Reaching For A Broader Demographic

Since my discharge from active duty 3 years ago, I have worked hard to end the war in Iraq -- so far without any success. Lately, I have been pondering why the anti-war movement as a whole, myself included, has not been effective in influencing members of Congress, primarily the Democrats who won in 2006 on a platform of "changing course in Iraq" to follow through on their campaign promise.

Who is to blame? Of course, George W. Bush & Dick Cheney. But it goes further.

Democrats in Congress automatically assume they will get the anti-war vote just because of their vocal opposition of the Bush administration. Therefore, they become lax and complacent being that they feel their seats are safe. They boast that they are fighting for change, only to lose every showdown. Pathetic and inexcusable even -- being that they have more votes than their Republican colleagues who prevail every time, only because a substantial number of Democrats vote the same way the Republicans do, at least in regard to the war in Iraq.

Many Democrats vote for the funding, they just complain about doing it. That makes it worse since they fully acknowledge that they are voting for something that is wrong, and that they themselves don't believe in.

I can no longer buy the argument that we need to elect more Democrats in order to end the war -- that is just nonsense. However, I fully acknowledge that a Democrat in the White House will be far better than John McCain, who will certainly carry on Bush's Iraq policy and quite possibly start another war.

Right now the Democratic candidates are promising an end to the war in Iraq. Once the nomination is secured, watch how the nominee softens their language on the issue. Instead of ending the war, they will argue we need to leave behind residual forces for counter-insurgency operations, protecting U.S. infrastructure, and training the Iraqi military. McCain will probably gravitate closer toward the center and argue for something similar.

Even with Hillary or Obama in the White House, there is no way they will start pulling troops out within their first 60 days of office, as both have pledged to do. It will take years, and that is why the 110th Congress should have immediately started this process once they took control of both Houses in 2006.

I know Bush has veto power, and I know the Republicans have the power to filibuster, however, so do the Democrats. Sometimes I feel like the inaction of Congress regarding the war is purposely aimed at prolonging the war to make it an election issue. Yes, I am a Democrat, so naturally it pains me to write this.

Switching gears ...

Another contributing factor is the American people who, for the most part, are not affected by the war in Iraq. Most of my friends wouldn't even know an Iraq veteran if they didn't know me. So if it isn't their problem, why would they care? It is like crime -- the people in the suburbs don't worry about it until it starts creeping in to their neighborhoods from the city. Then they demand action.

Not until the American people are called on to sacrifice themselves will they resist. That is why the anti-war movement of the late 60s and early 70s was far more powerful than that of today. Primarily because there was a draft, and people were being ripped from their lives to go and fight a war they didn't believe in. Once it is your blood or money in the game everything changes -- everything. Even for the cowards and chicken-hawks chanting "victory" on behalf of our lame duck joke of a President.

If we in the anti-war movement, or anti-Iraq war movement, or whatever you want to call it, are going to be successful, somehow we have to reach the silent majority, who are the millions of Americans who are completely fed up with the war, but have no idea where to turn for their voices to be heard.

Why is that?

Most Americans are totally turned off by anti-war groups infiltrating official Congressional hearings where important facts need to be heard, then seeing outrageous disruptions. People being drug away by Capitol police officers, who are just doing their jobs, but are unfairly being labeled as some modern day Gestapo force or agents of Bush. God bless the brave activists that put themselves out there for justice in such a manner, but this is something that Joe Q. Public just isn't going to participate in, ever -- and more than likely will be 100 miles off the grid when it happens.

People are volunteering to be "water boarded" in public, in front of members of Congress, all in an effort to raise awareness that our government has engaged in acts of torture on prisoners of war. I understand their point, especially because it is true. The only problem is that they are scaring the shit out of people who are walking by witnessing these demos in horror. Those very same people are probably equally as outraged, however, they are not going to be affiliated with these organizations in any way shape or form because of a total fundamental disagreement in methodology.

Persecuting the military is a total "buzz kill" for any rational American. Furthermore, it is a total setback for the movement. The war in Iraq is not the fault of our troops, it is the fault of the policy makers in the Bush Administration, and their enablers in Congress. And lets get real -- we are not going to dismantle our military, EVER. We need a military to protect us and our country. However, it is wrong when our leaders force our military to fight an illegal war for their self-serving interests, such as oil and global dominance. And in the meantime, bankrupt our country.

Here is the news, people: Congress has the power to end the war. But they won't do a damn thing to end it until they feel that their jobs are on the line. One thing they truly care about is getting reelected. What it will take is average Americans, mothers, fathers, teachers, cops, and students walking right into their offices and voicing strong opposition to the war. When they become convinced that it isn't just the anti-war activists (who Congress could care less about) who are raising hell, but also "average & everyday" people who have been silent for so long -- members of Congress will reevaluate their past ineptitude and dysfunctional legislative approaches, and maybe, just maybe, actually do their jobs and bring us the necessary and positive changes that our country desperately needs.

Comments

[desmirl]

Johh, Most congresscritters are scared to death of looking soft on the conflict in Iraq. They're also scared to death of looking soft on crime, soft on drugs, soft on anything.... It is a minset that demands punishment for any infraction of the rules--unless, of course, big business is breaking a few rules (like hiring undocumented aliens) which doesn't count at all. It's about money and power, and in this time, OIL supports money and power. Congresscritters will make mewley noises about wanting to stop the war in Iraq, but until the voters turn a bunch of them out of office and replace them with people who are true to their beliefs, the mess in Iraq will go on and on and on..... We have to hold their feet to the fire, or they will ignore everything except the blandishments of the nearest lobbyist.

[deminmo]

Perhaps the reason Congress has been so reluctant to stop
the occupation of Iraq, is vested interest in keeping it going?

With the anniversary on the 19th, the fact Chaney is going to
the Middle East, is there a chance Bush is planning action
with Israel, or on his own, against Iran?

This is the first time in my life that I feel very afraid that the
future is bleak, that nuclear war is a more real possibility
than at any other time in history. And that this time around,
the person that has the power to make this decision, seems
to care more about power than the welfare of the people.
I hope I'm wrong. I would like to see the younger generations
grow up.

[EspritDeVoltaire]

The first goal of attaining a broader base coalition should be to get the American people to realize the extent and the nature of the deceptions involved. The possibility of doing this with a non-confrontational media is a stark slap in the face as to what dire straits we find ourselves in. There are three core lies being perpetrated upon the American public.



1. Iraq will NEVER stabilize with a foreign occupation army there. The administration as well as the military know this. This is the first core lie. The only effect of the occupation is to pour gasoline on the blaze of the conflict over who should control the assets of the nation.



2. The second core lie is that there is a large al Qaida presence stopping the Iraqis from attaining a western style democracy. It is true there is a small contingent of outside agitators which has been made possible primarily by our presence. However, if the US pulls out, these outlaws will quickly find themselves as targets of both the Sunni and Shia and will soon diminish in influence. In any case they are not a large enough force to undermine the government. The bigger problem is that the Iraqis are not interested in being a petri dish for American social engineering.



3. The third core lie is that this is a war of religion. This is NOT a religious war, it is a civil war over resources where the divisions are split along tribal lines which also have religious underpinnings. The Sunni and Shia politicians have plans to fight this out over the next 30-60 years. The only progress which they're interested in right now is having us go home so they can take control of their country on their terms. Neither side wants a settlement along the guidelines we have tried to force upon them with elections based strictly upon our preconceptions.



Unfortunately, this is only an outline of the problem, not a solution. The only possible solution lies in getting the troops out now before the administration makes things even worse by striking at Iran. The question remains as to how this is possible with a media which are basically stenographers for the administration rather than journalists.

[John Bruhns - Huffpost Blogger]

EspritDeVoltaire,

Let me share this with you: http://www.philly.com/dailynews/opinion/20080306_Pull_the_plug_on_the_war.html
I think you will find we share a lot of the same thoughts. V/R John

[EspritDeVoltaire]

Great article, John. Absolutely, we are on the same page.

