End Of Day Round Up, Wednesday Feb 28
Hey folks,
Well, here is yet another end of day round up for you. The big news is the Democrats, make that the LWL, failing in their quest to pass a bill stripping the President of his Commander and Chief status, and the fact that there is this big meeting that many are screaming about.
First the LWL {Left Wing Looneys} find out that most Americans are NOT for them cutting funding and even restricting the who, what, where, and when, of the troops . In essence, they finally got it. Most Americans do not want to lose this, or any, war.
According to the LA Times,
WASHINGTON — Democratic lawmakers, who earlier this month nearly unanimously backed resolutions condemning President Bush's plans to boost troop levels in Iraq, are struggling to agree on what to do next in their drive to bring the war to an end.
They PROMISED they would end the war. The problem is, they promised this to a minute fraction of LWL fringe. You know, the Moveon.com type. But the majority of the American people, and even some in their own party DO NOT WANT THIS. So they made the promise, they boast,
"We've been in the majority for six weeks," said Sen. Patty Murray of Washington. "We've had 38 hearings on the Iraq war…. We've already had two votes on the war…. That's a lot better than they've done in the last 3 1/2 or 4 years."
But they haven’t really gotten anything done. {Laughing} I could say I worked all week. Over time even. But if I did nothing while at work, what’s the point? There is none. It doesn’t matter how long I worked. But this is not sitting well with the extreme Looneys out there.
"There seems to be a new world land-speed record set in back-peddling," said Tom Andrews, a former Democratic congressman from Maine who heads Win Without War, a coalition of antiwar groups.
Just a few weeks ago, Win Without War was targeting Republicans for standing in the way of the resolutions. Now, Andrews said, antiwar groups are encouraging their members to pressure Democratic lawmakers.
"There seems to be a new world land-speed record set in back-peddling," I love it.
Democratic leaders in the Senate have never been enthusiastic about using congressional authority over funding the military to tie up the deployment. But their strategy of rewriting the resolution that authorized the 2003 invasion of Iraq to limit the U.S. mission there also has run into trouble.
Leaders have been circulating a draft by Sens. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.), the Foreign Relations Committee chairman, and Carl Levin (D-Mich.), the Armed Services Committee chairman. But several senators sounded uncomfortable with language specifying that U.S. troops could engage in some activities, such as counterinsurgency, but not others.
"I think it's very difficult to start changing things after the fact and still avoid micromanaging," said Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), a moderate lawmaker who helped lead efforts to pass a nonbinding resolution opposing the deployment of additional troops.
So what is their answer to this. This HAS to be in the "you can’t make this stuff up" category. According to The San Francisco Chronicle,
House Democratic leaders, defending a plan by Rep. John Murtha, said Tuesday they will press ahead with legislation requiring all U.S. troops be fully equipped, trained and rested before being sent back to Iraq.
Despite rumors that Speaker Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco was backing away from the plan, which Republicans have decried as a "slow bleed" on the war, the speaker said Murtha's proposal on troop standards would be debated next week in committee and that she hopes to move it quickly to the floor.
The proposal, however, would allow President Bush to waive the rules if he wanted to deploy troops faster or under different standards than allowed by the measure.
WAIT A SECOND!!!! Read that again,
The proposal, however, would allow President Bush to waive the rules if he wanted to deploy troops faster or under different standards than allowed by the measure.
So they are going to attempt to pass THIS version, where the President can just simply ignore it? This is too much folks {Laughing hard} Seriously. "We are going to admonish you Mr. President, because we have too to attempt to satisfy the Looney fringe, but do not worry, you do not have to abide by it."
Democrats in the House and Senate are struggling to find ways to confront Bush on the war without alienating their most conservative members and opening themselves to political charges they are harming American troops fighting in Iraq.
It’s all about the polls for them. As I keep telling you. It all about popularity
Now for the other big news of the day. This is something that ALL the big guys are complaining about. They are ALL very upset about it. I’m not. I know, that may surprise and even upset some of YOU, but it IS the truth. I’m just not that mad about it.
What am I talking about? This so called "Good Neighbors" meeting in Iraq. This will include Iran and Syria. Now has the Bush Administration said that it will not meet with Little Hitler as long as he continues to his quest to build nuclear weapons? Yes. Are we going to this meeting with includes Iran? Yes. Why did US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice make this statement?
"We hope that all governments seize this opportunity to improve their relations with Iraq and to work for peace and stability in the region."
I would hope that it is because she meant it. I hope they will too. But everyone is absolutely livid about this. Why? Or better yet, you are probably wondering, why am I not?
OK, my take on this is simple. One, we are trying to get them, and are allowing them, to take over their own country. We freed them. We are training and protecting them while they start finding their footing. They WANT this. They called for it. Are we just going to lay down and allow Iran to build nuclear weapons? No. Are we going to allow Little Hitler to attack Israel? No. Are we going to just allow them to continue to attack tour troops? No. What WE decide to do with Iran, is between us and Iran. Nothing really to do with Iraq. They are THEIR neighbors. Not ours. They are now a sovereign nation. We have to allow them to make choices for themselves.
Two, we can at least say we tried. Look folks, you all know how I feel about Ahmadinejad. You all know that even when other fail to report to you all his doings, I do. You all know I have been watching Iran closely. He Is an evil man. He IS a new Hitler on the rise. But Iraq asked for this meeting. We are going to be there to observe. Nothing else. We are not going to turn over Iraq to Little Hitler. We are going to deal with him in our own way.
This is why I’m not all that upset over this. There will come a time when we leave, giving Iraq totally to the Iraqi government. After that, whatever their dealings with Iran, is their own. We will deal with Iran on our own. Make no mistake about it, we are not asking Ahmadinejad for help in Iraq. We are merely observing.
So to all my friends having coronaries over this meeting, relax. Let it play out. After the meeting, we can then determine the truth of the whole situation.
See you all tomorrow, for a story noone seems to be reporting.
Peter
Sources;
LA Times-War bill divides Democrats
The San Francisco Chronicle-Dems to push tough bill on redeployments
BBC-Iran positive on Iraq conference
AP-Analysis: Iraq talks may open new doors
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment