Remember earlier this summer when Harry Reid and the Democrats vowed they were "going to hold the president's feet to the fire" on Iraq? Well, now it appears they've decided to play footsie with the White House instead and take what one Democratic strategist calls "a more nuanced approach" that includes backing off demands to set a firm withdrawal date.

In anticipation of next weeks' inevitably sunny side up -- and statistically cherry-picked -- report from Gen. Petraeus, the White House has cranked up its spin machine, and the Democrats are falling into their default duck-and-cover mode.

So we get Bush hopping off a plane in Australia after his eight-hour photo-op layover in Iraq and telling the Deputy Prime Minister: "We're kicking ass" -- while Democratic leaders let it be known they are hoping "to manage expectations" by lowering their sights on Iraq.

Just last week, Reid was promising "I will not let these Republicans hide. When the Senate returns to Washington, I will force them to take vote, after vote, after vote on bringing an end to the war in Iraq."

"I can't believe how Democrats are playing this game," a Republican strategist told me the other night. "They hold all the cards -- and they are folding."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huff...on_b_63398.html
more....

While the resident cheerleader continues to jump up and down and do splits and holds up giant placards saying how good his Democrats are, we still are faced with the situation of a spineless Democratic Congress failing to do what they said, which is to end the Iraq War. This is a Democratic Issue and one for which the Democrats will be held accountable for come the next election. Never forget who the Democrats really are.

Never forget who YOU are and what this is about.
This is not about the Democrats, it's about you making this personal.

For you, it's about me. You simply can't help yourself.
The issue is far more complicated than your brain can deal with.

mellow, kids, (announcement... I don't know anything. i'm still a child. When i call someone "kid' I mean it as a compliment - one who's still learning, and knows it,).

you both want the same things.
there are others out there who want your anger.
they don't want what you want.

don't give it to them.

you both want the same things.

For some reason I do not think is true. I want the Iraq War ended, yesterday. I do not make excuses for why it is not ended. I do not give a damn about a certain political party except that it acts in a way that I want it to act. My goal is not to build up and defend a certain political party. I do not frame every issue around a certain political party.

So no, I disagree that we both want the same things. Sky is not anti-war, although he pretends to be. This is all about the Democrats for him and always has been.

kids settle down, Suess stop pulling your brother's hair....lol. Check it out BACK ON TOPIC
The reason the Dems haven't went after Bush is because #1 They know that they're a shoo-in in 2008 and nobody wants all that power that Bush has created to go to waste. #2 They don't want to seem like they're supporting terrorists. #3 If you look at the legislation that Bush has passed.....They can't challenge him. And the list goes on and on. Face it the cards are stacked against the Dems

sidenote: Part of the reason for the dems caving on domestic spying was a deal struck preventing Bush from recess appointing anyone while they were on vacation.

They compromised OUR freedoms for THEIR sense of security.

They compromised OUR freedoms for THEIR sense of security.

Yes. But the approval was temporary pending future review. Still inexcusable. Should have refused the vacation and continued working.

Let us also keep something else relevant, Congress is chugging along at approval ratings that are less than ideal as well:
http://www.pollingreport.com/CongJob.htm

Looking at the numbers from 8/1 through September the low is 18% the high is 25%

Granted its for both D's and R's, but when in the majority it would seem to reflect more on that party than overall.

BOTTOM LINE: THEY'RE SCARED OF BUSH!!!

Look,
Like the American people, the Iraqi's, and the Afgan's; Congress has been duped. The Dems don't hold all the cards on Iraq because Bush is using a different deck. Congress has been making decisions based on intelligence reports put out by the Bush administration. Bush has managed to convince congress that if they challenged what he did they would be unpatriotic. Bush created legislation through signing statements that render the legislative branch helpless. Bush created another branch of government that is being run outside of the constitution and have no legislative or judicial oversite. Even if one was to begin to base their decisions on the constitution, Bush has already managed to put the restraints on them and would render the constitution useless. BOTTOM LINE: THEY'RE SCARED OF BUSH!!!

