Monday, March 05, 2007

On Target



At its website currently devoted to preparations for the March 17 march on the Pentagon, the A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism) responds to Bush's "surge" speech by saying in part:

"For their part, the Democrats in Congress are involved in a...complicated dance. They want to posture as opponents of Bush's escalation and so-called surge without taking responsibility for bringing the war to a close. They could cut funding for the war which is their exclusive Constitutional prerogative. But they will absolutely refuse to take this responsibility. They are merely posturing for the 2008 elections hoping to take advantage of the well deserved public disgust for Bush and the Iraq war.

"The issue right now for the anti-war movement can not simply be opposition to a surge or an escalation: the issue is the war itself. The troops must be brought home now. As in Vietnam, that is the only solution. Those who initiated the war and who funded the war should be held accountable for one of the great crimes of the modern era."

How accurate is ANSWER's estimate of Democrats' cynicism and moral vacuity? The answer isn't hard to find, and as usual "It's in the P-I." From the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, via Digby's Blog, Hullabaloo:

"Washington Democrats Sen. Patty Murray and Rep. Jay Inslee requested last week that (state) legislators drop bills calling for impeachment investigations of Bush and against the troop surge in Iraq.

"They say such measures will increase political fighting at home while slowing the progress to get U.S. troops out of the fighting in Iraq.

"'Inslee and Murray are trying to tell state legislators that the efforts are a waste of time,' said Inslee's spokeswoman, Christine Hanson.

"'At the federal level, impeachment talks are more distracting than productive,' added Murray spokesman Alex Glass.

"State Sen. Eric Oemig, D-Kirkland, introduced the impeachment bill. Another bill that calls for the U.S. to refrain from increasing troop presence in Iraq is sponsored by Sen. Jeanne Kohl-Welles, D-Seattle."

Contrasting with this pathetic and hypocritical performance by congressional Democrats, Richard Mynick, posting at The Rag Blog comments:

"We have a Constitution which defines a separation of powers. It also defines procedures for impeaching officials who violate its bedrock principles -- in particular, its Bill of Rights, its separation of powers, and its foundational notion that power derives from the consent of the governed. We make elected officials swear an oath to "protect and defend" this Constitution. Why bother with all this, if, when the day of tyranny finally arrives, the Constitution's own provisions are not used to defend the document's principles against the would-be tyrants who have so egregiously violated them?

"In November, US voters told Washington that the public does not support the war; sees with increasing clarity that it is immoral and was launched on false pretexts; and wants it terminated. In response, Vice-Emperor Cheney snarled in a TV interview with an obsequious Bush toady that regardless of what the public or Congress might say about it, the White House intends not only to continue the war, but to escalate it."

And the reaction of Patty Murray and Jay Inslee to this is to say, "But we don't like it?" They seriously contend that they have better things to do?

It's been painfully obvious for over a month now that Democrats, not Republicans, are the real obstacle to ending the war. Republicans never pretended to want to end it, but Democrats, who reassumed power riding a tidal wave of antiwar sentiment, have now pulled the classic bait-and-switch. We demanded bread, and they gave us a stone.

It's time to take the struggle into the streets. Visit the ANSWER website to arrange transportation to Washington, D.C. for the march on the Pentagon on March 17. You also might want to think about getting involved in the wave of occupations of congressional offices now sweeping the country, and targeting mainly so-called antiwar Democrats. And if the Occupation Project, the group at the center of this seizure and occupation movement doesn't already have the office of the mealy-mouthed senator from Washington, Mrs. Murray on their list of targets, she should go to the very top.

No comments: