Why Dems voted for the Iraq war? (Confirming what the "crazy" people said all along)

[yesthattom]

The anit-war bloggers have always said this, but it’s good to hear it confirmed by a Senator:

“They are afraid the war will be over as fast as Gulf One. Few will die, the oil will flow and gasoline will cost 90 cents a gallon.”

They didn’t want to be on the wrong side of cheap gas and parade after parade celebrating troops coming home.

Bill Mahr made the same statement on Real Time on Friday. I bet he had an advance copy of the book, or one of his researchers read the same blog post.

(Thanks to beowabbit for pointing out the link)

Comments

It only takes the silence of the good to allow the bad to prosper.

[docstrange.livejournal.com]

Thanks for posting that. Our federal senators and reps are - most of them - reeds in the wind who say what their researchers tell them will do them best in the long run. Can't you see powerful candidates of the future consulting expensive AI-like expert systems to decide what at any stage the public will want, factored against the possible effects of political retaliation?

Lame, but there it is. There are not a lot of free thinkers in Congress. They are supposed to be the informed, thoughtful voice of the people, buffering the political will (which is fickle and frankly uninformed), while seeking to ensure the people's interests and ultimate goals are met. From an IL point of view, there are few politicians like Peter Fitzgerald and even fewer like Paul Simon. I don't think one of the current front-runners (either party) is of that caliber: Willing to sacrifice their political power to stand for doing the right thing (like Jeffords did). And it only takes the silence of the good to allow the bad to prosper.

And the voters - and the press/political system - run the best of our politicians out faster than ever nowadays.