Hoyer suggests vote on new Iraq authorization.
By on Jan 26th, 2007 at 2:10 pm
Hoyer suggests vote on new Iraq authorization.
“Democrats may push a new bill authorizing the use of force in Iraq — replacing the 2002 bill that allowed the Bush administration to proceed with the war,” House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) said today. The House will soon address ways to “affect the policy and strategy being pursued in Iraq,” possibly including “a revised authorization for the use of military force in Iraq that more accurately reflects the mission of our troops on the ground,” he said.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Hannity
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
Kristol
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Maddow
McCain
Media
Military
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Public Plan
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Technology
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Just end the Iraq Fiasco War and bring the troops home now!
January 26th, 2007 at 2:13 pmPlease bring them home sooner than later.
Re-deployment is not a four letter word.
January 26th, 2007 at 2:13 pmThis is when I start to think that the new Democratic Congress is just the another branch of the War Party. Jeesh.
January 26th, 2007 at 2:14 pmIt’s about time.
Virtually all of Chimpy’s self-granted dictorial powers stem from the interpretation (or misinterpretation) of that AUMF that was shoved down the throats of Congress during the nightmare of fear and hatred that immediately followed 9/11.
Recall the blank check! Take back your Constitutional power, Congress!
January 26th, 2007 at 2:23 pmThe congress cannot just “bring the troops home now” without going through the necessary procedures. I applaud them. They are covering all their bases. First, the unbinding resolution, which is essentially a statement from “the people” on their current opinion. Next, they attack the funding sources and pass new authorization which will restrict Bush’s ability to use the authorization on extra-curricular activities, such as edging his way into Iran. This is all GOOD NEWS.
Remember, the “Iraq War” is not actually a war. The congress never declared war. They passed authorization for military force to tackle a specific (false) problem. This is the same problem as with the whole Vietnam “police action” business.
Each step they take, they make it constitutionally more difficult for the president to wage his horrible war legally. Once enough traps are in place, impeachment is much more likely if he doesn’t change his action.
Could they impeach now? Yes, but digging out the details would be costly and the conservative media engine will pump out falsities to battle it every step of the way.
The more restrictions they pass, the more control Congress gets back and the closer it becomes to a co-equal branch of government, as it was designed.
You can’t expect these changes overnight! Bush and his cabal have in six years destroyed 200 years of democracy. That’s a lot to fix.
The Democrats are doing it the right way which will restore the legitimacy of our government while continuing to protect not only our civil rights but our safety as well.
Have no fear, the war will end. Our children will come home. I wish it could happen sooner. Blame the war monger, not those who are actively stopping him PERMANENTLY just because he’s fighting it and slowing it down!
January 26th, 2007 at 2:24 pmTime to check out who voted to get this ass in this position…Anyone.? Who voted for this guy. I want name’s…Let’s get all the traitor’s out of our party as well…..I am mad as hell and I’m not going to put up with this crap from either party….Palosi is out of the country in Iraq right now but between now and Monday I intend to send huge protests to any one responsible for this war hawk being in any position…..This resident witch will shout loud and clear to stop the killing’s and bring the troop’s home now…All of them….Blessings to all that agree, those that don’t are on their own and Karma will take care of them…Peace now, demand it
January 26th, 2007 at 2:24 pmThis is like taking a clunker to Earl Scheib for a $99 paint job and then trying to re-sell it to the person that got rid of it. End this fiasco….
January 26th, 2007 at 2:28 pmNo wonder Pelosi wanted Murtha in this postition instead of Hoyer.
January 26th, 2007 at 2:32 pmThere are already 60 American kids sent home in coffins since Congress was sworn in this month.
Could Congress pick up the pace a bit? People are dying for NOTHING.
OBS
January 26th, 2007 at 2:32 pmSome people seem to miss the point.
See Parrotlover77’s comment at #5, folks.
January 26th, 2007 at 2:35 pmSounds like a step in the right direction. Keep the Destroyer in Chief on the offensive. It sucks that it takes so much time to get things done. The Democrats need to make sure that they don’t appear to not support the troops. By re-defining this war and its spending, the Dems can put a stop to this war spending and bring the troops home. It saves face for the Dems and it allows for redeployment.
