W.House attacks planned Syria trip by House speaker | Politics | Reuters
How stupid do Democrats think Americans are? It appears as if the Democratic Party has decided that they are unwilling to wait for for the 2008 Elections to regain their authority on matters of US Foreign Policy.
Watching former-Senator Max Cleland on Wolf Blitzer's Situation Room made me want to punch the television set for several reasons. First, as a former-Senator, it would be reasonable to assume that Cleland maintains a fundamental understanding of the legislative process. One would be forgiven if they questioned the truth in this assumption having listened to his pathetic diatribe. One would be remiss if the failed to point out the pathetic nature of the reporting on the issue even amongst the most respectable in pop-media. I have posted a transcript of the conversation using Google's new and improved Notebook tool.
I did not see the entire interview, but I turned it on in time to hear Senator Cleland trying to get clever, insisting that the power to wage war in fact rests with the Congress. True, the Congress does have the sole authority to declare war, and it is also true that they have the authority to rescind a previous declaration. However, to make the point that this is what the Congress has in effect done with their NON-BINDING amendment to the Emergency Supplemental Spending Bill passed this week should be taken as an insult to the intelligence of Wolf Blitzer and his audience.
To insist that this largely symbolic action in anyway is a Congressionally mandated repeal of the authority granted, by previous Congressional votes, to President Bush to wage war in Iraq. I agree with Senator Cleland that the Congress does in fact possess the power to de-authorize any previously granted war authorization, but anyone under the delusion that this is what was done earlier this week should be forced to retake the Constitutional exam every American citizens must pass to graduate high school and junior high.
Anyone who seriously watches and writes about Congress would understand that the Republican leadership would have led a filibuster against any serious Democrat attempt to alter the status quo in an official and binding manner. In fact, the only reason they did not filibuster a vote on this non-binding action is because of the importance of passing the emergency supplemental funding of American forces without giving the Democrats a reason to accuse them of unnecessarily delaying passage, which is ironic considering the fact that by adding this amendment and guaranteeing Bush's veto that is exactly what has happened anyway.
But Chris Matthews and his eccentric sidekick David Shuster take everything so seriously. Chris Matthews actually tried to tell Tom Delay on his own show that "..you can never pin down my politics, one way or the other.." or something of that nature, going into a hard break so Rahm and Steny and everybody else dancing on the tables at Nancy Pelosi's Napa vineyard don't have to witness the exchange of words he was about to have with The Hammer, who was getting obviously irritated with the narcissistic Hardball host.
I did not see the entire interview, but I turned it on in time to hear Senator Cleland trying to get clever, insisting that the power to wage war in fact rests with the Congress. True, the Congress does have the sole authority to declare war, and it is also true that they have the authority to rescind a previous declaration. However, to make the point that this is what the Congress has in effect done with their NON-BINDING amendment to the Emergency Supplemental Spending Bill passed this week should be taken as an insult to the intelligence of Wolf Blitzer and his audience.
To insist that this largely symbolic action in anyway is a Congressionally mandated repeal of the authority granted, by previous Congressional votes, to President Bush to wage war in Iraq. I agree with Senator Cleland that the Congress does in fact possess the power to de-authorize any previously granted war authorization, but anyone under the delusion that this is what was done earlier this week should be forced to retake the Constitutional exam every American citizens must pass to graduate high school and junior high.
Anyone who seriously watches and writes about Congress would understand that the Republican leadership would have led a filibuster against any serious Democrat attempt to alter the status quo in an official and binding manner. In fact, the only reason they did not filibuster a vote on this non-binding action is because of the importance of passing the emergency supplemental funding of American forces without giving the Democrats a reason to accuse them of unnecessarily delaying passage, which is ironic considering the fact that by adding this amendment and guaranteeing Bush's veto that is exactly what has happened anyway.
But Chris Matthews and his eccentric sidekick David Shuster take everything so seriously. Chris Matthews actually tried to tell Tom Delay on his own show that "..you can never pin down my politics, one way or the other.." or something of that nature, going into a hard break so Rahm and Steny and everybody else dancing on the tables at Nancy Pelosi's Napa vineyard don't have to witness the exchange of words he was about to have with The Hammer, who was getting obviously irritated with the narcissistic Hardball host.
To Blitzer's credit, he does attempt to point out the obvious absurdity in Cleland's comments by pointing out that the Congress does not have the two-thirds majority they need to override a presidential veto. It may be George Bush's fault, for never vetoing a bill in six years, that it can be depicted as if he were doing anything out of the ordinary. though this is hardly the most glaring hole in Cleland's argument, and Cleland's response that it will then be Bush's pen that prevents the troops from receiving the funding they need to carry on their mission makes me think that this weak attempt at being "fair and balanced" is in fact a carefully orchestrated manipulation of the facts.
It is a shame that the debate over the merits of our presence in Iraq has been marginalized to such an absurd degree, blame for which cannot only be cast upon the laughable posturing of Senator Reid and Nancy Pelosi. The media's myopic obsession with Iraq is no doubt a catalyst, but what can really be done about that? Glenn Beck put it nicely the other night on his prime time CNN Headline News Show. I think the Republican Majority should have vetoed the vote on the non-binding resolution while attacking the cable news programs and demonstrating effectively that it was necessary to make sure the money was not delayed. However, the final showdown has not yet come, and the bill must come back once Bush kills it. This is an opportunity for a huge political home run, with momentum hopefully building from today through November 2008...
It is a shame that the debate over the merits of our presence in Iraq has been marginalized to such an absurd degree, blame for which cannot only be cast upon the laughable posturing of Senator Reid and Nancy Pelosi. The media's myopic obsession with Iraq is no doubt a catalyst, but what can really be done about that? Glenn Beck put it nicely the other night on his prime time CNN Headline News Show. I think the Republican Majority should have vetoed the vote on the non-binding resolution while attacking the cable news programs and demonstrating effectively that it was necessary to make sure the money was not delayed. However, the final showdown has not yet come, and the bill must come back once Bush kills it. This is an opportunity for a huge political home run, with momentum hopefully building from today through November 2008...
Tags:
