Will the Webb amendment make it through the Senate, the House and then signed by GWB? Looks like another meatless bone tossed to the angry hungry dogs on the left. In the short run GWB has all he needs with the two amendments declaring that Iran is a terrorist state. And there's not really any long run for Bush/Cheney.
I'm not appeased by one more effort by a Clinton trying to have it both ways that always somehow seems to give the right something to chew on and the left nothing at all.
Posted by Marie at October 1, 2007 01:15 PMI think this shows good leadership.
By the way, here's her official statement on her Lieberman/Kyl sense of the Senate vote.
Posted by Jeff Dinelli at October 1, 2007 01:33 PMHer "statement" is worthless. She voted for attacking Iran. Of course if the dogs do attack Iran and it goes badly, which it will, she will refer back to her statement which is just a smokescreen for her real position which is that the US has the right to attack anybody, any where, any time just like all of the other "reasonable" people in Washington.
They will eventually bring the war to our shores.
The fools!
And we, the American People are the fools too because we egg these miscreants along with our preposterous patriotic support.
Posted by Nobody at October 1, 2007 01:44 PMWell, if Cheney wants his money and this amendment passes, then he has to sign the bill with it.
This should have been done with the previous supplemental. A real Congress faced with what we are seeing in the press every day would demand this amendment, AIPAC or not.
This is the fucking Constitution---Congress decides if we are going to blow another country apart, not the Prezlidenterer.
Posted by euzoius at October 1, 2007 01:45 PMSo Steve, where do you stand on Clinton? Still with her?
Posted by Crazy Fox at October 1, 2007 01:50 PMMore cutting through the bs from IOZ -
Laugh first: Speaking of Cannabis sativa
Then cry: The Devil You Know
The devil you should know: I Was Able To Interpret This Feeling
While nobody was looking, the Congress repealed the Contitution.
Now its all up to the person who holds the highest office in the land, the Decider.
Posted by Nobody at October 1, 2007 02:02 PMThose exceptions are as wide as the Gulf of Tonkin.
The only question is whether Dick Cheney will bother with a historical flourish like imaginary small boats at night against a US warship, or go with actually provoking a land-based incident.
Posted by biggerbox at October 1, 2007 02:13 PMLinks not working - will try again:
Then cry: The Devil You Know
The devil you should know: I Was Able To Interpret This Feeling
or just go here: http://www.whoisioz.blogspot.com/
And while the Decider consolidates the takeover of the country, the House of Representatives spends the day renaming postal facilities and doing commendation resolutions. I guess they had to do something to earn their day's pay.
Posted by Nobody at October 1, 2007 02:18 PM"...requires Bush to obtain congressional approval prior to any broad military action against Iran, albeit with exceptions."
There already is such a requirement. Its called a declaration of war which is voted on by the Senate following a thorough debate.
The Democrats can end this war by just refusing to vote for funding it. This action is not subject to a Presidential veto. It just requires a simple majority. Why don't they do it?
Posted by at October 1, 2007 03:28 PMToo late. Clinton has already given Bush implicit approval to proceed as he deems necessary. The Webb head-fake bill will not survive filibuster.
As with Clinton's vote to authorize Bush to invade Iraq, her vote to do the same with Iran underscores her lack of good judgement.
the only thing I wanted to see about iran from THIS congress and bush admin until 2009 is:
- if OUR TROOPS (not contractors etc) are attached by iranian QUDs force in IRAQ while doing their current mission, then and then only attack them....
- Strong diplomatic initiatives...BUT our UN ambassador wrote a THESIS on iran and its ambitions so HE IS NOT the right diplomat; do not believe him.......
- strong sanctions if needed...incluing with those countires that maybe supplying iran with weapons... russia/china....
Posted by mp at October 1, 2007 05:22 PM
Last week my house member...guess who? ....Tom Lantos on the foreign relations committee.. gave me a "biweekly email update" ...saying something along the lines that the house voted something on iran...on sanctions but not authorizing war...
anybody know anything?....
By the way i replied to DCCC that they will not get a penny from me until my representative holds a town hall sometime....I have not heard of him having any lately...at least 2003..
My neighbour who has been in this area for ages is absolutely annoyed with him..saying he has stopped having these "meet the people" sessions.
Posted by mp at October 1, 2007 05:30 PMmp: "- strong sanctions if needed...incluing with those countires that maybe supplying iran with weapons... russia/china...."
ROFLOL, no, we will not sanction our banker (China)
Some of you people need to get a clue: a lot of Democrats (Hillary) will cheer when the Crawford Caligua bombs Iran
Posted by gay veteran at October 1, 2007 05:44 PMAnybody here familiar with ARG's? That's what I feel like when I see see people like Hillary who claim to be one way, and then immediately announce or vote another way. ARG: Alternate Reality Game. These people are trying to manufacture alternate realities to satisfy the greatest number of people with their fictions, fantasies, games, deceptions.
Wiki says:
" An alternate reality game (ARG) is an interactive narrative that uses the real world as a platform, often involving multiple media and game elements, to tell a story that may be affected by participants' ideas or actions.
The form is typified by intense player involvement with a story that takes place in real-time and evolves according to participants' responses, and characters that are actively controlled by the game's designers, as opposed to being controlled by artificial intelligence as in a computer or console video game. Players interact directly with characters in the game, solve plot-based challenges and puzzles, and often work together with a community to analyze the story and coordinate real-life and online activities. ARGs generally use multiple media (such as telephones, email, and mail) but rely on the Internet as the central binding medium.
ARGs are growing in popularity, with new games appearing regularly and an increasing amount of experimentation with new models and subgenres..."
It's all a big ARG, people.
Hill is, sorry, just fucking pathetic.
This is an opposition?
Fuck all the dems but Kucinich.
Damn I hope Al Gore finds enough patriotism in himself to run and save this fucking country.
Posted by Sharkbabe at October 1, 2007 06:18 PMWait a minute, wait a mintue, Steve SEEMS to be painting Hillary, Obama and Edwards with the same brush for two reasons: Their answers to a question by Pumpkinhead Russert; AND for the vote on Lieberman/Kyl (non)Sense of the Senate. I didn't see the Russert question, can't listen to it on the net, so would someone please provide a transcript so I can see if words are being put in anyone's mouth. Please? As for the (non)Sense of the Senate, who exactly voted for that? I don't care what the meme is, I want to know WHO voted for it. Hillary, Obama, Edwards???? Let's not use one brush to paint them all.
Posted by Julie at October 1, 2007 06:44 PMIt took HRC one word, yea, to vote for the KL amendment.
It took paragraphs to double talk the backtrack.
Now it's a vote for the Webb amendment.
This is called reading the poll numbers.
In 1993 she wanted to eliminate Medicare and Medicaid. Now she wants everyone mandated to have insurance through a private company.
HRC called for the Iraqi parliament to get rid of the prime minister.
Where is the support for the US Constitution and for human rights?
She's not for the folks here or abroad.
I'm sure innocent Iraqis and Iranians appreciate her explanations.
Hillary? Leadership?
Ref http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/10/02/hillary-supports-war-with-iran/#comments
Posted by gtash at October 3, 2007 04:41 AM