...denying...funding...troops...
When asked, that's what the average person hears.
Posted by snark at January 16, 2007 09:41 AMYup.
Posted by dj moonbat at January 16, 2007 09:46 AMHow about a Sense of Congress Resolution stating that the Congress no longer has confidence in the President and the VP and that Congress respectfully requests the resignation of the President, Vice President, and all of this Cabinet too.
Posted by Nobody at January 16, 2007 09:47 AMHow about a Sense of Congress Resolution stating that the Congress no longer has confidence in the President and the VP and that Congress respectfully requests the resignation of the President, Vice President, and all of this Cabinet too.
That would be sweet. Unlikely to occur, but sweet.
Posted by dj moonbat at January 16, 2007 09:49 AMWow, that was fast. snark, you're right on target.
Posted by iamcoyote at January 16, 2007 09:54 AMhere's something else the public hears: 3021 dead Americans and counting. Absent any stomach on these pages to set a funding cutoff deadline....maybe symbolic gestures are all thats left. The public seems to support bringing the war to conclusion even if the Executive Branch does not.
Posted by T2 at January 16, 2007 10:08 AMOdd how 70% supposedly opposed sending more troops last week, but now just 61% support a non-binding resolution declaring the same. With half the respondents opposed to actually stopping, what is by a huge consensus, folly.
Gallup always seems to issue poll results that support Repubs, doesn't it? Who's the failure here---Gallup or the people?
This will really help Deadeye Dick. Escalation'07 here we go! Wingnuts over Teheran!
Posted by euzoius at January 16, 2007 10:12 AMWho's the failure here---Gallup or the people?
Hence the problem with conducting foreign policy according to what the polls say.
Posted by snark at January 16, 2007 10:16 AMNon-binding?
What the hell is the point? To simply go on record as opposing Bush's policies?
non-binding resolutions are nothing more than saying "pretty please?"
Bush ignore's them anyway. They need to come up with something that will actually affect Bush's policies.
Posted by Simp at January 16, 2007 10:29 AMBush's foreign policy is beginning to remind me of the old Pay'N Pak strategy where you had a slew of stores, none of which were ever really in the black and the only way you could keep afloat was to open a new store every other month to give you a stash to rob from to pay off vendors. Iraq not working, Halliburton milked it dry, time to open up Iran.
Since BushCo have incorporated the Big Oil, Enron view that it's not illegal unless you're caught; and as Mr. Stimson's call this week to go after law firms representing Guantanamo detainees pro bono, it is apparent Bush's lawless philosophy has emboldened officials all the way down the chain of command to create an island where we have Bush as the Lord of the Flies.
"Escalation'07 here we go! Wingnuts over Teheran!"
...Chickenhawk Down!
"Bush as the Lord of the Flies"
...Didn't that have a happy ending when the flies cute little maggot offspring consumed the piggy head on a stick?
Obama declared, I yawned.
Posted by TIKI AL at January 16, 2007 11:10 AMRahm Emanuel said to Terry Gross that the Sense of Congress resolution is the correct procedural thing to do because it reflects the historical respect of the Legislative to the Executive Branch. He implied something more vigorous would follow--but of course he didn't say it outright nor describe it in any way apart from desultory investigations.
Move-On.org is trying to organize a demonstration in Washington Jan 27th. If you cannot go, they say, provide some money to someone who can. I think this is a worthy effort and should not be written off lightly (as many will do). The President and his buddies need to get it loud and clear from the streets if they cannot get loud and clear from the Congress. There is no signing statement that he can attach to a demonstration of magnitude.
I encourage you to at least think seriously about it.
Posted by gtash at January 16, 2007 11:11 AMTikiAl - that was how I remembered the ending.
Posted by mainsailset at January 16, 2007 11:53 AMSimp asks: Non-binding?...What the hell is the point? To simply go on record as opposing Bush's policies?
No. The point is to make GOP officials go on the record opposing or supporting a wildly unpopular policy pushed by an equally unpopular president.
Don't be surprised if a fairly significant number of GOP politicians sign on to a resolution expressing serious misgivings about an escalation. Think about it: if you vote to speak out against the White House policy, but not to defund anything, the only way you're likely to come out a loser is if the escalation works. (And c'mon...)
Once that vote is in, all of a sudden there is widespread bipartisan opposition to the White House's policies. Then, we can start really turning the screws.
Posted by dj moonbat at January 16, 2007 01:49 PMConsidering that the President is flaunting his unitary executive presumptions, and is challenging the new Congress with escalation of war in Baghdad, while at the same time going hell for leather, with a buildup to an unannounced attack on Iran,... it is hard to justify too much hand wringing in the House. Congress needs to quickly put non-binding resolutions behind them and do something real.
We don't need histrionics and hissy fits and huffing-and-puffing, accompanied by non-binding resolutions. What we need is for the responsible majority along with a few conscience-stricken republicans to curb this president. Time is of the essence. Faced with a president who is unresponsive to counsel, and feels no particular obligation to law, Congress must not delay the unavoidable crisis and give the President the leeway to create another lethal reality.
Saudi Arabia believes the Iraqi government is not up to the challenge and has told the United States that it is prepared to move its own forces into Iraq should the violence there degenerate into chaos, a senior U.S. official told NBC News on Tuesday.
Posted by Judith at January 16, 2007 07:42 PM