Letters to the Editor
-
Soup's On?
Grieve's Guess is as good as anybody's as to why this happened. I wonder if they're trying to get the "thin soup" amusingly referred to by Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL)...
"If the Republicans in the Senate cannot swallow the thin soup of the Warner resolution, how will they ever stomach a real debate on the war in Iraq?"
...on the stove and cooking. Very thin soup, indeed. But there is a war on, so maybe this is what the GOP Senators consider a sacrifice in wartime. Throwing more troops into the stewpot of Iraq isn't going to make it any better, folks. It's time for something more substantial. What's it going to take?
-
So make them filibuster already!
I remember reading about the old days when a Senator actually had to filibuster instead of just threaten to do it. Let's make one of the Republicans actually stand up and talk for a whole day to block action on Iraq.
-
wysiwyg
I agree. Let's bring it to the floor and make them actaully filibuster. THAT would be something to see on CSPAN...
-
Options?
Democrat's options-- a) continue as they are, not pushing for consideration of ANY proposal, and hoping to make their political point later in the month when they attach their proposals to legislation to implement the 9/11 Comissions suggestions. This leaves Dems open to attack for obstructing debate, but puts teh Reps in a worse position- opposing the 9/11 Commission and supporting Bush's Disaster b) Push for consideration of their proposals, forcing the Reps into a fillibuster and painting them as anti-debate obstructionists, but also blocking the consideration of any proposals. The Dems can then continue to attach their ideas to the 9/11 recommendations.
c) Allow all 6 or so proposals- Rep, Dem, Rep/Dem- to the floor, hope that theirs wins, and move on.
I think that ALL of this is useless nonsense, and that if the Dems are going to fight for any legislation, it should be the 9/11 Recommendations first, and IMPEACHMENT second. All the energy and political capital they are expending on a meaningless, non-binding, resolution could be put to better use pushing towards impeachment. I was, as recently as yesterday, supportive of the gradual, step-by-step approach-- and I still think that there are stong arguments for avoiding impeachment, more on that below-- but the threat of Bush meaningfully attacking Iran leaves me hard-pressed to see any way out other than Impeachment. That option, however, faces some difficult hurdles.
Most obvious in the minds of the Republicans, 'If we get rid of Bush, we still have Cheney- no real effect. If we get rid of them both, however, Nancy Pelosi would become the 44th President.' Much wailing and gnashing of teeth. The converse- getting their asses handed to them accross the board in '08 for backing Bush- isn't much better.
Perhaps they could be convinced that Pelosi having a short tenure as the first female POTUS would take the shine off of Hillary and open up the Dem primaries, while giving them the look of reasoned men and women in the eyes of the voters. Perhaps, but not likely.
There is also the very real concern that, after 6 years of non-stop consolidation, no one could effectively take control of the BUSHCHENEYCO monsterousity in such a short time, at such a pivotal point in our ME involvement. It would be nearly impossible to take over control at this stage, with no help from the existing government- which has, sadly, been filled with hacks, loyalists, and other various idiots. No, I am afraid that we are completely and utterly screwed, and nothing short of daily, large scale protests at congressional offices, state capitals, and in washington DC-- FOCUSED SOLELY ON IMPEACHMENT-- could get this congress to act. The Dems are going to need EVERYONE's help-- do not forget that the majority they hold is a slight one, relegated to one third of our government (less, if you consider the consolidation of power).
-
Well, actually ...
Warner & Co. were FOR the debate before they were AGAINST it before they were FOR it.
I know, trying to figure out Republicans makes my head hurt, too.
-
Here's a thought. Remember when we were little & learned how a bill becomes law?
This is serious stuff. Let all the bills come to the floor. Vote on each. Warner-Levin, Gregg's, Kennedy's, Obama's, Feingold's etc.
There is only one reason this will not happen. The senators, about 98 of them anyway, don't care enough about their country, the Iraqi people or the American soldiers to have straight votes.
We are treated to this chrarade of debating the debate. The only thing happening is that most of these folks are scared shitless of casting a serious recorded vote.
-
Just another day...
- Another billion spent
- A few solders died
- New terrorists recruited
- Some Iraqis civilians murdered
- Halliburton stock is up
- An incompetent president remains oblivious
- The Senate says there is nothing to debate
- I ponder how we lost our way -
Reid needs to get some guts
He won't let anything to the floor, because he knows he's backing a loser. If Reid believes that the resolutions he backs are the most preferred, why not let them all be voted on? Pure political posturing.