Thursday’s addition – 1 one more coffin draped in a flag will be returning. Bush thinks the sacrifice is worth it. I disagree.
January 26th, 2007 at 2:35 pmDon’t allow the troopers to be embeded into the Iraqi forces…
Report: U.S. soldiers abducted in Karbala, killed elsewhere
POSTED: 1:22 p.m. EST, January 26, 2007
BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) — Four U.S. soldiers the military reported killed in an attack on the governor’s office in Karbala last week were actually abducted and killed dozens of miles away, U.S. and Iraqi sources say.
The brazen assault, 50 miles (80 kilometers) south of Baghdad on January 20, was conducted by nine to 12 militants posing as an American security team. They traveled in black GMC Suburban vehicles — the type used by U.S. government convoys — had American weapons, wore new U.S. military combat fatigues and spoke English.
In a written statement, the U.S. command reported at the time that five soldiers were killed while “repelling the attack.” Now, two senior U.S. military officials as well as Iraqi officials say four of the five were captured and taken from the governor’s compound alive.
Three of them were found dead and one mortally wounded later that evening as far as 25 miles
east of the governor’s office.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/01/26/iraq.karbala.ap/index.html
Karbala had to be an inside job…
January 26th, 2007 at 2:35 pm#5 Comment by Parrotlover77 — January 26, 2007 @ 2:24 pm
Excellent post. Thank you.
January 26th, 2007 at 2:38 pmCould people possibly wait until we have some inkling of what the bill actually says before foaming at the mouth? Presumably the whole point of having a new authorization is to restrict the president, otherwise they’d stick with what they’ve got.
January 26th, 2007 at 2:39 pmHere’s a thought. How about REVOKING the original 2002 IWR authorization? Bush will then have 60 days to bring the troops home or face impeachment for breaking the law.
January 26th, 2007 at 2:40 pmParrotlover77
Excellent analysis. I don’t think the Repubs have anyone on their side comparable to Steny Hoyer. Watch this guy. He’s the total antithesis of Tom Delay .
The MSM is missing the point (what else is new) Nancy’s not out there alone. She’s got a guy riding shotgun who can play the game and deliver the votes better than almost anyone in Congress.
January 26th, 2007 at 2:40 pmNo question this is brilliant. Congress has limited authority to override a Commander-in-Chief, but if they can change the rules by which he’s operating, they can at least stop him from doing further damage.
I know during Vietnam there were several resolutions — “Sense of the House” declarations that are legally meaningless by themselves. They led eventually to the War Powers Act that Nixon vetoed and the Congress passed over his head. That’s the enabling legislation for the AUMF and the AUMF pretty much nodded to the WPA then said that the President was free to ignore it. They can at least put back in the piddling reporting and advise/consent clauses that the WPA says should be there.
If nothing else, it changes the conversation — and shows that the Democrats are in the majority now and are no longer going to play the opposition.
January 26th, 2007 at 2:41 pmThe original authorization was wrong to begin with, but the mission has changed since then. Recall Bush’s remarks from a press conference in March 2003:
The President. “That’s a great question. Our mission is clear in
January 26th, 2007 at 2:42 pmIraq. Should we have to go in, our mission is very clear: disarmament.
In order to disarm, it will mean regime change. I’m confident we’ll be
able to achieve that objective in a way that minimizes the loss of life.
No doubt there’s risks in any military operation; I know that. But it’s
very clear what we intend to do. And our mission won’t change. Our
mission is precisely what I just stated. We have got a plan that will
achieve that mission, should we need to send forces in.”
March 6, 2003
Parrotlover – like your music.
January 26th, 2007 at 2:43 pmKCinDC > that could be true, but the wording at the top of this post implies the Congress might pass new authorization for Iraq to cover Bush’s surge of additional troops. Bush is in violation of the old authorization, because it gave him authority to find WMD in Iraq, destroy the weapons, and remove Saddam from power. No WMD existed, none were destroyed, but Saddam was captured and hanged.
January 26th, 2007 at 2:47 pmTime to pull the troops out, because Congress and American public never authorized occupation of Iraq to secure oil fields for Petrol Cartel.