As I stated before one of my primary concerns is the continued abdication of responsibility by the press. I was at a dinner party recently with members of both the Washington Post and the Times. These people are so sold out for "access" that they are in complete denial of reality. I truly cannot conceive of how to reach someone willing to regurgitate what any "high placed source" tells them. To quote a song from the '60s, they're "in with the in crowd and go where the in crowd goes", even if they drag the country to hell in a handbasket behind them.

This is combined with a disdain of the Internet and the blogosphere which is stupefying. When asked as a group whether they read any bloggers, they reacted as if you asked them how often they had sex with their mothers. We don't even appear on their horizon.

[RogerHWerner]

The job of ending the war in Iraq is crucial and I agree with everything Bruhns has said but he missed one extremely important detail. Some 48% of Americans believe that progress in this war has been made and that the situation is improving owing to the escalation. There has been an 80% reduction in media coverage of the war and the media, as expected, has bought into the "escalation as success" White House talking points. Until this situation changes, I don't think the antiwar movement has much a chance to increase public involvement in any antiwar efforts. As bent as this may sound, perhaps the situation in America hasn't quite reached the point where even presently disengaged people will rise up and demand change. Maybe we need someone like a President McCain for the situation to become truly awful and I don't mean in Iraq. I'm talking about the domestic situation. As Bruhns indicates, most Americans are insulated from the affects of the Iraq war owing to the way the government has the war arranged. Republicans through their misguided adherence to free market theories are immune from recognizing economic distresses of individual citizens and visual signs of domestic catastrophe. When comfortably well off Americans are faced with the stark choice of buying gas for the work commute, putting food on the table, or making a mortgage payment, perhaps then they will pay attention to why they have to make such choices and come to understand that the situation in Iraq good or bad has been catastrophic to Americas economic health. When I think about the likely prospect of serious civil unrest, I think of Project Endgame. The detention facilities and special rail transportation cars being built by the government for the purpose of transportation terrorists aren't being built to house Middle Eastern terrorists. Let me say that, I'm not optimistic for a peaceful antiwar transition. Sadly, I agree with Bruhns that little will change irrespective of who is elected to the presidency but I believe McCain would exacerbate an already difficult situation.

[John Bruhns - Huffpost Blogger]

Roger,

Beautifully stated, I echo your sentiments. V/R John

[Lemeritus]

Once again, John, thank you, thank you, thank you. There's so much in your article, I hardly know how to arrange my thoughts (typical Sunday morning American); so I'm going to approach things as you did:

Congress. Until we recognize that Democrats don't always wear white hats, we're not going to be able to demand that "our" party put forth candidates of real change. Until we disabuse ourselves of thinking the Democrats have a majority or that a bigger majority is the answer, the longer it will take to assess the damage of the Blue Dog Coalition in the Senate and "blue dog" thinking in the House. From the Patriot Act to the inability of the House to overturn Bush's veto on a bill that would ban "waterboarding" (thereby making torture the law of the land), we continue to see the kind of "bi-partisan cooperation" that I find chilling. I think it needs to be noted that the erosion of our civil liberties has moved apace with the pursuit of our military misadvanture in Iraq, and that neither of our remaining candidates for President have acted as particularly effective bulwarks against either.

The American People (of which I am one, "by God and by birth"). How can the Republicans continue to vote shamelessly as a monolethic whole and how can the Blue Dogs be so accomodating? There's ALWAYS K Street, of course, and the workaday reality that some of these people represent states and districts where military spending is bread-and-butter. There's the patriotic disingenuity of things like, well, "The Patriot Act".and the disconnect between "supporting our troops" and leaving them in harms' way. By forswearing a draft (though our military is taxed to the breaking point and our state national guards are scattered to the four winds when we need them most), the Bush Administration has managed to avoid arousing American resistance -- not only to the war, but to the destruction of the Constitution.

The chickens coming home to roost for Americans, however, is not the draft but the economy. Unlike other wars. the benefits of a war economy are being outsourced. All we have is the crushing debt of war and the destruction to our economy of a disrupted oil supply line where the Saudis literally have us over a barrel. If you add to this the corrupt mindset of the people who not only brought us the war but turned a blind eye to the sub-prime pyramid scheme, I think you might finally get Americans to pay attention -- $4 a gallon gas affects people who don't even know what habeas corpus is, would never think the government might use warrantless wiretapping against them, and honestly couldn't find Iraq on a map or tell you how many of our people have died there if you offered them NASCAR tickets. The first anti-war candidate who makes the connection will be the first one to start winning the fight.

Thanks again, John.

[John Bruhns - Huffpost Blogger]

Lemeritus,

All my thanks to you -- for your thought provoking comments. I agree 100% V/R John

[juevosrancheros]

John,
Allow me to commend your thoughtful article. But also let me say how impressed I am that you've taken the time to interact with the responses to it; I wish more authors would.
I am sympathetic to those who would like to bring our Iraq quagmire to the quickest possible end - I just worry about the duty that we have to Iraquis now that we've blundered into their country and helped to set off an instability that threatens to consume rival groups (and also makes Iraq vulnerable to its neighbor/longtime nemesis Iran). This, I think, is why a number of antiwar politicians (yes, I believe that there are a few) continue to fund the troops, despite there being no end in sight. I would just like to know whether you think we should pull out and leave the Iraquis to fend for themselves - so that we will have stopped siphoning billions of dollars into a lame enterprise and will have stopped seeing our own soldiers killed - or whether we should seek as much as possible to 'stabilize' Iraq over the next however many years before we pull out.
It seems to me that the current administration has put us in a position in which it's tragic to stay, and tragic if we go. Can I hear you say something to my concerns here?
Thanks again.

[John Bruhns - Huffpost Blogger]

Dear juevosrancheros,

Here is piece of legislation that I am strongly in favor of -- and judging by your very thoughtful comments, I think you will find it attractive & provide answers to your questions and concerns. V/R John

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-5507

[juevosrancheros]

John,
Again, thank you for pointing me to this bill. It does indeed seem attractive to me - though I'd like more language regarding mechanisms for the post-withdrawal stabilization; the strategy of encouraging an international group to aid in this task is a very optimistic one indeed.
As well, I noticed that in this bill's acknowledgment of the need for regional participation in Iraq's stability, we would have to talk directly with countries like Syria and Iran. Last I checked, Obama was the only candidate who seemed open to such communication. I hope that if it turns out to be Hillary in November, she will have altered her stance on dealing with these nations. And of course, if it's McCain, we can just toss this bill right out the window.
In any case, this bill gives me encouragement that efforts are being diligently undertaken to find a resolution to our involvement in a careful way that does as much justice (or as little injustice) as possible to the parties involved.

[uglicoyote]

Great piece John and right on the money. As a Viet Nam vet turned anti-war activist, I saw first -hand how futile and counter-productive the more extreme and disruptive tactics were. The war was stopped when it became politically untenable. The politicians don't care about activists, they care about voters and re-election.

Keep hammering away John. People are still dying in Iraq every day. Just because they are no longer American soldiers does not mean we have succeeded. I'm still hammering.

[John Bruhns - Huffpost Blogger]

uglicoyote,

Thank you for your service in and out of uniform, & thank you for you words of encouragement -- I promise to keep hammering. V/R John

[SamThornton]

Democrats, Republicans. In reality, exactly what are political parties? I mean, operationally. What are they really doing and how are they doing it?

I would argue that a political party is simply an association of professional politicians and wealthy supporters dedicated to performing favors for each other at public expense. The so-called issues politicians publicly bicker with each other about are mere counters in their contest to divide up the communal pie among their group, and which conveniently provide the smokescreen behind which the pie is divided. If they occasionally have to throw a scrap to the ignorant rabble, well, that's just part of the cost of doing business.

