Although it still hasn't crept fully into the public consciousness yet, there has been more talk of the idea of defunding the war as one of the only viable options in putting the brakes on it, even though Nancy Pelosi has seemingly dismissed the idea.
Peter Welch and Patrick Leahy have both come out now with the message that any surge escalation of troops can be countered with the defunding option:
Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy, a Democrat on the Appropriations Committee, is having discussions with other senators about legislation that would restrict the president's use of the military. He said the "only way" a withdrawal would occur is through the budget process.If Leahy and Welch are serious, I think this is a step in the right direction. Let's just say they pull it off, and it goes over well with the public. It suddenly doesn't seem like such a far-fetched idea as a way to stop the war.
"I don't know anyone who believes we'll see an end to (the Iraq war) the way we're doing it now," he said in an interview. "It's time to get out of there.""What will the president do? That's the $64 million question," said Congressman-elect Peter Welch, D-Vt. "I would oppose adding troops," Welch said in an interview. "And I would support steps to deny funding for adding more troops."
If it happens, it's crucial that it is done in a way to insulate it from the expected 'Dems don't support the troops' attack that will come from the right-wing noise machine. As I understand it, this could be done by continuing to fund personnel - and nothing else, no money for new operations, anything. The troops would be sitting around camp all day, but it's a much better option than getting blown up. And it's also very easy to counter by simply asking the Repubs how sending more troops to die is supporting them.
4 comments:
You're getting more pathetic. I remember the good old DAY (election day) when you Dems were giddy about stopping THE WAR. Now you're already backpeddling and apparently happy with stopping THE ESCALATION.
And the real funny part is that you don't even realize that's exactly what Bush wants you to focus on so the end result is -- ready for this: Staying the course.
Some people never learn.
Come on, JD, push Leahy and Welch to go all the way: Troops Home Now. And to hell with your nonsense about being realistic.
If you wanted to be realistic, you'd get a fucking haircut, buddy.
Come on, be at least as radical as the doo.
You Dems? Don't lump me in there.
So, yeah, the hell with being realistic. I guess I could just hang out with all the anarchists and others too hip for politics and drink coffee and remain drunk on wishful utopian thinking while contemplating where my fifteenth body piercing will be, and whine abut how the 'libruls' are screwing up while offering no viable candidate or plan of action of my own (as in 'could actually happen'). Not saying I'm doing much better here, of course.
To be honest, I think we're screwed, pure and simple. I don't have a problem pushing for 'troops home now', it's what I want and hardly a radical concept. Don't mean I can't address how to address the escalation.
Yer making me want to rant, not like you give a shit (nor do I).Although a big pain in the ass, yer a smart one. More people might realize it if you put some of that energy you put into belittling everyone who doesn't agree with you into actually expanding on your good ideas, cuz you do have a lot of them, they just get lost in the constant attacking, and never seem to reach their fruition. I'm not trying to draw blood here, I just really don't get why you let your good ideas get obscured by your vitriol. The rude pundit wannabe thing loses its charm after a while, especially when you don't let up on people that don't seem to bear you any ill will, such as myself. People on my side piss me off too, I'd just rather save the viciousness for the other side, which is much more deserving. I'd rather kick a neo-Nazi in the teeth than a hippie, although both would be pleasurable, I'm sure. Hey, I'm not flustered, pissed, hurt, anally stimulated or anything, I just don't understand it. And, no, save the 'fuck off' for something else, I'm not trying to give you advice. You don't need it.
Whatever.
Oh, and good post on Ford. Must have made for compelling radio.
Sorry, Mom, I forgot to take out the trash.
Yo, I'm only being direct. Which, in my not-so-humble opinion, is better than banning and deleting.
As for lumping you in with the Dems, I could have sworn you worked for Donny Osman -- ahem, a Democrat. And I also remember some fawning words you wrote about Welch when you met him at a private party. Ain't nothing wrong with any of that, just don't run from it. And, better yet, use it to push back on these folks to do something real with the power they now have (Welch, not Osman, obviously).
Troops Home Now. Right Now.
P.S. I've been blogging long before Rude Pundit. I started in 2001.
Okay, fine, just realize that working for a Dem (or even supporting a Dem or being impressed or whatever) isn't the same as being a Dem. I'm not a party man.
I'm not into banning and deleting unless it gets to the point where every post is just an attack. I aint' worried about that, though.
Now, as far as the issue at hand... troops home now. There is the defunding option. But I've looked into this, and short of defunding (which Bush could possibly get around with a signing statement), as I understand it, Congress does not actually have the power to directly 'bring the troops home'. Or do they?
Rude Pundit's more consistently funny, though. Unless you can work in a 'Jim Douglas' leather slave' angle. So there. Pfttt.
Post a Comment