Cafferty: "It seems the Democrats are the greatest thing the Republicans have going for them...."

Jack Cafferty replies to a question from a disheartened Democrat during a Huffington Post Chat:


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jack-cafferty/livechat-getting-ugly-_b_64117.html

...

Andrea asks: Do you think Democrats realize how alienated and disenfranchised thousands of their voters are? Why can't the Democrats stick together like the GOP when things are so ugly? I think we're doomed.

Cafferty says: Great question. The Democrats were handed a golden opportunity to challenge President Bush on the war when they were given control of Congress in the midterm elections last year. So far they have done absolutely nothing. (Yes, I know it takes 60 votes in the Senate... but the House must pass all appropriations bills for the war and they only need a simple majority). It seems the Democrats are the greatest thing the Republicans have going for them sometimes.

...

Hard to make the case that the Dems are the Repubs' worst nightmare--as they should be.

Jack's sweet but not deep. Without appropriations, we'd have a government shutdown and that's beyond the current voter mandate. Cooperation is finally happening and our leaders are acting appropriately.

I remember Cafferty from his Newscenter 4 days ... he didn't get the permanent anchor spot and has been a bitter man since. He has an authentic voice, but is not a deep thinker and I think he'd be the first to admit it.

So is a continuation of what's going on now.

This is just my opinion. But a refusal to appropriate does not necessarily lead to a shutdown. What you are suggesting is that if we don't send the money, Bush will refuse to cave in, and a shutdown will necessarily ensue. Why? Bush always sticks to his guns. That's why he wins.

Its time for us to do the same.

Of course he's not deep. He's a product (maybe even one of the pioneers?) of the tabloidization of TV news.

I'm only saying that on this question I agree with him. You can't trust Congressional Democrats to do anything but react to Republicans. They are deeply ingrained in the habit of coming in second.

Pass an appropriations bill with a deadline.

He's not listening to his generals... why should we follow his lead and give him what he wants?

Give the public what it wants... deadlines. If he vetoes it, that's on HIS head.

The power of the purse is too clumsy to be wielded over ending the war. Like Vietnam, the nation must mourn in stages - but perhaps we can extricate ourselves from our mistake with more dignity this time. When I saw John Kerry chairing recent hearings, I felt heartened ... Jack probably didn't even notice.

siblings, spouses, children, etc., who have lost and will continue to lose loved ones in this bullshit occupation that should have been stopped 6 months ago.

I remember Vietnam - we're compressing the time frame by a factor of 10. I'm sorry, but it took time to set the conditions for our attempted occupation and we're going to have to suffer the consequences of failed empire building. Don't shoot the messenger, or in this case, the political historian.

This is no time to lose heart? IMO it's way past time; those families already have, I'll warrant. I think a bit of haste in ending this war wouldn't be misplaced. I'm not willing to wait until 08, though that could be the reality, in which case the Dems will have even more blood on their hands.

I'm not cavalier ... I've taken to the streets and will again. But I've seen this before and know that politics is the art of the possible.

As long as we agree on reality, I think we can also agree on principles. And if that's the case, then I think we can agree that - in theory - public affirmation of our nascent leadership and a show of solidarity is a good thing for continuing political success.

I think he's right in this case. Give him a break for hitting both sides when they need it.

our congress can stop the funding of this war and we must demand that they do!

Nothing less than an effort to once again pretend as if their is no difference in voting republican or Democratic.

I'd like the really different Democrats to wield the power in the party and make the slugs toe the line.

I'm sorry you can't see that.

right. He can be so maddening but this is only maddening because he hit the nail on the head.

As long as Bush keeps one third of Americans with him,
the rest of America can be ignored. This is fact.

The Democrats are divided so they cannot stand up
strongly and give a contrasting view.

Cafferty is making a point that cuts me deeply.
because he is correct.

The Democrats could stop the war by not funding it/
The Democrats on the Hill are not willing to do this.

dispute him factually. Name calling is for the other side. Fact is, we don't have to send this war more money. We don't don't have to help escalate it. Let him rob money from somewhere else. Otherwise, you own the war too.

This isn't shutting down the government over Medicare - the people were with Clinton on that. But to force emergency appropriations now would throw the system in chaos and probably delay any final resolution. Right now, hearings are making the case for ending this mistake better than we did in Vietnam. You may have been missing the entertainment on C-Span, but it's obvious who's taking power.

You need patience to be effective in politics and election schedules matter. We have to remind the electorate that '08 matters and they will turn out.

Put the funding and the pressure on them. The current money in the pipeline won't disppear. They might be forced into using it to withdraw or come to a negotiated stance. They could seek emergency funding if they run out but would have to concede instead of bully.

He's calling it like he sees it, and he's right. And he seems to be in empathy with the disheartened Democrat....it isn't like Democratic voters aren't frustrated with the Congress. A lot of us are...

We have to continue to point out that the White House matters ... and wait for '08. There is no constitutional shortcut in a "time of war".

about the congress having sole power of the purse is a short cut?

The House has done a respectable job of keeping up with appropriation bills ... you don't hear mention of continuing resolutions anymore. Holding up the regular process with another debate on the war won't hasten the eventual withdrawal and will destroy the comity the new leadership is trying to build. There have been symbolic votes, binding resolutions as well, but all have failed without hurting the new majority party. That's a rational strategy when lacking the White House and/or a super majority in Congress.

I'm sorry it's not as satisfying as a good fight over the military industrial complex's budget ... personally, I love a good show. But, and despite polls to the contrary, I see Congress doing a better job than they did a generation ago when we faced a similar crisis.

Just don't put another bill through until they can be assured of a date certain. The only thing this congress has done on a factual basis has given the administration an escalation of this war for a period of time. That is in no way slowing the war down nor drawing it down. They choose this strategy along with a couple of white lies thrown in for political purposes. Maybe it works, maybe it doesn't. But it doesn't erase fact.

I'll be following developments closely. Seems your aims coincide with theirs and events are influencing GOP positions, even if the conversion has to be handled delicately.

If Silverspoon hadn't gotten selected, there would be no war for which the democrats needed to take action.

Nader was wrong.
The Professor

That is, even if we were to focus on only one issue.

Nader was right.

He doesn't think. He just mouths the words given him. He would have done whatever Gore said.
The Professor

The only way that the Democrats will take George Bush down, is if they trip on a carpet and fall over him.

And people wonder why Congress has such low ratings. Of course Cafferty is lying his repuke ass off here (ignoring the committee hearings that have resulted in about 80% of BushCo quitting since 06), but I know it's hip to bash Dems on DU lately so I guess have at it. :eyes:

Actually, they've done worse than nothing -- they've enabled Bush to continue his treasonous war.

Failed to block the escalation of our occupation of Iraq. Sent MORE troops there.
Failed to even re-frame the "surge" as what it was -- a willful escalation.
Failed to block MORE funding for the occupation -- gave Bush billions more to squander.

Yes, it's disheartening alright -- and no amount of party chest-thumping can hide that.

I suspect Cafferty said it because he knew it would be accepted by his republican friends and Democrats critical of the party alike.

What does he really care or know about Democrats?

role models for whatever they call the Republican Party, when they rebrand it.