Are Democrats being Set-Up for 2008?

I'm watching the Iraq war debate go back and forth and I'm wondering if we're not being set up.
Think about it. Come September, we know nothing is going to change, Petraeus will say that 'some' of the surge is working and pulling out will be the end of the world as we know it.

So now, step in the republicans. Beat up by constituents over the Iraq war, they demand bu$h* start withdrawing troops or they will side with the democrats on any and all amendments. bu$h* concedes to the point that he starts a 'plan' to withdraw by 2009 or some other date after he's long gone. He crafts a plan with the congressional thugs that essentially ends the war. It's a republican bill to end the war but the dems HAVE to vote for it or they really look stupid.

The republicans declare that they did what the ineffectual dems could not do, they ended the Iraqi war. bu$h* along with the thugs resurrect the GOP.

by the way, I am on meds.
Please shoot me.
:shrug:

:patriot: I know I should be contributing to this conversation, but when I see that pic, I just think what a fantastic couple they are and forget what I'm doing.

NYCGirl completely. End the war NOW. Bring our men and women home alive and with their limbs attached. Then we can worry about the "fallout." The predicted "bloodbath" in Iraq may occur after our departure - but in case anybody has noticed, there is a bloodbath going on now and our people are being forced by Bush to stand in the middle of it.

The only people who can settle this thing are the Iraqis themselves, and they may do it the hard way, or they may find an easier way, but itis certain that we are not going to do it for them - no matter how long we stay. Viet Nam was an insane war, but Bush has topped that.

Excuse ME for being shallow, okay?

When it is election or reelection time, the neocon rethugs will do whatever spinning is necessary to again steal the election.

What they will do is SAY it is ended and maybe fifty thousand troops will come home, the rest will still be in Iraq, occupying those bases on the periphery and with new, shoot-to-kill orders for "force protection". This will be called the "end of the Iraq War" by both Republicans and Democrats. We are not who we think we are. We certainly aren't who we would like ourselves to be...

the public is gullible, but not that gullible

But, I think it will be because anything bad that happens in Iraq after any sort of withdrawal bill is passed will be blamed on the Democrats. And, of course, the media will happily play along and call the Democrats weak on defense.

And, of course, if any terror attacks happen within the United States after Bush leaves office won't be because Bush trashed our intelligence agencies and outed Valerie Plame and Brewster-Jennings and also pissed off the world, it will be because the Democrats are weak on defense.

The next president does not have an enviable task on their hands in having to tackle Iraq, global warming, terrorism and the other mountains of shit that Team Bush has created. Not to mention righting the RW courts (not just the Supremes)

Iraq. Ending this war and bugging out of Iraq is going to be a cluster-fuck. Imagine that scene only 6 months before an election. It's not a pretty picture for Republicans. They are going to do everything they can to prevent that from happening until after the election.

Words are meaningless.

here...

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/05/29/1500/

<snip>
1. Shift “ownership” of the downside of the “war” and occupation of Iraq to the Democrats.

2. Begin to wind down American involvement in the occupation of Iraq no later than mid-2008.

3. “Claim victory and get out” of direct combat in Iraq by the early fall of 2008.

4. Win big in the 2008 elections by having “won” a “war.”

Step one was accomplished last week, when Republicans - particularly those most visible in our corporate “mainstream” media - played up hugely how “Democrats” in the House and Senate had “caved in” to George W. Bush’s demand for a “free hand” in Iraq. Bush, of course, is not up for re-election, so it’s no problem for him to take the short-term heat for the ongoing death and destruction in Iraq. With $500 million budgeted to re-write history after he leaves office (the so-called “Bush Library” and “think tank” associated with it), Bush has plenty of time to rehabilitate his legacy, much as Reagan’s handlers have so deftly done.

With the Democrats “giving the President what he wanted” on Iraq, the average person in our nation now thinks Democrats and Bush are jointly responsible for the current “mess” in Iraq.
<end>

..And then there's this...

<snip>
Step two was initiated a few weeks ago with diplomatic initiatives by Condoleezza Rice to Iran and Syria. At Bush’s news conference about the passage of the Iraq funding bill, he all but laid out this strategy, in citing the Baker/Hamilton Commission, which recommended pulling Iran and Syria (and other nations in the region) into the process of stabilizing Iraq, and redeploying American forces to “safe” places like the Green Zone, the huge military cities (”bases”) we’re building there, and to nearby countries like Kuwait. A day later, the Bush Administration quietly announced that they were dropping funding for covert destabilization programs against Iran and Syria, and initiating talks with Iran “about Iraq.”

Bush will now follow nearly exactly the script the Democrats wrote in the bill Bush vetoed, reducing and redeploying out troops over the next 15 months, all in anticipation of the 2008 elections. Except that the Democrats, having failed to override his veto and having “caved in” to him, can no longer claim any ownership whatever to the successes that will come from it - Republicans in Congress and Bush will claim all of that.

This is the end-game of a political equation that was begun the day after Bush was sworn into office.
<end>

read the rest at the link... this is a very interesting read.....

they want to blame the next Democrat in the White House for losing the war and pulling the rug out from under the military. Republicans want to blame the next Democrat for not renewing Bush's tax cuts, hence..retroactively increasing taxes. they look forward to blaming this Democrat for high gas prices and shortages in gas that are expected over the next five years. even though Medicare and Social Security could have been kept solvent if Bill Clinton's surpluses had been used for reducing the national debt, they can't wait to blame the next Democratic President for "mismanaging our entitlements" as the babyboomers start to retire.

nothing will please these fascists more than blaming tax and spend liberalism for the inflation and economic problems expected in the near future. never mind that our economy boomed after Clinton's tax increase a decade ago, or that Bush turned a $5.7 trillion surplus into a $496 billion deficit. Now they're worried someone like Fred Thompson might take this chance away from them, no wonder Republicans don't have a frontrunner!

some people are still all sports, shopping, and serial prgram tv watching.

Dems, in some ways, need more support. The ratio is definitely what I have claimed for years - hardcore 27% - 37% right wing self-blinded supporters for the Republican agenda - immovable. That leaves a lot of rational people who can figure out that slaughter, torture, theft, lies is wrong. But, they aren't making enough noise abut ending the war, ending torture and imprisonment without representation, vote theft, disappearing money.

Even the whore press would have a hard time making that case.