#12 mrJJ,
If true, that is a sickening and gut-wrenching story.
“Three days after the attack, the U.S. military in Baghdad announced the arrest of four suspects in the attack and said they had been detained on a tip from a Karbala resident. No further information was released about the suspects.”
Hopefully, the next information we DO get about these savages is that they have been tried and executed.
January 26th, 2007 at 2:52 pmNice post, parrot, however I am one of the foaming at the mouth {kcinDc} mentioned and here’s why…Yes I am happy with what the Dem’s have tried to do so far but it is a far cry from what we wanted them to do and they know it…..I am pissed off that they have not addresses what we the voter’s put them in to do and are draggin their fat feet while our troop’s are dieing for bull shit bush’s personal war…..We voted to get bus/cheney and all the guilty out of office…We voted in hopes of getting all these dreadful bill’s the last congress passed removed and I for one am sick and tired of war hawk’s…..I didn’t vote for them any time in the past and won’t now..It is going far to slow to suit me and many of us that watch the bush body count mount higher every day are ready for a revolution right here and now to stop this eternal madness….Our own are moving way to slow…At all appearances they are doing what bush does, looking for excuses to follow his madness……Enough of the excuses and polite protacal, this is war and it has to end, right after we Impeach, jail and hold all the guilty accountable….Blessings
January 26th, 2007 at 2:58 pmHopefully, the next information we DO get about these savages is that they have been tried and executed.
Comment by Exley
Kill the suspects!!!! Even if the resident was paid for the tip. Kill teh suspects!!! No trial….no evidence….kill the suspects!!!!
Is that what you meant to write Exley?
January 26th, 2007 at 3:00 pmLegislation should be enacted that stops funding in 3 specific areas that are not related to funding the troops, but would send a strong signal to the Iraq government and their neighbors.
1. Re-construction. $15B spent so far. How much of that has been wasted. Countdown reported last night that $15B would cover fixing our entire domestic infrastructure (roads, bridges, etc.). Include tying future re-construction funding directly to Iraq meeting specific security ownership objectives.
2. Immediately halt all funding for the mega US Embassy complex currently
under construction.
3. Immediately halt all funding for construction of permanant US military bases.
January 26th, 2007 at 3:01 pmgreat idea
January 26th, 2007 at 3:02 pmDlet, I said “tried.” That means their guilt would have to be proven.
January 26th, 2007 at 3:03 pmDavid Allen at #15
Well said. Congress should challenge Bush by forcing his hand and this sounds like a valid way of doing it.
January 26th, 2007 at 3:16 pmDlet, I said “tried.†That means their guilt would have to be proven.
Comment by Exley
You mean they actually try their terror suspects in Iraq? Wow. They seem to be eclipsing us in the democracy department. Maybe Democracy is on the march. Aren’t you proud.
January 26th, 2007 at 3:17 pm#5, great post and well said.
It is about time someone in the new Congress started doing something real about Iraq.
BTW, (I can’t believe I am saying this, again) Props to Pelosi for actually going to Iraq.
January 26th, 2007 at 3:23 pmInteresting:
“House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has pulled several antiwar members aside and pleaded with them not to call for cutting off funding for U.S. troops to stop the war. Her efforts have caused friction inside the Democratic Party, because lawmakers and many activists argue it is hypocritical for leaders to call the war immoral and not doing everything in its power to stop it … Pelosi’s response has been clear: cutting off funding would be wrong and politically damaging to a Democratic Party trying to strike a more centrist tone.”
The Politico Jan. 26, 2007
January 26th, 2007 at 3:30 pm#29
January 26th, 2007 at 3:40 pmLink, corroboration, facts, anything?
What have I been telling you people – no need to thank me.
Dems will tell you whatever you want to hear to get your vote, then maintain the status quo. My role in this universe, is to tell you all about the brick wall that you are sprinting towards, so that when you hit it, you don’t jump up and wonder who hit you.
January 26th, 2007 at 3:43 pmDlet, It is from toay’s “Politico.” ThinkProgress provides a link to the article in today’s thread titled “Profiles in courage?”
January 26th, 2007 at 3:45 pmSteney Hoyer has stench written all over him. He’s none other than the jerk who helped ram HAVA down our throats to enable the crooks to steal elections! That’s why Pelosi wanted Murtha instead of Hoyer. This will bite the dems on the arss before long because Hoyer is in the “thick of it – big time” and then it will be time for the Dems to do their own housecleaning. He & Bob Ney wrote the Help America Vote Act, ostensibly using the handicapped rights lobbies as fronts, to mandate touch-screen *(known hackable) voting machines to the american people. And, none other than our new Secy of Defense, Bob Gates, is on the board of directors of VoteHere – who spent more money to get these corrupt machines into our system than Diebold, Sequoia and ES&S combined!!!
Hoyer is a stench on the Democratic party – there’s no doubt about it and, like the Rethugs….it’s time to get the corrupt “stench” out of Washington!! Hoyer is going to totally embarrass the Democratic Party during his first 100 hours in office – a horrendous choice – a horrible judgment on the part of the dems who put him there.
People that know him dub him “stench hoyer”
January 26th, 2007 at 3:50 pm#5 I couldn’t agree with you more wholeheartedly….in 6 short years, the Bush Crime Family Cabal has regressed this country 200 years and it’s doubtful that in any of our lifetimes that the honor and respect we once had as a country will ever be reinstated or even superficially restored. This Bush Cabal has destroyed the reputation of this country internationally.
January 26th, 2007 at 3:52 pmThat’s ‘STENCHYHOYER!
January 26th, 2007 at 3:53 pmDlet, It is from toay’s “Politico.†ThinkProgress provides a link to the article in today’s thread titled “Profiles in courage?â€
Comment by Exley
Read it and no direct quote having Pelosi saying those things or what her strategy is or anything of the sort. Sounds like heresay and conjecture at his point but if she is not for it at all then she is wrong. Time will tell.
January 26th, 2007 at 3:54 pmI just had a thought: Maybe Cheney and his bitch Bush are right.
Say Bush goes ahead with more troops and 21,000 is more than enough to get er done as they say in Texas. Suppose that superior firepower forces the Al queda terrorists to flee back to Saudi Arabia and Syria. Then Sunni insurgents decide to accept life as the Iraqi undogs and lay down their arms and will of resistance to Shia militias. Al Sadr’s Shiite militia then lays down its arms accepts American democracy while Sadr hauls ass for a Pakistan cave. Violence ends in Baghdad, and peace speads westard, to Anbar Province. The Shia population decides NOT embrace hardline Islam and wants to develope trade with America in return for their oil. Condi Rice is invited to the Iraqi presidental palace for a chicken dinner.
Iran, seeing America means business, watches as the long awaited flower petals from the grateful Iraqi citizens rain down on parading American troops as they head back to Afganistan to finish the war there. Having the crap scared out of them, not only abandon their nuclear quest, but cut off all aid to Hezbollah. Syria, finding itself isolated, kicks out both Hezbollah and Hamas and threaten to hang its leaders as criminals. Both Syria and Iran then seek to have peace with Israel and ask if they can get in on the long term gravy train of American aid if they give up jihad.
Bush’s dream of spreading democracy throughout the Middle East becomes true and, breathing a huge sigh of relief, McCain gets elected president in 2008, offers Jerry Falwell the VP, and spends 8 years reminding us he backed Bush until the end.
The democrats ought be careful here in the vote for any resolutions on Iraq, as this fairy tale might just come to pass.
January 26th, 2007 at 3:59 pmThere’s a priceless picture of Bush today on MSNBC.
His mouth is wide open, and it looks like he’s trying to swallow something.
I think it’s a lie, or two, or three, or four, or five, or six, or seven, or 10,000. It’s lies all right.
Google the picture.
Subject:
MSNBC BUSH: ‘I’M THE DECISION-MAKER.’
John
January 26th, 2007 at 4:05 pmwhat an asshole. the man’s mind must boggle his pet’s.
talk about delusional? authorize more war?
