I have nothing to say about THIS. You tell me.
I have to leave for a while..take some deep breaths. read carefully. think carefully.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
remember
Andrew Breitbart...American Hero
My Blog List
-
-
-
-
An Epidemic Of Biden3 years ago
-
-
FOR ME - MORE BLOG LESS F B2 years ago
-
-
Kid's Creations2 months ago
-
Sixty-one Years Ago Today7 hours ago
-
His Name Was Charles4 years ago
-
-
-
Project Reconquista Commences10 years ago
-
Sorta Makes You Wanna Cry...9 years ago
-
-
-
-
Mr. AOW Has Gone Home3 years ago
-
-
Compare and Contrast1 week ago
-
-
Wow. I Lost Myself6 years ago
-
-
-
Can You Hear Us Now?1 week ago
-
VALENTINES DAY! :-)4 years ago
15 comments:
what they need is an act that will force them to cooperate on such important matters as steroid use in baseball.
it's just another way to hamstring the process. Cooperate my *ss. They can't even figure out when to vote on lifting the ban on drilling.
We are at war. Perhaps the panel, instead, should direct their rules for war to the enemy. That wouldn't be any more ludicrous.
I especially like this one; "inform Congress of any plans to engage in "significant armed conflict," or non-covert operations lasting longer than a week.
In turn, Congress would act within 30 days, either approving or disapproving the action."
A timetable from the get-go! A week! Well, launching a hydrogen bomb would work.
Outside of that it would take weeks just to move the men and equipment into place for "significant armed conflict". The geniuses that thought this up must have been let out of the nursing home.
So, let's see, we spend billions of dollars, mobilizing our forces for "significant armed conflict", begin the operation, and like clockwork, on the seventh day, someone blows a whistle and yells TIME'S UP!
The democrat Congress holds hearings, and OH NO, on the 30th day. They say, WE GIVE", bring the troops home.
I know I'm making light of this when it's a serious matter. The idea isn't serious, the fact that it's even being discussed is. During a war, btw.
Diplomats and politicians love bureaucracy, so why not do something unconstitutional and fight wars through committee? God knows the Congress is trying to do just that.
President Bush did go to Congress. Congress did give him their assent to go to war with Iraq. It worked pretty well IMO.
This is nothing more than an attempt to strip the Commander-in-Chief of his Constitutional power, and duties.
I have a picture of these diplomats sitting around their large table, discussing how to fight a nuanced war, a la John Kerry. A civilized war. How to avoid difficulties and political differences. Talk, talk, talk.
In other words, write a primer on how to have a war, and do no harm. Add layers of bureaucracy, so as to make victory impossible.
When will these elitists 'get', that war is hard, there can't be timetables, there is no such thing as an exit plan, only winning.
If you want "nice", be a florist, not someone who has to deal with life and death decisions, and for sure, not someone who is supposed to protect and defend your country.
All this does is tell the world, we really don't want to fight, so don't take us seriously.
God help us.
Pris
you're both SO right.
Pris..that 'thirty days' thing stuck out at me more than any of it, funny you should particularly mention it. THIRTY DAYS ..to RESPOND? to losing CLEVELAND, maybe?
Their approval rating today is at 9% (thanks to stuff Elbro describes and more) and Americans are still poised to apparently vote in MORE DEMS than there are even now in the Dem-dominated congress..
SO, who's MORE stupid??
Oh for heaven's sake! Why in the world should the nincompoops in Congress who can't even work a full 40 hour week have anything to say about it? Anonymous is right in saying Bush did get Congress's approval, but there is no law that he had to, and there shouldn't be.
Pelosi and Reid aren't capable of stringing a chain of paper clips together let alone making decisions as important as this. If we gave them that much power we may just as well blow ourselves up. It will amount to the same thing!
Congress is in DIRE NEED of a very deep cleaning!!!
LOL! The Congress needs to go take a powder. NOTHING will get a Democratic Congress to back a Republican president in ANYTHING. Screw THEM! In fact, it's time to give the President the right to unilaterally declare war (push back time). And it's also time to start PROSECUTING members of Congress who conduct an independent party-centered foreign policy contrary to that of the official policy of the United States of America via Dept. of State (got that Nancy, nudge, nudge).
ps- Pardon my French.
There really is no reason , obviously to have a president according these two old gas bags.
All I see is more and more take over of the socialist way of doing everything by committee...now, come on, you TELL me what this.
James Baker and Warren Christopher...oh boy.
They both need to go home and just shut the ...up .
But it is SO good to know where everyone really stands. I had my suspicions. SOme people would sell anyone.
WVDOTTR
Anon raises a good point on what's said, where congress would act within 30 days....
There shouldn't be ANY delays in making decisions on offensive force.
To further exacerbate the situation, I never did understand where former secretaries of state have the qualifications to even become involved in warmaking decisions in the first place.
Well, obviously anyone who ever had any kind of post in any administration is an expert on war, declaring war, identifying war and so on.
And they wonder why everyone is blogging.
WVDOTTR
Bill Clinton didn't need Congressional approval nor authorization to provide Al Qaeda with 79 days of air support against Serbia.
They don't want the president to have the power he has. And let's face it, this is aimed squarely at Bush, they'll never forgive him for not turning Iraq into their Vietnam fantasy.
Imagine Pelosi and Reid effectively bickering over whether to go to war or surrender. It'll be all over by the time they decide when to hold the next meeting.
Is this perhaps a precursor in trying to stop any upcoming Iranian strikes?
Watch out for pizza delivery en masse at the Pentagon on the weekends.
Your elite commenters hit every point perfectly. Christopher and Baker are such shining examples of liberal mindset... delay, defer, and invite demise.
Oh, and "MK"... I don't see Pelosi and Reid ever arguing about whether to go to war or not... The question would more likely be which one got run over by the other as they both tried to quickly run away.
It is as if we now live in a parallel universe, albeit backwards.
We need another president like Lincoln who basically just told everyone to go to hell, and then did what he wanted to do without anyone's "by your leave."
Lincoln acted as a self-appointed dictator and has been LAUDED and APPLAUDED for his utter lawlessness.
In his case most people succumbed to the notion that "the ends justified the means."
We always do when we AGREE with the agenda at hand.
We MUST have someone in command who is not afraid to ACT IMMEDIATELY when a crisis like 911 arises.
The D'Rats will have everyone tripped up in their underwear and hog-tied. Their ideas are tantamount to rolling out the red carpet and icing plenty of champagne for anyone and everyone who seeks to harm America.
If there could such a thing as collective Insanity, the D'Rats exemplify it to the hilt.
~ FreeThinke
There's vindication in victory/ success, FT. Best buy GWB stock now. It can't but rise.
Post a Comment