Tuesday, January 30, 2007

Constitutional showdown

Democrats appear to be confused about which branch of government is invested with the commander-in-chief powers.
Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee began laying the constitutional groundwork today for an effort to block President Bush’s plan to send more troops to Iraq and place new limits on the conduct of the war there, perhaps forcing a withdrawal of American forces from Iraq. ~nytimes.com
Seems a bit like a coup to me.

“I would respectfully suggest to the president that he is not the sole decider,” Mr. Specter said. “The decider is a joint and shared responsibility.”

Mr. Specter said he considered a clash over constitutional powers to be “imminent.” The Senate next week will take up competing proposals that would express disapproval of Mr. Bush’s plan.

Senator Russell Feingold, a Wisconsin Democrat who acted as chairman for the hearing, said he would soon introduce a resolution that would go much further. It would end all financing for the deployment of American military forces in Iraq after six months, other than a limited number working on counterterrorism operations or training the Iraqi army and police. In effect, it would call for all other American forces to be withdrawn by the six-month deadline.

“Since the President is adamant about pursuing his failed policy in Iraq, Congress has a duty to stand up and prevent him,” Mr. Feingold said. ~nytimes.com

Monday, January 22, 2007

Linkage option

The following are links that I'd like to follow up on and blog a full post about, but may not have the time to do but one or two...

Climate scientists feeling the heat
As public debate deals in absolutes, some experts fear predictions 'have created a monster'

Ramping Up the Pressure on al-Sadr

The Taliban’s ‘Bloody Spring’
Afghanistan’s ambassador to the U.S. expects fresh American funds to help fight a resurgent enemy.

We Can Win the White House
To build on our midterm gains, Dems should follow my '50 Percent Solution.'
(Half witted plan!)

Sen. Bernie Sanders: If You Are Concerned About Health Care, Iraq, the Economy, Global Warming You Must Be Concerned About Corporate Control of the Media

Al-Qaeda deputy 'mocks Bush plan'

A New Christendom from the ‘Two Thirds World’ is Arising

Confidence in Bush Leadership at All-Time Low, Poll Finds

Liberals or Al Qaeda?

It's honestly hard to tell when Zawahiri says, "Why not send 50 or 100 thousand?" if it's not a statement from Biden or another democrat. Or it could be Murtha saying that our troops will be massacred by the blood thirsty shock troops of Islamist terror. Or it could be Kerry who says that our troops are weak and easily defeated.

(CNN) -- In a video released Monday, al Qaeda's second in command ridicules President Bush's plan to send more U.S. troops to Iraq and predicts a fate "worse than anything you have yet seen."

"Security is a shared destiny," says Ayman al-Zawahiri, the chief aide to Osama bin Laden, on the video, which was tracked by lauramansfield.com, a Web site that analyzes terrorism.

The video, released on the eve of Bush's planned State of the Union address, lasts about 14 minutes.

"If we are secure, you might be secure, and if we are safe, you might be safe. And if we are struck and killed, you will definitely -- with Allah's permission -- be struck and killed." (Watch a soundbite from the video Video)

Al-Zawahiri cites Bush's plan to send more than 20,000 U.S. troops to Iraq, and asks, "Why not send 50,000 or 100,000?

"Aren't you aware that the dogs of Iraq are pining for your troops' dead bodies? Send your entire army to be annihilated at the hands of the mujahedeen to free the world from your evil and theirs because Iraq, the land of the caliphate and jihad, is able to bury 10 armies like yours, with God's help and power."

Bush, in a speech on Iraq policy changes January 11, said he will increase American forces by more than 20,000, the vast majority of them coming from "five brigades [that] will be deployed to Baghdad." ~cnn

Honestly, it's hard to tell.