Steny must be getting bribed and taking payoffs to say something like this. we need an investigation into his sanity
January 26th, 2007 at 4:15 pmSorry, never read comments first
for those of you that think we should be allowing congress to wait, you must not have been around for the vietnam debacle. You do not wait for congress to do anything, you have to tell them 2 years before they will ever do something, unless it is a campaign promise to get re elected
please, don’t be naive. our congress is almost completely corrupt, and there isn’t much going to change it unless we tell these crooks we mean to throw them out if they don’t do what we want. They are making money on this war, and are not going to end it unless the people of this country get mad about their inactivity, thus it has always been so in corrupt societies that profit by war
January 26th, 2007 at 4:18 pmMaybe Hoyer and Lieberman should get a room and roll all over each other. They sound like such perfect girlfriends. Forget it, Hoyer. You GET A LIFE and bring the troops home, so that they can keep thiers. Comprendez, mole?
January 26th, 2007 at 4:25 pmI don’t think anyone is asking Congress to wait, I think we are asking US – the voters, the passionate, the activists – to wait.
Six years of Republican destruction do not get reversed in three weeks. A warmongering, fascist thug does not get stopped in three weeks, especially when only ONE HOUSE OF CONGRESS has a substantial opposition majority, and said thug refuses to obey any laws or acknowledge the time-honored checks and balances of our democracy. The Republicans must be brought over to our side (this too for any impeachment effort), and the Democrats have thought of many brilliant ways to do that so far. But it won’t be easy and it won’t be quick.
If we, the informed, intelligent MAJORITY VOTERS, do not begin to realize these simple, obvious facts, and if we cannot give those we elected the barest modicum of a chance to prove themselves, then we are no better than illiterate Republicans who thoughtlessly, knee-jerkingly vote their party and refuse to recognize reality when it smacks us in the face.
January 26th, 2007 at 4:30 pm#40- oldtree
Well said. Howard Zinn could not have said it any better. Many, if not most, of those in Congress are old enough to remember Vietnam and yet they seem to have failed to have learned the lesson of that ill-fated adventure, which was to never invade a country which was never a threat to the United States and attempt to subjugate its people. It is simply stunning that the Democrats, as well as the Republicans, have not spoken out in unison condemning what Bush has done, cut off the funding for the war/occupation and take back the authorization that they gave Bush to invade Iraq. But for them to do so would require common sense and courage, traits which this Congress, for the most part, seems to lack.
January 26th, 2007 at 4:33 pmBravo old tree, I agree and you know I love old tree’s…..When will they listen and learn.? Why do we have to beat them over the head time and again before they listen.? Why can’t they remember Viet Nam and what we have been through because of mindless, greedy war monger’s.? Creating misery here and over there is mind bogeling to me…..Blessings
January 26th, 2007 at 4:34 pmAll Dems are not this way, just as all Repubs are not warmongering fascists.
Let’s get a little perspective here. There are plenty of Dems (and now ever Repubs) that want the war over NOW.
The way to get it done is to make friends on both sides of the isle.
Sadly, more brave Americans are dying in the interim, but that’s not the fault of those trying to stop war (slowly or quickly). It’s the fault of Bush, Cheney, and Rove. PERIOD. They LIED and decisions were made because of that lie.
There are those that believe immediate withdrawal (like the “out tommorrow” kind) may cause more problems than it solves. I do NOT agree personally, but I do see the point of those people. At least they want out, as opposed to the Bush loyalists.
Agreeing on a compromise is preferable to just bumping chests and never getting ANYTHING done (like the last Congress did).
January 26th, 2007 at 4:57 pmI don’t necessarily agree with the level of corruption, but you do bring up a good point.
While I’ve been defending the new Congress, I have left out one very important thing…
No matter whether you are happy about the actions so far or pissed, never ever stop telling your representatives (by phone, email, fax, or written letter) your thoughts and feelings!
Even though I am in the “I think they are doing the right thing” camp, I still tell them my opinion often.
It does make a difference.
Thanks for pointing that out, oldtree.
