War Funding Would Break Dem Promises (blame Pelosi)

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is about to lead her party into a major showdown over Iraq funding by violating two Democratic campaign pledges in one fell swoop. To the critics, whether anti-war activists or House Republicans, Pelosi has made her feelings clear: Get over it. This week’s maneuvering over a $200 billion war spending bill has revealed Pelosi self-confidently playing what she believes — with increasing evidence — is a strong hand.

Strong enough that she is expected to break one promise — her 2006 pledge for a more open and inclusive committee process — by circumventing the powerful House Appropriations Committee on the Iraq bill. And when the final Iraq bill reaches the president’s desk, any troop withdrawal conditions are likely to be gone from the legislation. That is another 2006 pledge that has fallen by the wayside.

Pelosi’s calculation, say political analysts, seems clear. Democrats are using the Iraq bill as leverage for billions of dollars in domestic spending priorities. As for anti-war activists, they seem to accept the speaker’s logic: More than 40 previous Iraq votes have left Democrats maxed out in terms of legislative efforts to dictate an end to the war over a veto-wielding President Bush.
Most of all, the early signs are that there will not be a backlash from voters. Democratic victories in recent special elections — Don Cazayoux in Louisiana and Bill Foster in Illinois — suggest that individual candidates are not suffering from the low public approval ratings that are afflicting the Democratic Congress.

House Republicans, protesting the bypassing of the Appropriations Committee, promise floor theatrics, with numerous floor votes when the Iraq bill comes for a House vote. Explaining the threatened tantrum, Jo Maney, spokeswoman for Republicans on the House Rules Committee, said: “You said you were going to do something and you didn’t. They are using process for political objectives.”
Democrats countered that Republicans wanted to slow down progress on the floor. “Voters are frustrated about Iraq, but they know Democrats have pushed to bring the war to a responsible end,” said Pelosi spokesman Nadeam Elshami. Some important voices in the anti-war movement, meanwhile, are not blaming Democratic leaders for the inability to move war policy despite the 2006 campaign promises.

much more at:
http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=BB9F56AF-3048-5C12-0064FDC724B0CAD0

We should be careful what we sow, we may not like what we reap in the future.

One should go back to the cavalier treatment of the then Robert Michaels lead GOP by the likes of Tip O'Neil and Jim Wright, you may win in the short term.

BUt I have a hunch that the GOP will have a long memory which will in my careful estimation result in two things:

1. They will do there level best to tie things in knots next year under a Democrat president, also consider that if that president is Barack he has pledged to try to accommodate the GOP from time to time, and unlike Nancy, I believe he means it, Nancy will hate that.

2. We complained to the moon and back when we were treated this way, now because we have the power it is acceptable behavior?? Perhaps, but when the GOP regains the majority again (and they will) we had better not complain when this comes back to bite us on our behind.

We had a long memory and so will the GOP.

Hey Nancy,
Your constituents are pissed.
We are working for your defeat.

She's pissed off more people than she has pleased, that's for sure.