Dems were largely elected yesterday because of Iraq. I don't think voters will allow the new congress to do nothing about it for 2 years. The time has come for dems to actually communicate their plan to all of us, instead of simply saying Bush's plan ain't working. Voters will be angry at the new congress if we are having this same discussion about Iraq 2 years from now. Border protection? Red, that bill was passed by the conservative House at the end of last year. H.R. 4437 passed with 82% of dems opposing it. Dems want an amnesty program, like Bush. Unfortunately, I see Pelosi and Bush standing side-by-side at a bill signing ceremony next year touting their wonderful amnesty plan. 10 years later will be having another discussion about our illegal immigration problem. Dems better be careful the next 2 years if they want the White House. Voters didn't vote for them, they voted against republicans. That kind of support is very fickle.
Agreed, Better learn to speak and read spanish because we will now get amnesty for all the Illegals in this country. A lot of areas around Denver including my sons school, everything is in english and spanish. I always said everything was the Republicans to lose and they did but the country will pay the price for voting for a party that is anti-everything. Remember what Clinton said the other night campaigning for a democrat in Virginia? “Republicans will have you believe that Democrats will tax you into the poor house and that you’ll meet a terrorist around every corner and trip over an illegal immigrant on the way there.” Bill Clinton seems to think that terrorism and the immigration issue is a some joke. Some might think this is funny but we shouldn't make jokes over serious problems. So someone has elected a party that denigrates the troops and jokes about immigration and terrorism. Like I always said it was the Republicans to lose.
Bush is still in control and the new House will not be able to make changes because of the veto. The democrats can't really fashion a plan until they have a candidate for the White House to get behind. And why should they? The best bet for now is to let the republicans take the heat for their plan until they try to work with the democrats to fashion a new one. The 2008 election campaign is where you will start hearing new democratic plans. The republicans have to come up with a plan, too, because they damn sure ain't going into 2008 with the neocon plan that they are saddled with now. Bush has failed to enforce the illegal immigration laws already on the books, prosecutions for hiring ilegals dropped 400% since 2000. The 700 mile fence is 1800 miles too short. He was dragged into the bill against his will. I just don't see him enforcing or improving the border situation in the next two years. I had to stand in line behind nine Mexican painters (non-english speaking) to buy lunuch at Churches chicken yesterday. Not lettuce pickers. Painters taking jobs from Americans and enriching contractors who are breaking immigration laws. It will still be an issue in 2008 True 'dat. The Democrats have to be smart. The voters were sending a message all right. It was not that they want the Democrats to start being obstructionists and making things worse. They want the democrats to make government work effectively again and exercise some oversight of an out-of-control executive. If the Dems are smart they will get behind efforts to reach bipartisan agreement on as many issues as possible in the next two years. The voters will like that a lot. And the Republicans had better be smart enough to involve the democrats in decision-making. If they still try to operate an imperial presidency and shut out the democratic majority representatives of the people in the House . . . they could lose another hundred seats in 2008 and the White House, too. I think the democrats are not going to be obstructionist, they are looking ahead to 2008, when they can really get something accomlished. The republicans, likewise, are going to change their course in a big way or they will go into 2008 facing the same issues that cost them 2006. We all win if they start working together.
And that's the new Democrat mantra. "We got control of Congress , but anything goes wrong and its still Bush's fault.:dis: So, for 2 years we've heard Demos say "we need a change" but they won't change a damn thing, lest Bush look good? That's about right.
This is a good point. The way I see it the Democrats have a real problem here. They are against the war in Iraq and say its Vietnam. Will they approve the funding for Iraq or will they not? If they don't approve funding then they have a big problem and then if they do they go against everything they've said about it since Kerry voted for it and then voted against it. Not much will change, prepare for gridlock and Democrats investigating Republicans the next 2 years. Which is it? Support the troops and the war with funding or not? Bush's biggest problem is that he would never defend his policies the last 2 years while liberals had a field day attack after attack. At least the terrorists and democrats are happy today!
The House dems will have oversight and control over spending money on Iraq. I really don't believe people voted for them yesterday with the hopes of them doing nothing about Iraq, except to continue bashing Bush. They can't force Bush to withdraw troops, but they can make it very difficult on him to continue down this same road. I can't imagine the majority party of the House would not tell us their plan on Iraq when they are responsible for oversight and spending ... but I hope they don't. It'll only hurt them. Sooner or later, you guys will have to stop blaming Bush. Dems have the House, and may end up with the Senate. When you are in the minority, not much else you can do but complain. But the game has changed. Dems have power. Voters will not be happy if they don't address the illegal immigration issue.
Well, its really only control of the House. The GOP has the Senate, the Executive branch, and the Judicial branch of government.
Not until he is gone, amigo. Hell, Sourdough is still trying to blame Clinton! Bush is still the top bananna and the failed Iraq policies are his. Sooner or later, you guys will have to stop enabling Bush.
Complaining is easy. Doing something about it is a different story. I don't see anyway the dems can get around not doing something on the issues that got them elected if they want to stay in power. But hey, I hope they don't!:thumb: BTW, Rumsfeld just resigned...
Here is the difference. I have openly admitted at this forum the mistakes and that I don't agree with the way the war in Iraq has been handled, that doesn't mean I'm against it! Yes, the Clinton Administration was a disaster as far as any war on terror, most people acknowledge that. I have criticized Bush and his administration for various reasons as well as Clinton. Some people will never admit or acknowledge that Clinton ever did anything wrong including war on terror. My post above just made another point that John Kerry and Bill Clinton last week made comments in bad taste, whether a joke or not shows just how they seem to feel about important issues in this country. I didn't blame Clinton above just stated that the Democrats haven't helped themselves by making jokes out of serious issues in this country. But, hey, Its the leftist, liberals day, all we need is Bush to declare Iraq Vietnam now, Rumsfeld resigned, Merry Christmas, its what some wanted. Maybe Bush will resign now, he has been a fiasco IMHO with the one exception and that was his response to 9/11 and fighting terrorism with the exception of the way the war in Iraq has been handled! You see, I tell it like it is but as much as I blame and don't like Clinton I don't care for some of the Bush administation policies. Long live Conservative Republicans!
