Taking The Easy Way Out
By Pejman Yousefzadeh Posted in Congress | Featured Stories — Comments (19) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
This was an exceedingly bad idea:
As the Senate opened debate Monday on a $122 billion Iraq spending bill, Republicans vowed not to allow Congress to impose a withdrawal date for American troops, but said they would rely on President Bush's veto pen rather than procedural maneuvers to block it.
Mr. Bush has vowed to veto any legislation that establishes a specific timetable to remove combat troops from Iraq. The Democratic-led House has passed such a plan, and Senate Democratic leaders are seeking to advance a similar measure this week, but the party does not have enough votes in either chamber to override a veto.
For weeks, Republican leaders have used procedural maneuvers to delay a debate over Iraq. But Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, said he did not want to hold up financing for the war by spending more time than necessary on a measure that will never become law.
Republicans signaled that they would not use procedural measures to block the bill, but would instead let the White House kill it and then urge Democrats to pass a bill that provides funding for the war without setting any dates for troop withdrawals.
"We need to get the bill on down to the president and get the veto out of the way," Senator McConnell said.
I realize that funding for the troops is an important matter, but it would have been far better for the Senate Republicans to block the bill via filibuster, point out the manifold ways in which the bill is laden with pork and help turn public opinion against the Democrats' efforts to signal an end date for the war (and a date when the insurgents and terrorists in Iraq can begin celebrating the removal of American troops and the removal of an obstacle towards their achievement of power and anarchy in Iraq). Additionally, given how weak the President currently is, placing the future of Iraq in his hands is not the best of ideas. Any more such maneuvers and pressure will focus squarely on the White House instead of being dissipated via Senate filibuster--all of which only serves to endanger the reconstruction project.
And having failed to filibuster the bill, the Republicans watched today as it passed. I propose that our word of the day should be "veto," though I continue to maintain that it should have been "filibuster."
« Rep. Capuano's Newspeak for Censorship — Comments (5) | I Prefer Paul Ryan's Vision for America — Comments (3) »
Taking The Easy Way Out 19 Comments (0 topical, 19 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
what you're saying, I disagree. I see no reason for the Dems to budge prior to a veto. It seems to me that the longer it would be drug out at this point, the stronger the Dems. position will get. They'll delay until it is crunch time on the money and then the monkey will be on the Repubs backs. No, I think McConnell has made the right call here.
Some Republicans think they ought to vote FOR the bill ... most do NOT.
If a veto is such a sure thing (and it ought to be) ... the best block vote the Republicans could do would be to abstain.
Although I wonder if depriving the Senate of a quorum wouldn't make for some interesting politics.
Doesn't the President have certain discretionary spending powers? Or has he used all of that (political) capital? If not, I say he should veto the bill AND rip it up on camera, give the Dems a verbal b****-slap over their attitude, and add emergency funding to the war effort. Short of that, I guess a straight veto would be in order. He's on his last term anyway, why not go out by really smacking the Dems around?
I think overly relying on the idea that Bush will veto bills would be a dumb move, mostly because Bush seems reluctant to veto anything, but this bill I figure he will veto.
I think the philosophy behind it is that it doesn't hold up the funding aspect longer than neccessary.
Bush lives it, breathes it, walks it, talks it.
He will never stand up for himself, his decisions, his reputation, his honor, his subordinates, his policies, probably not even his own family.
Doing so would violate the "New Tone", you see.
And that simply would not do.
So Bush would simply turn the other cheek, order his people to apologize on demand and sit impotently as his reputation (and unfortunately) that of his party is dragged through the mud.
Sorry ... but relying on Bush to do anything other than lie supine before his domestic opponents is nothing short of wishful thinking.
But this is about the war so I think the chances are 55-45 that he would veto it. Any other issue, tax hikes, nationalized healthcare, etc. and it's practically guaranteed that Bush would fold like a cheap suit.
but isn't this the first time he's even actually threatened a veto? Be a shame if he backed out of that stance.
that there is communication and strateegery between the senate minority leader and the White House on this?
No.
The "New Tone" demands that there be no communication going on whatsoever, whether it be between the White House and Senate Republicans, or the White House and the American people.
That might offend Democrats.
And that simply would not do.
George W. Bush: A Folder ... Not A Fighter.
A new BBC-USA Today-ABC poll released a few days ago found that 4 out of 5 Iraqis oppose the presence of coalition forces in Iraq.
This echoes an earlier poll months ago taken by the US State Department that found that a strong majority of Iraqis wanted us out
Most of us here just refuse to have it be at the cost of a pile of dead Kurds.
Moe
PS: While I appreciate the appeal of good masturbatory fodder as much as any other man, your next post will have a link to the actual poll, complete with the raw data for us to peruse; or it will contain an apology for wasting our time with one-handed Nation wankery. Your call.
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC.
We want out. Everybody wants us to be gone.
The question is one of leaving with Iraq self-governing, or leaving Iran in charge, which is what would happen if we left now, or any time as a result of it being too hard.
And there's more, of course, but you're a troll and I shouldn't waste any more time on you.
--
See the Academy
the whole BushLied/People Died meme, after a while it is all you know. I know good Rs and staunch Conservatives who aren't wonks or political junkies and I hear it from them; they still more or less support the President, but you here the propaganda creeping through what they say. If you aren't the sort of person who seeks out news and information but rather relies on the front page and the six pm news, the war is a failure, Iraq is Vietnam, the Iraqis hate us and want us gone, and on, and on. So, these people rely on their polls because they can drive those polls; you know you're winning when your words come back to you.
In Vino Veritas
Still bites that so many, otherwise knowledgeable people would succumb to the propaganda. Right and wrong don't switch places, just because someone uses a different set of semantics, or a more fancily worded argument. I'm no expert on world affairs, but even a cursory examination of world history over the last 100 years shows us all what evil really is. To hate this President, when he is trying to do something constructive for the entire world, sickens me to see.
The problem is that so many of the top people in the GOP, even Rove, it seems, just don't seem to get how pervasive and all consuming it is ... and how much it's actually hurting the GOP and the war effort.
George W. Bush: He's A Folder ... Not A Fighter.
"Additionally, given how weak the President currently is, placing the future of Iraq in his hands is not the best of ideas"
Ah, but it is if you're trying to distance yourself. Why throw yourself under the bus of public opinion when you can toss Bush instead? The public backlash against a filibuster would be greater than one against a veto. If they filibustered, think of how artfully the Democrats could turn a famed Republican talking point around: "the Republicans are blocking funding for our troops in the field." It's one thing when the President does it; it's another when 50 senators do.