March 08.  This will acomplish exactly what the Democrats wanted to do in this supplemental. 


Sorry (Gordie - 5/26/2007 6:03:41 PM)
that so many people are interested in getting elected and reelected in '08.

The more no one does nothing and lets Bush go his way by funding this war, the question looms over all our heads; "Who will be the last to die for this mistake of a War or should I say Civil War."

Are we all really going to let our elected officials give up with out a fight? Just let them sit and wait till September and 500 more of our troops die, just so the Democratic Congress can say " I told you so".

Sounds sick and cowardly to me.



Why are you letting your frustration (Catzmaw - 5/26/2007 9:43:40 PM)
lead you to an over-simplified and narrow and completely bogus interpretation of what's going on here?  The fact is that Bush would rather let our guys die to make his point than to give in on the timelines issue.  That's got nothing to do with people worrying about their re-election prospects.  The fact is that there was no way of mustering enough support to override the President's veto - it can't be done when you don't have a majority and the Dems DO NOT have a majority in the Senate.  The fact is that as long as the Dems let the issue be them and not the President's conduct of this war they were giving Bush and the neocons the opportunity to continue Bush's course.  When the inevitable failure came they would have had the ammunition to claim it was the Dems' fault for not passing the funding provision.  You want a quick, easy, simple, straightforward solution.  It's not possible. It's not going to happen.  And you should consider getting behind the people who are trying to get us out of this mess whatever way they can.  No one promised it would happen right away.


I am behind (Gordie - 5/28/2007 7:42:48 AM)
the democratic congress, I just don't like to see them fold their hand as soon as they did. Also I hate to see them get the mic and make stupid statements like we will fund the war before there is any reason to say it. or like Harry Reid saying we will never give in and then as soon as they cannot override Bush's veto they fold.

I want them to make this issue all about the troops, but our leaders have no way of doing that. They should have been out their ever hour bashing Bush for not supporting the troops when he vetoed the funding bill.

The Democrats have no ideal of how to spin. Republicans are masters of that and let me say if they had not back this villege idiot they would be in power for the next 30 years. No I am not a Republican, but I can appreciate a plan of spinning their agenda, even if it is filled with lies.

The point of keeping Bush in the spot light for this ugly war is a sound point and I certainly understand it. It is also a point the Republicans will not talk about. BUT then you validate my point that it is all about winning elections.

This statement "Bush would rather let our troops die then give into a timeline" really has me confused. I thought they were dying now. Like being on another record month.

So my question still is how many records are we going to set for troops dying and who will be the last to die for this ugly war.

And I hope Congress is enjoying their VACATION while our troops die for them. HA and they bash the Iraqie parliment for wanting to take a vacation. Shame on all of them to pass a piece of junk so it looks like they are doing something for Memorial Day. I hope the news pundits are correct, "They are all getting an earfull during this mini vacation".