ABC News: The Blotter
On Heels of 9/11, Clinton Fundraiser Raises Eyebrows
September 11, 2007 12:02 PM

Justin Rood Reports:

Just days after the sixth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks, Hillary Clinton and several Democratic lawmakers will be getting uncomfortably cozy with moneyed interests who have stood to reap billions in post-9/11 homeland security spending, watchdog groups say.

On the sixth anniversary of the attacks which killed nearly 3,000 people, Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton is slated to attend a sober memorial service near Manhattan's Ground Zero.

One week later, the junior New York senator is scheduled to speak at a homeland security-themed, $1,000-a-plate fundraiser for her campaign in the downtown Washington, D.C. offices of a powerful legal firm.

"Being a week after 9/11, it appears unseemly and politically opportunistic," said Steve Ellis, a former Coast Guard officer who is now vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense, a Washington, D.C. good government group.

Clinton's fundraising audience is expected to include many of the government contractors and lobbyists whose fortunes have soared in the years since the attacks, which triggered a massive government reorganization and billions in new government spending.

But that's not the only objectionable feature of the event, critics say.

For the price of a ticket -- from a $1,000 personal donation to a $25,000 bundle –- attendees will get a special treat after the luncheon: an opportunity to participate in small, hour-long "breakout sessions" hosted by key Democratic lawmakers, many of whom chair important subcommittees on the Homeland Security committee.


"It's an outrage," said Danielle Brian, executive director of the Washington, D.C. good-government group Project on Government Oversight.

"You never want to see lawmakers trading on their national security credentials...to people making large donations," Ellis concurred.

The break-out sessions include:

First Responders, with Reps. Henry Cuellar, Texas (chair, Emergency Communications, Preparedness, and Response Subcommittee of Homeland Security Committee) and Nita Lowey, N.Y. (Appropriations, Homeland Security Committee)

Intelligence and Information Sharing, with Reps. Jane Harman, Calif. (chair, Intelligence, Information Sharing and Terrorism Risk Assessment Subcommittee of Homeland Security Committee) and C. A. "Dutch" Ruppersburger, Md. (chair, Technical and Tactical Intelligence Subcommittee of intelligence committee)

Border, Maritime and Global Counterterrorism, with Reps. Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas (chair, Transportation Security and Infrastructure Protection Subcommittee of Homeland Security Committee) and Jerrold Nadler, N.Y. (Transportation and Infrastructure Committee; Judiciary Committee)

Science and Technology, with Reps. Jim Langevin, R.I. (chair, Emerging Threats, Cybersecurity, Science and Technology Subcommittee of Homeland Security Committee; intelligence committee) and Ellen Tauscher, Calif. (chair, Strategic Forces Subcommittee of Armed Services Committee)

National Security, with Reps. Kendrick Meek, Fla. (Armed Services Committee) and Joseph Sestak, Pa. (Armed Services Committee)

"Political fundraising should have no relationship to policy recommendations," said Brian, a former policy analyst for Congress. "Most of these [participants] are seasoned policymakers. How can they not see this as wrong?" It only made things worse, she said, that the event was centered around so sensitive and vital a topic as homeland security.

The Clinton campaign and most lawmakers participating in the event did not respond to requests for comment for this story.

One participant, Rep. C. A. "Dutch" Ruppersberger, D-Md., said he didn't see anything wrong with the event.

"I very strongly feel that it's time we get politics out of national security," he said in an interview Monday. "It's more important than ever that we keep discussing national security."

"The unfortunate part of our [political] system is that to get your message out, you have to raise money," Ruppersberger said. "Until that system is changed, you have to have the ability to raise money so people know what you are and who you are."

Before you can do reasonable battle with the enemy with any hopes for progress,
first one must understand the enemy.
I'm wondering if George knows yet what is the difference between a Shiite and Sunni?
After all, they're both Muslims.
Can we tell which Democrats lean Right and which ones lean Left?
After all, they're both Democrats.