All the blather about supporting the troops, the troops are all heroes, the surge is working, the surge is a joke, and on and on is part of the smoke screen. America has been put on a paying basis. Nothing happens without an eye on the bottom line of the politicians and their supporters. Which particular party gets hold of the levers of power is irrelevant. You and I will continue to get only the scraps. Get used to it.

[John Bruhns - Huffpost Blogger]

Dear Sam,

I think your post should be an introductory to Political Science 101. Thank you for sharing. V/R John

[JacobSinger]

Noam Chomsky has pointed out a number of times that the most compelling reason we find ourselves at such disenfranchised from our political system is the fact that we do NOT have an "oppositon" party as a means to embody the will of the people.

Currently we are mired in an illegal occupation of a sovereign nation, our economy is on the brink of collapse, our rights and our constitution are embattled, and the president has empowered himself through excutive orders with the means to become the dictator of Corporatist States of Amerika.

Perhaps--once the smoke has cleared and the bodies are buried--we can come together and initiate a true opposition party. We as a majority of Americans want universal healthcare, a sound economy not based on feudalistic priciples, and a military that exists for the defense of our nation, and not for the hegmonic goals of the 1% and NeoConservative ideologues.

We must realize that, as you pointed out, the system as it stands allows for a limited set of outcomes, and none of those truly reflect the will of the people.

But I do believe that something big is going to happen soon; the question is, are we up to the challenge--will we seize the opportunity? Has the spirit that founded this country become so subdued that we cannot muster the fortitude to reinvent it?

Our biggest enemy now are those who would govern us....

[SamEllison]

Here is what I call the "vowel lobbies" and they are in control of congress and the White House as well as MSM.

A- the armaments lobby. They call themselves the 'Defense Industry" to hide the truth. Ike called them the "military industrial complex" but they sell death.

E- the energy lobby. Everything but GOP(gas, oil, petrol) including nuclear(can you say GE?) power to corn(ethanol tariffs) and coal.

I- the Israel lobby. This group of Jewish-Americans are very powerful and is a model for grass-roots political activism in the US. Their leadership is out of step with most Israelis and Jewish-Americans.

O- the oil lobby. Did you like GOP(gas, oil, petrol)? nuff said!

U- the unitary executive. Though not a lobby its effect on our government is staggering and if not corrected will lead to the downfall of our country.

and sometimes;

Y- the Yen and Yuan. Again not a lobby but the currencies of Japan and China, the countries that are buying our debt and paying for this war now( loans that our children and grand-children must pay back).

The only way to fix the problem is to educate the masses. A long hard slog.

[John Bruhns - Huffpost Blogger]

Indeed, a long hard slog ... V/R John

[texanna]

One way the anti-war movement might be more successful is to focus a bright light on the Blue Dog Dems that are the real problem here. I say they are the real problem, because they are the ones that keep the Democratic "majority" from being effectual. Also, they are the most likely to be swayed since they were elected as Democrats. Anyway, recently, the Firedoglake site held a popularity contest to find out who their readers would most like to target with respect to their vote on the FISA legislation. Then, when they had the ones they wanted to focus on identified FDL put their money where their blog was and started ads in their districts regarding what those Reps were actually doing. Voila, they actually got them to switch their vote. As all Reps are up for reelection, this could be an effective strategy and a to get those in the silent majority to recognize what's going on. Maybe once they recognize what's going on with THEIR Rep. they might actually do something about it. You know the old saying about everyone thinks the problem is with someone else's Rep, that their guy is doing just fine?

Also, we should be pressuring to get new people into the House and Senate leadership that would really know how to use their office. The people we've got right now are pathetic. We could send everyone a copy of the biographies of Sam Rayburn or Lyndon Johnson or the guy from Massachusetts whose name escapes me at the moment, maybe, because those guys knew what to do and how to do it.

