The good senator has already tried to micromanage another conflict, and didn't have ANY apparent qualms about it back then. He decried Bill Clinton's bombing strategy in Kosovo (former Yugoslavia) without a second thought. Sure smells like hypocrisy to ME!

Senator Mitch McConnell, CNN TALKBACK LIVE 15:00 pm ET, March 25, 1999: "I don't think we can put American troops on the ground in there to fight the war for someone else."

Incidentally, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives also chimed in back then with their opposition to Clinton's military tactics (micromanagement, anyone?) as described in this passage I stole from a Center for American Progress paper on Congressional war powers:

"On April 28, 1999, with U.S. troops already in combat, the House approved, 249-to-180, a bill to prohibit funds from being used for the deployment of U.S. ground forces in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia unless that deployment was specifically authorized by law."

Huh -- what a thought! Congress exerting influence on a President's war strategy. Nope, we can't do that now. NOW, we have a Democratic Congress and a Republican President. THEN, we had a Republican Congress and a Democratic President.

Any fool can see the difference. (So I'm waiting patiently to hear from some fool who can explain it to ME!)

...never comes back with any semi-witty retorts after dropping his pathetic verbal hand grenades, then being slapped down by someone?

What's up with that? Could it be that he's capable only of "Your mother wears Army shoes" insults, but can't get beyond it to have a coherent discussion or even an interesting argument?

Just asking.

I wonder how it is that we ever elected (let alone RE-elected) a President who is no better than a third-rate intellect -- a person who can barely stitch together a coherent sentence.

The Current Occupant often falls back on the thin reed that we'll just have to wait for the long historical perspective to judge his Presidency fairly. Well, I in turn wonder what history will make of all of US, that we allowed the Bush debacle to happen in the first place, and to continue into a fifth year of carnage in Iraq.

Oh, good Lord -- Dubya and Laura just appeared on American Idol, thanking everyone for supporting last week's African charity effort. Joking about his lack of dancing skills.

Here's a thought -- there's NOTHING funny about this President, even his ludicrous Bushisms. It's time to start screaming and shrieking at every opportunity -- "We're mad as hell, and we're NOT going to take it any more!"

You are exactly right -- Congress should be trumpeting the TRUTH of this bill, what it says, and what it does NOT say.

Dubya is said to be sending the message that he doesn't care. The real message is, he doesn't HAVE to care, as long as Congress doesn't have the backbone to challenge the President's lies directly.

My senator, George Voinovich, was quoted yesterday, saying something like "Now comes the compromise -- both sides may vomit, but now it will come." I hope, pray and expect that Sen. Voinovich will become one of those elder Republicans who visit the White House and speak truth to power -- that it's OVER, and you MUST at least sign a non-binding timetable.

Just as during Watergate, when a similar delegation of senior Republicans finally told Nixon that it was over and he had to go, it's now time for Republicans to show higher allegiance, respect, and yes, LOVE for this country, its people and our Constitution -- and tell the Current Occupant what IS going to happen next. This job falls to the GOP, lacking a veto-proof Democratic majority.

Tim, as pointed out by "johnhummel" yesterday (and others, of course), the withdrawal timetables contained in this budget resolution were NON-BINDING. You omitted that in this War Room item.

No respectable report on this issue should omit the word NON-BINDING. The budget as approved gave every dollar requested by Dubya -- AND MORE.

Keep saying it until everyone (*especially* Bush and every other Republican voicing resistance) screams "Enough already, we get it! The timetables are NON-BINDING!!!"

Non-binding. NON-BINDING. N*O*N-B*I*N*D*I*N*G!

It all becomes crystal clear.

We've wondered why there were no plans to evacuate New Orleans and its environs after a massive hurricane strike and breaching of the levees. The answer turns out to be the SAME ONE offered by tiberius in his pithy (pathetic?) little quip.

Just as in Iraq, pulling humans out of harm's way in logical reaction to reality is nothing but RETREAT. Real men don't "retreat" (and neither do women and children) -- they just suck it up, continuing to bleed, drown and die for no other reason than the fact that we NEVER RETREAT.

NOW I understand. Thanks, tiberius.

Leading candidates are currently:

1. A half-dozen chimpanzees, seated in front of word processors, are allowed to bang away on their keyboards. Given enough time, at least one of them comes up with a semi-coherent script for their Chimp-in-Chief. (The head human speechwriter merely edits that script to remove any words with more than three syllables.)

2. A couple hundred random words are tossed into a paper bag, which is then shaken to ensure thorough mixing. The head speech writer (might even be one of those six chimps) reaches in repeatedly, grabbing a handful each time. These words are then transcribed and handed to our fearless leader to recite (poorly) to the adoring masses.