Question of the day: How can Democrats best frame GOP obstructionism?
It’s mind-boggling really: Democrats garnered 56 votes in the Senate, a strong majority, in support of Jim Webb’s bill (pdf) to protect our troops. The bill failed for one and only one reason — because obstructionist Republicans used the filibuster to prevent an up or down vote: the very same tactic, of course, they’ve been using to thwart virtually every Democratic legislative goal.
And how do major media outlets cover the story? Do they emphasize GOP obstructionism? Or the clear undermining of the will of the people? Or perhaps note the gross hypocrisy inherent in having the very same senators, who, not so very long ago, were ferociously decrying Democratic filibusters against a few judicial nominations, now using it themselves as a matter of course?
No, instead, we get this.
(AP) Senate blocks bill on Iraq combat tours
Democrats’ efforts to challenge President Bush’s Iraq policies were dealt a demoralizing blow Wednesday in the Senate after they failed to scrape together enough support to guarantee troops more time at home.
The 56-44 vote — four short of reaching the 60 needed to advance — all but assured that Democrats would be unable to muster the support needed to pass tough anti-war legislation by year’s end. The legislation, sponsored by Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., was seen as the Democrats’ best shot because of its pro-military premise.
“The idea of winning the war in Iraq is beginning to get a second look,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who led opposition to the bill alongside Sen. John McCain.
Note the storyline: not Republican obstructionism, but Democratic failure. And that’s been the consistent theme of reporting in filibuster situations since the first day the Democrats gained majority status.
So how do we change it? Here’s my take: congressional Democrats need to make Republican obstructionism THE ISSUE for the rest of this congressional session. Forget about compromise. The only compromises that interest Bush Republicans anyway are those based upon Democratic surrender, and we’ve been down that road enough already. Besides, Beltway style deals — however much they may warm David Broder’s heart — are irrelevant to the war issue. The only “compromise” the GOP leadership will agree to now is one that maintains the status quo. The American people want us out of Iraq, period. Anything less is beside the point.
The best chance we have to speed an end of this disastrous war is to force widespread Republican defections based upon the fear of electoral defeat. But that will never happen as long as the Democrats make it easy for Republican senators and representatives to pretend they oppose the war, while actually supporting Bush. So forget the fruitless reaching across the aisle, and, instead, force one antiwar vote after another. And every time the GOP stages a filibuster, go in front of the cameras and accuse them of obstructing the will of the nation.
If the press won’t report it, go around them. Work with the netroots. Run advocacy ads. Raise hell. Then raise some more hell. And if need be, go to the voters in 2008 as the party that did everything possible to end this nightmare.
Then let democratic process settle the issue.
That’s my thinking anyway: so what are your thoughts on how the Democrats can better frame Republican congressional obstructionism?
loans ma salieparent plus sallie loan student maeloan parent sally maeday loans same collateralproposal loan sample businessspecialist loan resume samplecounty san diego loan businesscounty loan san diego Map
September 20th, 2007 at 12:30 am
Sounds like a plan, Steve. I watched the news on CNN and saw the same framing that you did: Democrats Fail. No mention of Republican obstructionism, ignoring the will of the people, supporting more death and destruction in Iraq. The Democrats MUST make this war totally and absolutely THE REPUBLICAN WAR. It must be hung around their disgusting necks like an albatross. Reid and Pelosi must back all bills introduced to force the Repugnants to change course in Iraq, whether they have a snowballs chance in Hell to win or not. The rest of us must write letters to the editor, to the networks, to the various progressive groups that this war is a Republican war, not supported by the people. Tell MoveOn and others to make that clear in ads and billboards. Let this war become the millstone that drags down the Republican Party to the depths of their own destruction. We have to get beyond preaching to the choir and push the MSM as hard as we possibly can.
September 20th, 2007 at 6:44 am
I think the DNC should target ket Repub Senators and start running adds pointing out their votes, that they are the ones hurting the troops…especially the ones up for election….same with the house.
September 20th, 2007 at 6:44 am
How can Democrats best frame GOP obstructionism?…
It’s mind-boggling really: Democrats garnered 56 votes in the Senate, a strong majority, in support of Jim Webb’s bill (pdf) to protect our troops. The bill failed for one and only one reason — because obstructionist Republicans used the filibuster to…
September 20th, 2007 at 7:05 am
Democrats should stop treating Americans like idiots, that’s the policy of the GOP. They should use the words of Greenspan and let the people know that this “war” is indeed about oil. They should explain the “Production Sharing Agreement” sought by bush for “victory” in Iraq. The emphasis should be placed on why we are there, not just how to get out. Ask the GOP why the oil law is so important. “What does it do for Iraq? Who besides Exxon Mobile and BP stand to gain? The Hunt brothers of Texas should be called before Congress to explain their oil deal with the Kurds. Dems should state that if this is all about oil, then let’s put our cards on the table. What steps are we taking to steal Iraq’s oil? How long will our military need to stay to protect the oil companies while they extract their black gold? Will taxpayers have to bear the burden of the cost of security while the oil execs rake in the profits?
We need to talk about oil, oil, oil. Make the GOP explain this law and convince Americans that our kids should continue to kill and die for Exxon and BP. Ask, “Doesn’t everything political in Iraq depend on the Oil Law?
If Iraq can be persuaded to give up control of their oil, will this be the victory you talk about? Should our military be used to obtain oil from unwilling nations? Is war the only way for America to satisfy it’s need for oil?
OIL
Operation Iraqi Liberation
OIL
Organization of Insidious Liars
OIL
Operation Iranian Liberation?
September 20th, 2007 at 8:15 am
I agree with your solution. No compromise whatsoever with Republicans. If they block an anti-war vote, make them block another the next day and explain why every time. The problem is the Democratic leadership is corrupt and has no guts. Majority or no majority, they will give Bush and the Republicans whatever they want on a silver platter because that is what the corporations who fund both parties demand. It’s ridiculous to count on the Dems to fight when they have betrayed us at every turn for the last six years. Yesterday Hillary unveiled a health-care plan to make health insurance mandatory. Great – a windfall for the insurance industry and an additional burden on the poor. Tomorrow Democrats will vote to make Bush’s expanded spy powers permanent before they rush to coronate Makusey without delay. We need to stop being their chumps and concentrate on drafting a credible third-party candidate.
September 20th, 2007 at 8:19 am
Propose a funding bill with a timeline for withdrawing the troops. If the Repubs fail to muster the 60 votes needed to end the filibuster, then they are responsible for not funding the troops. If the bill passes and the President vetoes it, he is responsible for not funding the troops. The Dems let themselves be cowered into voting for the war by saying that they were weak on defense. And they must now standup to the Repubs and refuse to fund anything in the defense budget that does not include bringing the troops home.
September 20th, 2007 at 8:29 am
Dear Steve,
The obstructionist branch of the Reublican party is happy to sacrifice 60 to 90 American Troops EVERY MONTH in order to march in lock-step with the Presidant and VP. They are deaf to the will of the American people, they are blind to the suffering of our Troops and their families. They profess concern for the welfare of the Iraqi people, whom they claim will be at greater risk should the occupation end, and yet they refuse to authorize refugee status for the Iraqis who have fled Iraq. These Republicans have placed Party above National Interest. They have placed Party above the Constitution. They must be removed from office like the Cancer that they are. Do they “support the Troops”, or do they only support the delusional administration? The American people deserve to be represented in Congress. The traitors to the Nation and to the World must go.
Keep repeating: The GOP thinks Bush’ crusade is worth 90 American Soldiers’ lives every month!
Sounds like a freaking deadly sect to me.
September 20th, 2007 at 8:45 am
The Senate should insist that we actually have old-fashioned filibusters not just the threat of one. Let the public see Republicans
standing on the floor hour after hour talking nonsense and see who is really an obstructionist.
September 20th, 2007 at 8:50 am
Since we’re discussing frames, and I agree with Steve’s suggestion, there’s a seemingly innocuous trifle buried in the discussion which bears scrutiny: the “MSM”, or Main Stream Media.
The Corporate Controlled Complicit Media (C.C.C.P.) acts more like Pravda than the 4th Estate which the people who framed the constitution relied upon to balance the government with the honest truth. It is not ‘Main Stream” if it does not reflect the truth that a majority of us out here understand. So I suggest that we drop the abbreviation, because it only serves to reinforce the mistaken idea that what it reports is worthy of respect.
Simon
September 20th, 2007 at 1:05 pm
Framing.
Cite every law Bush has broken. All of the Geneva Conventions. Abolished most of the Bill of Rights. (Violated oath to protect Constitution.) US Code, Title 18, section 1001, It is a felony to lie to Congress. Broke the anti-missile treaty. Cut funds to buy Soviet nukes. Censured Swiss ambassador for bringing Iranian offer to stop enriching uranium. Refused Saddam’s offer to bring in US military to search for WMD’s. Froze Clinton’s deal with N. Korea to halt nuclear bomb building in exchange for food and oil, resulting in more N. Korean nukes.
Expose true cost of invading Iraq, in dollars and lives, and in increased Al-Qaida recruiting.
Expose six million dollar cut in levee maintenance funds before Katrina, resulting in sixty billion cleanup, two thousand lives lost.
Cite cuts in funds for local police, veterans’ benefits, school lunches, and on and on– more mercury in the air, more dead lakes from acid rain.
But, in the last analysis, the way to characterize these people is snouts in the trough, standing in pools of blood.
September 20th, 2007 at 1:34 pm
I’m with you, Simon. I won’t use MSM again.
Karen has a good point too. Congress has rendered themselves irrelevent.
They don’t bother even going through the motions anymore. They don’t even need to take a vote or debate, everyone already knows the outcome. They serve no purpose except to play starve-the-beast and kick-the-can with the white house.
September 21st, 2007 at 2:08 am
Congress seemingly is content to ignore their 11% approval rating. If it goes much lower, not even the cranks and crackpots will approve of them. They seem to have joined Bush in denying the relevancy of the polls, and the relevancy of the people they were elected to serve. It gives one pause to ponder why they are there at all. Certainly, not as a government “by, of and for the people.” THAT point needs to be driven home to every single one of them, Democrat or Republican. They are wasting our time and our money.
As for using the term MSM, I agree with the principle that the major media outlets do not present objective facts and buy Whitehouse spin lock, stock and barrel. Being corporate-owned, they are not likely to be objective. However, I use the term in contrast to the Alternative or Progressive Media groups. Since I often post at 3AM in the morning, I am likely to use it again. They consider themselves mainstream, the rest of us do not have to buy into that appellation.
September 21st, 2007 at 12:15 pm
The general public thinks that because the Democrats have majorities in both houses of Congress, they should be able control Congress. Democrats need to constantly point out to the public that if anything good is to come out of Congress, we need to elect 60 Democratic Senators.