[WorkingClass]

Tip O'Neil is the name you cant remember. I would argue that Nancy (while she is no Johnson) is not an incompetent leader. She (and Harry Reid} and all of the DLC and yes, the blue dogs, are all collaborators. If they were stronger leaders they would just be more effective collaborators. The Democratic party is a rotten barrel with a few good apples. The good people at firedoglake (and others) who are trying to reform the party are patriots indeed. But I fear they are fighting a losing battle. They would accomplish more in the end by organizing in opposition to both parties and the corporate interests that own them.

[John Bruhns - Huffpost Blogger]

Because I feel like I'm constantly banging my head against a brick wall, I especially liked this part : "But I fear they are fighting a losing battle. They would accomplish more in the end by organizing in opposition to both parties and the corporate interests that own them." Thanks for your commentary .... V/R John

[texanna]

FDL is committed to a Progressive agenda and to getting more Progressives into the Congress. However, what I do like about the strategy they did with FISA was that they took the situation before them and made a difference when it would be easy to say, "Wait til next year." We have to have short term goals as well as long term ones because things are happening right now that we can't afford not to address.

[John Bruhns - Huffpost Blogger]

Good insight .... V/R John

[Purple Girl]

Kicked into the Ded end Post Comment page Again!
'duplicate comment my ass!'
Anti War Movement has fallen under the same spell as other 'liberal' issues. Lack of seeing th ebig picture
NOW apparently is on a Vendetta path - follwoing any vagina who is in th espotlight without regadr to qualifications or consequences
Green Peace spent more time chasing down Whaling Ships and tie them selve sto tree than going after the Corps who are responsible for the rape & pilage
The Humane Society has taken Up the short sighted doctrine of PETA. Failing to see that legal actions must be taken to reduce irresponsible Breeding and thus reducing the Supply of our nations luxury of Pets to 3rd world countries for sustenance (they are not going to eat their plow oxen- idiots)
Pro choice ahs allowed "Pro Life ' to get away with their Blanant lie about their real goals- Let's focus on those Already Alive and Suffering, before we get caught up with multi celled parasitic organism, who would not survive without a Host. Lets' feed ,cloth and educated the kids already here, lets's give theri parents the means to care for them, lets take care of those nearing the end of their lives to remain as indepenent as possible. Let's focus on thsioe issues that actually affect LIFE!Civil Rights has focused on the 'Race Card', religious card, sexual preference card' instead of the Right to Equality for all humans.
As the Crowned Stewards of this Planet we not only must appreciate all we have been given (by God or Nature) , but must take on the responsiblity as the only species who is capable of sustaining ourselves, the other species dependent on US and the Planet that makes this All Possible.
WAR is heretical to our Prime Directive.

[WorkingClass]

P.G. You have a long list of very legitimate complaints. I see no need for a separate group for every social concern. I see no need for citizens to define themselves politically according to their gender or color. We are almost all workers. If not we are former workers or dependent on workers or wish we were working. Public policy must serve the interest of the working class. For instance; why would workers want wars? We have to fight them AND pay for them. Americans need to learn the power of solidarity. We need an American Labor Party. Enough already of the slobbering mad Republicans and the quisling Democrats.

[Purple Girl]

