Responsibility

[Downthestretch55]

According to my dictionary, being responsible means being held accountable, answerable, for something that within one's power to control.

Please, don't demean me by saying that I'm a Democrat, a communist, or of any party affiliation. I'm not.
I am, in fact, INDEPENDENT.

That stated, I'm a bit puzzled by all this talk from the Republicans that it is the "responsibility" of the Democrats to come up with a plan for the resolution of the Iraq debacle. To me, demanding that of the Democrats, that won't be in control of anything until Jan 1, 2007, and have not been for the past six years, appears to put a demand for an "exit strategy" on those that aren't responsible for the circumstances.
The claim has been made that "the ball is in their court" now.
It's not at this point in time, nor has it been.
Again, please don't paint me as a "Democrat sympathizer". That will end this discussion quickly.
If anyone can please explain to me who is, in fact, "responsible" (answerable, accountable) for finding resolution to the Iraq war, I'd appreciate your input.

Thanks,
DTS

[SentToStud]

Amazing how fast things change. Two months ago serious people wanted the campaign to go into Iran. Now, they are a potential partner for peace, at least seemngly to Blair. The problem with winning the war is that it can't be done. There will not be a peaceful, single-state Iraq, certainly not without some rough fighting between the sects. America must find a definition of victory that allows our troop levels to decline. It sure loks like Iran is the big winner here.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Downthestretch55

According to my dictionary, being responsible means being held accountable, answerable, for something that within one's power to control.

Please, don't demean me by saying that I'm a Democrat, a communist, or of any party affiliation. I'm not.
I am, in fact, INDEPENDENT.

That stated, I'm a bit puzzled by all this talk from the Republicans that it is the "responsibility" of the Democrats to come up with a plan for the resolution of the Iraq debacle. To me, demanding that of the Democrats, that won't be in control of anything until Jan 1, 2007, and have not been for the past six years, appears to put a demand for an "exit strategy" on those that aren't responsible for the circumstances.
The claim has been made that "the ball is in their court" now.
It's not at this point in time, nor has it been.
Again, please don't paint me as a "Democrat sympathizer". That will end this discussion quickly.
If anyone can please explain to me who is, in fact, "responsible" (answerable, accountable) for finding resolution to the Iraq war, I'd appreciate your input.

Thanks,
DTS

but really, the ball now IS in their court. it's all well and good to criticize others and their poor planning. but anyone can criticize. they need to produce a viable alternative to what has been done up til now. of course, it's not as tho the dems were innocent bystanders in all that has happened up til this point. they are just as responsible for everything, as they were too cowardly to vote no a few years ago when we first went to iraq. they knew then what they know now. to try to pawn off their vote as being due to misinformation is a crock.

wonder what will happen if we are still paddling upstream a couple years from now, still looking for that exit plan.

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by Bababooyee

I have never seen an "independent" gloat so much about one party losing control as you...so, how about "flaming liberal"?



Where is "all this talk from the Republicans" you mention?

Thanks Baba,
I kind of expected that from you.
I'm out.
Insults have no value.
DTS

[Rileyoriley]

Haven't you heard? No one in this country is responsible for what they do. It's always someone else' fault. There is always an excuse. And what's worse is the consequences are usually a slap on the wrist.

[Revolution]

You can call yourself a horse or a chicken and that doesn't make you one.

Just face it, you are a liberal democrat. Nothing wrong with that. You have every right. It is nice to see you are concerned and pay attention to things.


Just to let you know, I am an Independent, and Independents don't read Commondreams.com. That is a liberal piece of propaganda.

[Rileyoriley]

I'm not sure if you were calling me a liberal democrat or not but if so my brother (the liberal democrat) would be rolling in the aisle laughing. A liberal democrat I am definitely not.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Rileyoriley

I'm not sure if you were calling me a liberal democrat or not but if so my brother (the liberal democrat) would be rolling in the aisle laughing. A liberal democrat I am definitely not.

he was talking to dts.

[GPK]

Great article in the New York Times yesterday about the exit strategy in Iraq. Can't remember who wrote it though.

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by GPK

Great article in the New York Times yesterday about the exit strategy in Iraq. Can't remember who wrote it though.

Newsweek also has a good section in this week's issue about Iraq. I think it's this week-- whichever one has the cover story about Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. Also has an interesting article on the Republican Revolution of 1994 and what happened.

[Downthestretch55]

I'll make another attempt to bring the topic of this thread back to the question presented at the beginning, though I know there are some that are unable to respond to the question and would rather postulate on my "party affiliation".
So,..."Fox "News" 's John Moody put out a memo. It seems that Fox has a policy of finding the "talking points" and then looking to find "news" to substantiate. Hmmm..
Here is John Moody's memo. Pay attention to the 4th paragraph.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2006/1...-_n_34128.html

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by Bababooyee

The memo does not state it is the Dems "responsibility" to come up with a plan. I still haven't heard any Repubs saying that Iraq is now the Dems "responsibility" or problem (like I said, all I seem to hear is "stay the course", etc.) .

Nevertheless, according to the media and the Dems themselves, the Dems took Congress, in part, because they offered an alternative to the "neo-con" vision/plan for Iraq (and the mid-east in general). So, if that was indeed a major reason the Dems received votes, they seemingly owe "we the people" that plan (ie they should stick to their word).

However, the reality is that the only thing the Congress can do (no matter which party won earlier this month) that would have any substantial bearing on Iraq (for the next two years, at least) is cut funding, which would be political suicide in terms of the next elections. But if Congress was intent on getting our boys and girls home ASAP, this is a sure-fire way to get it done rather quickly. The fact is, the Dems care more about using this election and the next two years as a stepping stone to get the White House in 08, so nothing much is going to change. (don't get me wrong, if the shoe was on the other foot, the Repubs would be playing the same tragic game)

And to parse this out as one party's problem moreso than another party's problem should be left the the talking heads and political hacks. The truth is that, regardless of party affiliation, its our neighbors, friends, brothers, sisters, sons, daughters, etc. that are over there - so, it is an American problem.

Baba,
Thank you for taking the time to respond.
I agree with your last paragraph. Some of your other points will have to be verified by future actions of the Dems, and since I haven't been chatting with Miss Cleo lately, my best guess is that these will be a "wait and see".
Now, about "talking points" (Moody), you might disagree with me on this, but it seems that Fox "News" has previously shown bias towards Republican policies, and continues to do so.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200611150009

DTS

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by Bababooyee

Well, the facts are that the President is Commander-in-Chief of the military and the only limit on his use of the military is monetary funding which is authorized/controlled by Congress.

Any speculation simply flows as a matter of course after those legal and political realities. IOW, for the Dems, it will be easier to simply blame Bush for nothing changing much in Iraq over the next two years, than accept the political fallout for "not supporting our troops and by cutting funds when they needed it most!" It doesn't take a Karl Rove or Dick Morris type of mind to see where we're headed here. For example, you've already said many of the excuses we'll hear from the Dems: "not responsible for the circumstances", "haven't been in control for 6 years", etc., and by then we'll all have forgot that these guys in fact ran on a "Change in Iraq Policy" platform (so those excuses shouln't come close to flying)...and if some of us don't forget, we'll hear "Bush wouldn't go along...but Hillary will!"

I don't care about Fox's bias, CNN's or anyone elses...news media is market driven like any other commodity. Some will lean left, some will lean right...they're simply meeting a demand. Besides, I am not really sure what the Fox memo has to do with your initial premise or question; iow, even assuming Fox = Repub, the memo still does not mention or imply that Iraq is now the Dems "responsibility" or that "the ball is now in their court"...I am not saying that the Repubs haven't said that stuff, I just haven't seen it.


In the end, imho, since the Dems ran on, and presumably and in-part won on, a vow for a new plan for Iraq, at minimum, the Dems owe it to the American people to present (not even necessarily implement) a comprehensive, coherent and viable alternative plan for Iraq. Do you at least agree with that? And if they don't even do that, will it matter to you at all?

Seems to me that various Dems have floated plans, Biden's (won't work),
Murtha's (put his out a while ago, redeploy rather than quell a civil war), and Levin's (might be the one). Time will tell.
Yes, the Dems should come up with a coherent plan. The current one doesn't seem to be working too well. I'm guessing that the Dems will let the Repubs own it as long as possible. Baker is next up at the plate.

[Rileyoriley]

Sorry Revolution. My mistake.