Top Dem decries 'idiot liberals' on war

[Amianthus]

Friday, March 09, 2007

Rep. Obey lost his temper with an anti-war constituent.
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey, D-Wisconsin, apologized Friday for a tirade against anti-war activists on Capitol Hill Monday that was secretly recorded on video and then posted on the Internet site YouTube.

In the testy exchange, Obey -- who is himself an anti-war liberal -- called the activists "idiot liberals" for encouraging him to vote against the supplemental funding bill for the Iraq war even though for the first time the bill places a binding timeline for the redeployment of U.S. forces out of Iraq.

"We're trying to use the supplemental to end the war," Obey told the unidentified women who described herself as the mother of an injured Iraq war veteran as she approached him in the hallway near his office. "You can't end the war if you're going against the supplemental. It's time these idiot liberals understand that."

Obey grew more frustrated when another unidentified person again encouraged him to cut off the funds for the war -- even though Obey had just explained Democrats don't have the votes to do so.

"How, if you don't have the votes?" Obey yelled.

He then stressed that the supplemental bill would end the war. "If that isn't good enough for you, you're smoking something illegal. You've got your facts screwed up."

"We can't get the votes," he continued angrily about the suggestion to cut off funds. "Do you see a magic wand in my pocket? How the hell are we going to get the votes for it? We ain't got the votes for it. We do have the votes if you guys quit screwing it up. We do have the votes to end the legal authority for the war. That's the same as de-funding it."

At that point, a woman who appeared to be an aide led the animated congressman back to his office and shut the door.

In a statement issued Friday afternoon, after the Internet posting and after congressional Republicans emailed news of the outburst to reporters, Obey said, "I am sorry I yelled at them. I respect their passion on the issue. I wish they would respect mine. We are both frustrated, and that led us to have an argument that we never should have had because we both want to see an end to U.S. involvement in that war. What divided us was the question of how."

Obey was videotaped by someone who stood behind him and who held the camera below waist level. Obey didn't know he was being recorded, an aide told CNN. It was posted on YouTube by an organization identified as "grassrootsamerica4us.org."

-- CNN Congressional Producer Ted Barrett

Article

[sirs]

Friday, March 09, 2007

In the testy exchange, Obey -- who is himself an anti-war liberal -- called the activists "idiot liberals" for encouraging him to vote against the supplemental funding bill for the Iraq war even though for the first time the bill places a binding timeline for the redeployment of U.S. forces out of Iraq.  "We're trying to use the supplemental to end the war," Obey told the unidentified women who described herself as the mother of an injured Iraq war veteran as she approached him in the hallway near his office. "You can't end the war if you're going against the supplemental. It's time these idiot liberals understand that."

Krauthammer- "Slowly bleeding our forces by defunding what our commanders think they need to win (the House approach) or rewording the authorization of the use of force so that lawyers decide what operations are to be launched (the Senate approach) is no way to fight a war. It is no way to end a war. It is a way to complicate the war and make it inherently unwinnable -- and to shirk the political responsibility for doing so."

Perhaps that's precisely the idea.  Make the war unwinnable and a self-proclaiming prophecy, while shrinking their responsibility for it.  Kind of a win-win scenario     

[Michael Tee]

<<Perhaps that's precisely the idea.  Make the war unwinnable and a self-proclaiming prophecy, while shrinking their responsibility for it.  Kind of a win-win scenario   >>

Sounds good to me.  Just a tad slow, though.   

[_JS]

Perhaps that's precisely the idea.  Make the war unwinnable and a self-proclaiming prophecy, while shrinking their responsibility for it.  Kind of a win-win scenario

I believe that Obey was referencing the binding timeline, not some nefarious method of making the war unwinnable. The Bush administration and the former Defense Secretary have already done a superb job of doing just that, without any help from the House, the Senate, or even Iran.

I wonder who next week's scapegoat will be.

[Xavier_Onassis]

<<Perhaps that's precisely the idea.  Make the war unwinnable and a self-proclaiming prophecy, while shrinking their responsibility for it.  Kind of a win-win scenario   >>

========================================================================================
Let us assume that the Juniorbushies are incapable of winning this mess, and the objective is to withdraw in such a way as to lose the fewest troops and spend the least money as possible.

Given the powers of Congress, what would YOU do, Mr Smartypants?

Juniorbush, Cheney & Co. have already had longer than either WWI or WWII. There is no reason to assume that more patience under such bungling leadership will result in a more victorious result. Unless Petraeus delivers a truly hasty miracle, there is no real chance of anything resembling a victory.

[sirs]

<<Perhaps that's precisely the idea.  Make the war unwinnable and a self-proclaiming prophecy, while shrinking their responsibility for it.  Kind of a win-win scenario   >>

========================================================================================

Let us assume that the Juniorbushies are incapable of winning this mess, and the objective is to withdraw in such a way as to lose the fewest troops and spend the least money as possible.

I'm not going to make that assumtion.  I have no reason to, if the military is allowed to do what it is that the surge is designed to do

Given the powers of Congress, what would YOU do, Mr Smartypants?

Krauthammer already answered that question..."Now, more than four years later, the Democrats want out of the resulting war. Most, such as Rep. John Murtha, want to do so for a simple reason: They think the war is lost. If you believe that, then getting out is the most reasonable and honorable and patriotic policy.  Congress has the power to do that by cutting off the funds.[/b]

[Plane]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070313/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_iraq

Officials said Speaker Nancy Pelosi (news, bio, voting record) and other members of the leadership had decided to strip from a major military spending bill a requirement for Bush to gain approval from Congress before moving against Iran.