As with many 'liberal' organizations they have failed to project the Big Picture (because in amny ways it does not serve the Orgnaizations goal- increase membership and financial support) consider NOW- they ahve accomplished nothing bu t makeing Females appears to be seeking Revenge agains ttthe Male population. NOT TRUE, we just want a Fair opportunity to prove we are capabe. I have no anomosity , not desire to partake in a Vendetta against Men.
then look at Green Peace- out chasing whaling ships and berating 'Lumber jacks' failing to point out that the Earths health is ours, and Ultimately our responsiblity bestowed upon our Sepcies by a God or 'mere' Nature. A sin to rape & pilage the very thing that supports all life.
Teh Human society has taken up PETA"s rhetoric with out recognizing the need to push for Regulations to resolve issues of animal over popualtion. Make those who breed animlas indiscrimately accountable for their irresponsiblity. they are up in Arms about Horse Slaughter and Puppy Mills- but have failed to push for limiting th esupply of these animals to begin with and fail to see that in some countries eating a dog or Horse may be theri only option (can't eat the ox that pulls theri plows- "PETS' are a luxury item in our country- If we are against them being shipped off and Eaten- then we need to stop supplying them!)
Pro Choice. Is also a ridiculous War Cry. WE need to combat the 'Pro Life ' movement on that basis- If you are Pro life you must be Anti War, Pro socialized Medicine, Pro Long term Care ,Pro Stem Cell therapy, pro education, Pro Labor. the movemnet which masks it self withthe tem Pro Life is nothing more than the irresponsible breeders in the dog & Horse world- onc ethey hit the ground they don't care what happens- what their LIFE will be like- what conditions they must atempt to survive.
The Anti War movement needs to encompass the real Defenders of Mankind- WAr Kills our kids, ruins th eenvironment and is counter productive to our Prime Directive - To be the Stewards of our Planet and those who need our help.
So where are all these Rellgious Holy rollers? Oh yeah the 'Pope' has decided to give US his list of new age sins- I think the Vatican (and the rest of the Religious Heirarchies) should Repent and beg for Forgiveness for Oppression and Betrayal not just of Humanity, but the Planet and the Gift given to Us by a God or Happenstance of Nature. the 'Civilized' World is far from Civilized, we hav ebeen betrayed and conned by entitiies claiming to be 'ordained ' and righteous.

[John Bruhns - Huffpost Blogger]

Good analysis , very good, my pleasure to read .... V/R John

[GDliberal]

"Democrats in Congress automatically assume they will get the anti-war vote just because of their vocal opposition of the Bush administration."
Didn't you get the memo? If you are on the left the dems own you and your vote.

Maybe it's time for a change in tactics. Instead of just hounding congress do the same thing to the TV & press. Everywhere they go have anti-war people there. They are the "eyes of the world".

[John Bruhns - Huffpost Blogger]

Indeed, I got the memo, that is why this was written obviously. It is time for a change of tactics -- my point of reaching a broader demographic ... V/R John

[EspritDeVoltaire]

I believe it is an error to believe that the Democrats are against the war. If that were true, they would act to stop the funding. The idea that the troops are going to be left in the field without food or ammunition is a preposterous piece of propaganda. Stopping the funding would result in withdrawal as there are no other options available at that point.

The problem is that there is no opposition party in the United States. Both sides of the aisle support the same policies with only minor variances in how they should be carried out. Senator Obama MAY act to stop the war if elected, but Senator Clinton most assuredly will not. Quite frankly, I doubt either of them will, although I view Senator Obama as least likely to expand the theater of operations.

The biggest problem lies in the fact the issue is still being framed as a "war". This is not a war, this is a military occupation. As long as both the Republicans and the Democrats speak of it in these terms, the public is being misled. As long as they are both acting to mislead the citizens, there is NO hope of them ever acting to stop it as they are both complicit in the same deception.

The goal of the administration remains expanding the conflict to Iran and neither party in Congress appears the least bit concerned about this prospect. Then we will have a REAL war on our hands. The worst is yet to come; we haven't even reached the "end of the beginning" as Churchill called it.

[John Bruhns - Huffpost Blogger]

I could not agree more .... V/R John

[WorkingClass]

You need to quit the Democratic party and stop making excuses for them John. The invasion and occupation of Iraq is a crime. The perpetrators are the Bush administration. Every Democrat in congress knows this and yet they refuse their constitutional obligation to impeach. The Democrats are quislings, don't waste your time with them.

[John Bruhns - Huffpost Blogger]

Definitely not making excuses for them :-) .... I'm disgusted with their ineptitude and lack of action at a time in our history when we need competent and effective leadership the most .... V/R John

[WorkingClass]

John: I am grateful for the work you are doing and I admire you for doing it. This may seem like nit-picking but I think it is important. The Democrats are not inept. They are collaborators. If you are anti-war you are anti-Republican AND anti-Democrat.