January 26th, 2007 at 5:00 pmParrottlover 77
I strenuously disagree. If most Democrats and many Republicans, as you claim, want the war over NOW, then they are certainly not speaking vociferously on this issue by calling for the immediate withdrawal of those troops from that abattoir in Iraq. You seem to believe that Americans should be patient while those in Congress attempt to reach a compromise in getting those troops out of Iraq. As I and oldtree tried to point out, apparently in vain, the politicians began to slowly talk about bringing the war to an end in Vietnam in the late 1960s, and when it finally happened, approximately 20,000 more troops were killed. According to you, the calling for a withdrawal of the troops should not be rushed, conveniently ignoring the fact that thousands of American soldiers would probably wind up very dead and thousands more maimed and crippled, with missing limbs and severed spines and being brain damaged and psychologically traumatized from what they had witnessed and/or participated in in Iraq. Is this what you wish to happen? Because if you believe that the idea of withdrawal should not be rushed, then the possibility of more mounting [unnecessary] casualties will soon become a reality.
January 26th, 2007 at 5:17 pmThe key is the timeline. Put the authorization at 30 days. Then there has to be a new vote every thirty days. Vote for it the first time. After that, who knows?
January 26th, 2007 at 5:39 pmI see Judd is leaving. No big loss as I can see. And good riddance while I am at it.
I am going to miss all of the ” underlings ” around here yelling ” Judd Help! I am spineless and defenseless and they are talking mean to me. Please make them stop! I am so psychologically damaged and unbalanced that this poster is really getting under my skin! ”
Please make them stop! I have no other recourse against true debaters and patriots other than to fold my tent and run to you for some kind of strange assistance that I never recieve by the way.
You democrats are all mental midgets.
Bwahahahaha!!
January 26th, 2007 at 5:55 pm#37 – Joe,
Quite a pipe dream.
January 26th, 2007 at 5:56 pmBush is like a cornered animal… he feels threatened by this new Congress and he is going to fight back and fight back hard. Cheney has already lost his mind. The Democrats need to stop Bush and they need to be smarter than these tricksters. Congress does have the ability to STOP funding this illegal war. With Bush feeling attacked and if Congress withheld all funding, Bush will continue to either send more troops or keep our troops in Iraq longer, only with less equipment than they already have. It’s not going to be easy to get out of this mess that the Bush/Cheney cartel created.
I can’t comment on Steney Hoyer because I don’t know much about him. I spent the past 8 years trying to get rid of Ricky the Rooster Santorum. Finally succeeded.
January 26th, 2007 at 6:07 pmThere are only SEVENTY-THREE House ‘Out of Iraq’ caucus members.
Here’s the list:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/ index…essional_Caucus
The Dem policy of support leads directly to the DLC. Regrettably, too many on the Left can’t tell the difference between OUR difference (and Pelosi, Dean, et al.) and the party as usual — and simply damn the Dems with a wide brush, ignoring the opposition within the party — opposition which is in acendency, but still not sufficient numbers to accomplish much of what people expect handed to them on a silver platter.
The Dem House caucus has 233 members.
233 – 73 = 160 representatives who are not members of the Out of Iraq caucus.
We, those of us who support that goal, are about 1/3 of the House Dems. So you should thank your lucky stars that Pelosi is the hottest House politician in decades, and that we are moving forward.
The situation in the Senate is FAR WORSE.
Biden made it clear last week that the best way to stop the war is to author another AUMF, which would supercede the first. He said, however, that it would require 60 votes, and they only have something like 40.
A LOT more public pressure is needed, not just handwringing and moaning about how hard it is to fight tyranny. That’s the birth-task of any American — JUST KEEP AT IT.
How many of you are going into the streets tomorrow to protest in support of the DC march?
I protest today (as usual) and tomorrow in support. I’m a bit sick of hearing people whine about the Congress, when they can’t even show up at THEIR OWN OFFICE, namely our public streets, and make their complaints known.
We have a lot of work still to be done. People who simply want to pout and throw tomatoes at “the Dems” — as if that was anything more than childish tantrums — need to put their asses into GEAR.
Boots, bottle of water, jacket, bandana, PROTEST SIGN. Exit front door.
January 26th, 2007 at 6:15 pmThe Out of Iraq Caucus, most of whom will be in DC tomorrow, supporting us supporting them:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Out_of_Iraq_Congressional_Caucus
January 26th, 2007 at 6:17 pmWhy don’t they just indict him (that’d be, um, “impeachment”, I think) for violating the original force resolution?
The only reason people have to keep searching for these “creative” solutions is because no one wants to use the remedy the Constitution suppplies – and demands.
