Reid, Pelosi and others who are now in control of the Legislative branch are terrified that action on their part to end the Bush Crime Family's "amusement" in Iraq will result in their own defeat at the polls next time they run for re-election. Thirteen years of Soviet-style Republican rule has turned Democrats into whimpering cowards where it concerns the requirements laid on them by their oath of office and the US Constitution.
The combination of screaming charges of "supporting the terrorists" from the Republican swine who still have found ways and means to control both (now fully corrupted) branches of Congress, coupled with the degenerate howl from right-wing dominated talk radio and television of "traitors!" that would flow like muck from a thousand backed-up, flop-house toilets, guarantees the Democrats are capable of nothing but empty posturing and whiney rhetoric. Bush's criminal occupation (very likely soon to be Hillary's) continues apace. Endlessly."
Wrapping things up with the Kucinich interview, I commented, "There is a lot of talk that the Democrats are afraid of being attacked viciously, if they do this and stop the funding."
Kucinich really nailed it with his reply, "Fear is not a basis to run a government in a Democracy."
The biggest conclusion I reach from this is that Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, the leaders of the Democratic party, are failing to stop the war. Either one could, virtually single-handedly, lead their parties by refusing to bring any funding legislation to the floor. No legislation on the floor-- no funding.
I also asked Thom Hartmann to comment on my what would it look like after the dems told Bush no more money question. Here's his reply
The day after Congress refuses to fund any more of the occupation of Iraq, American will be on the road to becoming America again. FDR said that we don't covet the property of any other nation; JFK said that "America will never start a war." Republicans in the past 5 years have done both, and it's fundamentally treasonous to the ideals of this nation. When Congress finally says "No" to the third George to be President of the US, we'll be taking a step not unlike that taken by the Founders when they said "No" to the third George to be a King of England.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
