Oh yes, we have no resolution
The big buzz today is the war resolution that remains unresolved. Just about everybody is talking about it and there's a lot of conflicting opinions about whether the Republicans shut down the anticipated debate or whether the Democrats simply refused to debate it. Steve Benen did a great job of rounding up the best takes so I would encourage you to go there for the detailed explanation but as far as I can tell from my limited perusal of the posts, the short version seems to be there were at least three competing proposals.
The Republicans wanted to manuever the Democrats into a corner by requiring a filibuster level vote for passage and forgo debate. The Democrats wanted to allow any proposal to pass on a simple majority as long as there was a debate and the spoiler resolution that might have passed in the resulting confusion was some lame endorsement of the President's right to do whatever he damn well pleased.
EJ Dionne has a good column on the dynamic behind the manuevering and counsels patience. Personally, I'm fresh out of patience and I'm disgusted with both sides. The whole sorry spectacle serves as the perfect illustration of what's wrong with our Legislative branch. For the love of Pete, while the professional politicians are in hot pursuit of the right headline for PR purposes and busily trying to score political points for their side with non-binding resolutions, Bush is out there plotting his next blunder. We need concrete and decisive action. Enough with the posturing already.
The only Senator that got this right is Feingold, who cuts through the BS with some hard words for both parties. Via Bob Geiger, who was in on a conference call Feingold had with the big bloggers:
The Republicans wanted to manuever the Democrats into a corner by requiring a filibuster level vote for passage and forgo debate. The Democrats wanted to allow any proposal to pass on a simple majority as long as there was a debate and the spoiler resolution that might have passed in the resulting confusion was some lame endorsement of the President's right to do whatever he damn well pleased.
EJ Dionne has a good column on the dynamic behind the manuevering and counsels patience. Personally, I'm fresh out of patience and I'm disgusted with both sides. The whole sorry spectacle serves as the perfect illustration of what's wrong with our Legislative branch. For the love of Pete, while the professional politicians are in hot pursuit of the right headline for PR purposes and busily trying to score political points for their side with non-binding resolutions, Bush is out there plotting his next blunder. We need concrete and decisive action. Enough with the posturing already.
The only Senator that got this right is Feingold, who cuts through the BS with some hard words for both parties. Via Bob Geiger, who was in on a conference call Feingold had with the big bloggers:
This is not a time to finesse the situation. This is not a time for a slow walk. ...Amen. Crooks and Liars has video of Feingold laying it on the line. I'm almost sorry he's not running for the nomination this time around.
"This is an important moment to see if we're really going to try to end this war and, frankly, I am disappointed that Democrats are playing it too safe on this.
"This goes back to the beginning -- remember most of these guys voted for the war, so they’ve got a heck of a lot of baggage on this thing. So they’re afraid, as they have been all along, of standing up to these phony arguments of the White House. They want to have their cake and eat it too. They want to be able to say they’re against the war, but they’re not for a timeline to withdraw the troops, they’re not for cutting the funding -- you know, they’re not for anything that's actually going to get the job done.
posted by Libby Spencer at 4:04 PM
3 Comments:
I don't know, I read somewhere today that the Dems were just handed a gift by the GOP who will be perceived as blocking debate on troop increases. That was my first impression too. Poll after poll shows that Americans want our troops home, but the GOP once again ignored the voters and put party ahead of country.
If they keep this up, what happened to their party in November 2006 will be a minor tremor compared to the tsunami that sweeps them away in 2008.
these non binding resolutions are stupid anyway. why are there such things as non binding resolutions? cut the funding. be men (and some women)
fuck that other shit
There are PR advantages to it Kathy but we don't have time for politics as usual right now. Normally, I would agree that the PR value was enough. But there's a madman in the White House that must be stopped. Non-binding resolutions won't do it. If Bush pulls the nuclear trigger, the tsuamni will wipe us all out.
But even putting that aside, the midterms weren't just about the war. It was about a Congress that doesn't do its job. In the long run, ordinary citizens who don't live and breathe politics like we do, are just going to remember what gets done - or doesn't. The Dems aren't going to get away with much ado about nothing this time. I'm telling you 08 will be the year of the anti-incumbent if they don't deliver some real change.
Lester - I think you and I agree on this point.
Post a Comment
<< Home