January 26th, 2007 at 6:27 pmYou democrats are all mental midgets.
Bwahahahaha!!
Comment by Joanie Doe
Nice take. Now try saying it thru your mouth, hon.
#37 – Joe,
Quite a pipe dream.
Comment by CoffinsDrapedWithFlags
Yeah. Like Jason and Dick Cheney, I’ve really got my hopes up on this one.
January 26th, 2007 at 6:31 pmAvedon, we DON’T HAVE THE VOTES for impeachment, and mommy doesn’t run the Congress. Attempting impeachment without the votes is counter-productive.
Nothing about Congress is understandable unless you can count the votes.
INVESTIGATION, INDICTMENT, IMPEACHMENT, REMOVAL.
Emphasis on the outing of crimes, not on useless demands (and anger) at what isn’t available yet.
January 26th, 2007 at 6:39 pm#5. Quite reasonable. Unfortunately, reason no longer seems to apply, and as noted on the front page, the “surge” is already under way.
January 26th, 2007 at 7:50 pmBad idea, unless…
The only reason to even consider a new AUMF would be after we repeal the two existing AUMFs, to cover the continued use of such force by the troops we already have engaged in Iraq and Afghanistan as is necessary for them to use as they extricate themselves from those countries. A new AUMF that tries to authorize any use of force beyond that needed on the way out, will have to have loopholes allowing the President to commit additional forces for emergent contingencies threatening the troops, willl not set firm deadlines for drawdown, and will therefore not limit anything. Worse, the new AUMF would make the Dems once again partially responsible for the on-going war, a result devoutly sought by the Republicans, and to be avoided by all but DINO Dems. Oh, I forgot, this is Hoyer’s idea.
Democrats shoud assume responsibility for the conduct of this war if and only if they achieve consensus on the one reasonable course now open to us — immediate and complete withdrawal. People who want Dems to pass a new AUMF that falls short of that, that authorizes continued war, simply want the war continued. They aren’t moderates or centrists, they’re DINOs, sellouts or self-deluded.
January 26th, 2007 at 9:34 pm“The only reason to even consider a new AUMF would be after we repeal the two existing AUMFs,”
A new AUMF would inherently cancel preceding ones.
We just don’t have the votes yet to pass one which does the trick.
January 26th, 2007 at 10:54 pmAnd it’s not Hoyer, it’s Biden.
What Biden said was that a new AUMF is the best way to stop the escalation. It might not be effective even so, as you say, but the main reason for doing it, to my mind, is to put the Constitution back into play.
If you think Dems don’t ‘own the war’ you must have some different party in mind. There are 73 out of 233 House Dems in the Out of Iraq caucus — Biden suggested there were maybe 40 votes total for a new AUMF, when 60 would be needed. So in the Dem Congress there are at least 150-170 caucus members who support in some regard the deployment of troops to the ME, though that number will certainly change once the war against Iran starts (if it cannot be stopped — which is highly doubtful with the arrival of a second carrier group in February).
January 26th, 2007 at 11:02 pmBtw, Biden is chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committtee, which is why his view is pertinent.
January 26th, 2007 at 11:10 pmWell, obviously, it’s Hoyer now (which to my mind is good0. Biden brought this up this last week in committee.
January 26th, 2007 at 11:15 pm“There are already 60 American kids sent home in coffins since Congress was sworn in this month.
Could Congress pick up the pace a bit? People are dying for NOTHING.”
Don’t you see, they are not dying for nothing, they are dying for this administration to gain power, and the ability to gain control over the oil in Iraq, and other points close to Iraq. It’s not even close to over, not until we can control that area, and then the area’s around that region. Look up locations of military bases in that region, you’ll find that we have them all over the middle east, surrounding that region. This administration is just using its strong hold and iron fists to take control over the most oil rich countries because soon oil will be at a shortage, and do you think Iraq would have shared with us, no, so we have to take control now… Its just the beginning, watch!
January 28th, 2007 at 9:27 amSkin Care Mole Removal
Hi – just wanted to say good design and blog -
March 20th, 2008 at 5:12 amAss Tight Ass Ass Worship
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 28th, 2008 at 2:55 pm