Adding Insult to Injury on the Iraq Betrayal

Total U.S. Troop Deaths: 3,441 (104-April, 90 so far-May)
Total U.S. Troops Wounded: 25,242 (thru 5/10)
Untold Thousands of Iraqis Dead and Mutilated
$94 Billion More War Dollars Appropriated

It's difficult to write anything original about passage of the Iraq Occupation Capitulation Act yesterday. A myriad of passionate responses and pointed analyses dominate Dem sites all over the web. We all know in our hearts what a calculated betrayal this was.

In the House a majority of Dems voted against the capitulation, including Pelosi and Obey, the bill's sponsor. In the Senate, only 10 Dems (and Sanders) voted against the funding bill. Once again way too many Dems chose to protect their political hides from "scary" criticism by the rightwingos, and vote with the Republicans. Some opposition party. They couldn't or wouldn't muster the nerve to vote for what is right -- to protect our troops from further exploitation in a boiling cauldron of bloody chaos. Our own Senator Bingaman is one of them. The only NM member of Congress to vote to end this failed and bloody experiment in 21st century imperialism was Rep. Tom Udall (NM-03). At the moment, he's the only NM member of Congress I respect. The rest are either deluded or lacking honest conviction in my book.

As bad as the vote was, the explanation being offered to the media and the base by Dems is worse -- exhibiting the lowest form of cynical manipulation. As is so often the case, I think David Sirota has it exactly right in this post, which I hope you'll read. His bottom line:

This is what we're dealing with folks. A party that runs to the press to brag about the brilliance of using their majority not to end the war, but to create a situation that makes it seem as if they oppose the war, while actually helping Republicans continue it.

You can check out the roll call votes to see who caved and who didn't:

• Senate
• House

As I'm sure you know by now, Obama and Clinton both ended up voting against the funding bill at the very last possible minute. All during the debate, both of them had indignantly refused to reveal how they would vote. I guess they were each in the process of psyching the other out to make sure their rival didn't get away with a yes vote if they dared to vote no. It's clear what's most important to these two "frontrunners," and it isn't supporting the troops or ending their futile bloodshed. They did nothing to urge their fellow Dems to vote against the cave in.

A number of Dems were very critical of those voting to issue another blank check to Bush while pretending to do otherwise. Go Google Bill Richardson, Russ Feingold, Chris Dodd or John Edwards for starters. And check out what Keith Olbermann had to say about Dems and Repubs alike in his latest Special Comment.

But the fact remains that a large contingent of Dems believes it's safe to pretend to be representing the will of the people while voting primarily to protect themselves from criticism from the right. This despite abundant polling results showing a growing majority of Americans want Congress to stand up against the madness and mean it. When will that fact penetrate their pointy little heads? They'd have to get out of the Beltway Big Donor Bubble long enough to give the real world a chance to seep into their conciousness. Don't hold your breath.

Do something, anything, to express your sorrow and anger publicly this Memorial Day weekend in response to the indefensible continuation of this unjust, illegal, deathly occupation.