Why the Democrats are clueless
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said yesterday that Democrats should not seek a unified position on an exit strategy in Iraq, calling the war a matter of individual conscience and saying differing positions within the caucus are a source of strength for the party.
Pelosi said Democrats will produce an issue agenda for the 2006 elections but it will not include a position on Iraq.
Polls show the populace now opposes the war. Yet the Dems still can’t stand up and fight on an issue the people support them on. This isn’t ‘strength’, this is idiocy. Well, it’s complicity too, most Congressional Dems favor the war. It’s up to us, the people to demand they end it.
A political party with actual savvy would seize the war as a major issue, ram it down Dubya’s throat, then romp to victory in 2006. Hey liberals, given this Democratic non-opposition to the war, should they somehow take Congress in 2006, you think they’ll be ending the war anytime soon after that?
Are any anti-war Dems going to challenge California Dems who voted for the war, like Feinstein? Or ones who voted against it but have done nothing to stop it, like Pelosi? If we wait until November, it will be too late. It would be great not to see the names of Feinstein, Lieberman and Clinton running for re-election in November.
What anti-war Dems?
However, “Green Party anti-war leader to challenge Sen. Feinstein in California”. http://www.gp.org/press/states/ca_2005_12_15.shtml
Lowell Weicker may challenge Lieberman in CT specifically on the war. Weicker is a major political figure in CT. A while back he ran as an independent for governor, won, raised taxes, and was still hugely popular.