0

TODAY'S TIMES

BORROWED OPINIONS
In Search of a Congress

If you were one of the Americans waiting for Congress, under Democratic control, to show leadership on the war in Iraq, the message from the Senate is clear: “Nevermind.” The same goes for those waiting for lawmakers to fix the damage done to civil liberties by six years of President Bush and a rubber-stamp Republican Congress.

The Democrats don’t have, or can’t summon, the political strength to make sure Congress does what it is supposed to do: debate profound issues like these and take a stand. The Republicans are simply not interested in a serious discussion and certainly not a vote on anything beyond Mr. Bush’s increasingly narrow agenda.

On Wednesday, the Senate failed to vote on two major bills. One would have restored basic human rights and constitutional protections to hundreds of foreigners who are in perpetual detention, without charges or trial. The other was the one measure on the conduct of the Iraq war that survived the Democrats’ hasty retreat after last week’s smoke-and-mirrors display by Gen. David Petraeus and President Bush.

There were votes, of course, but not on the bills. They were cloture votes, which require 60 or more Senators to agree to cut off debate, eliminating the possibility of a filibuster, so Senators can vote on the actual law. In both cases, Democrats were four votes short, with six Republicans daring to defy the White House.

We support the filibuster as the only way to ensure a minority in the Senate can be heard. When the cloture votes failed this week, the Democrats should have let the Republicans filibuster. Democratic leaders think that’s too risky, since Congress could look like it’s not doing anything. But it’s not doing a lot now.

The country needs a lot more debate about what must be done to contain Iraq’s chaos and restore civil liberties sacrificed to Mr. Bush’s declared war on terrorism. Voters are capable of deciding whether Republicans are holding up the Senate out of principle or political tactics.

The current Republican leadership, now in the minority, has organized its entire agenda around the filibuster. In July, the McClatchy newspaper group reported that Republicans were using the threat of filibuster more than at any other time in the nation’s history.

Remember, this is the same batch of Republican senators who denounced Democrats as obstructionist and even un-American and threatened to change the Senate’s rules when Democrats threatened filibusters in 2005 over a few badly chosen judicial nominees. Now Republicans are using it to prevent consideration of an entire war.

If anything was clear from General Petraeus’s testimony and the president’s prime-time speech, it was that Mr. Bush has no idea how to end the war in a way that salvages as much as possible of America’s treasury, blood and global image while limiting the chaos that would follow any withdrawal, whether it comes quickly or slowly. Mr. Bush’s only idea is to keep the war going until he leaves office, and that means that other co-equal branch of government, the Congress, will have to lead the way out.

Democrats and Republicans who oppose the war have a duty to outline alternatives. Those who call for staying in Iraq have a duty to explain what victory means and how they plan to achieve it. Both sides are shirking an obligation to deal with issues that must be resolved right now, like the crisis involving asylum for Iraqis who helped the American occupation.

Congress is the first place for this kind of work. Right now, it seems like the last place it will happen.

longhorn said:
 
I had another wrestling match with kelly at the other place yesterday concerning this.

The democrats strategy of "blame the republicans" is just not working. In fact, the wingnuts who said before the last election that the dems only strategy was "blame the republicans". Damned if it isnt true, no matter HOW much I dont dont want to believe it.

HOW, in the wide, wide world of sports, did the democrats not DO anything for over four years and blame it on being in the minority? And now, that the repukes are in the minority, they STILL control congress? WTF? The repubs are in control whether they are in the minority or the majority?

Someone needs to remind the dems that they didnt use the tools available for them when they were in the minority. And now they are not using the tools available when they are in the MAJORITY!

Like deer in the headlights, they are frozen. So.. American voters have a choice between the frozen dems or the rampaging repubs. With no alternatives in sight.

And it aint much better in Topeka...
 
posted 792 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
lindainks55 said:
 
I read your dismay and disappointment with the Democratic Party over there. Every word TRUE sorry to say. And I hadn't heard it put so succinctly. How can they deny the Republicans are IN CONTROL whether they are the majority or minority party? Shouldn't this get through even the dullest and thickest minds to say, "Oh, it must be be something we are doing / not doing!" Guess our Democratic members of Congress don't even have a dull mind, just pockets.
 
posted 792 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
Danny said:
 
This is my thought on the matter:

In principle there are probably many(both Republican and Democrat) against the war but without any alternative plan on how to withdraw or alternative plans on how to fight the war we are currently in. So they stay quiet.

Thus, the only option of the war appears to be the option we are currently taking. Whether this is right or wrong, the opinion of the American people seemingly says that it is wrong and we need to start working toward leaving. Thus the expectation is that our elected leaders would listen to the majority of Americans. But as stated in in just a bit higher up here, if there is no plan or no other plan is provided then words are just rhetoric and then there is perceived inaction. Perhaps, they don't know what to do or how to get out of Iraq any better than the other half.

I can see leaving Iraq being difficult, too fast or too slow something bad is going to happen. However, maybe just by showing we are leaving it could kickstart something in Iraq to begin political solutions to their own unique set problems. I don't know the best way to leave, or to stay.

However, it seems that what is currently happening isn't working, but I'll admit I don't have all the information. I have what each of us can read and see on TV, but it isn't all the information it is part of the big picture. The emphasis being only part of it. Thus, if we do not have the entire picture but pieces of it, can we really make a good plan based on that?
 
posted 792 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
gster said:
 
I know it's highly unlikely to occurr, but I often wonder what would happen if Congress told Bush , given a majority of us want out of Iraq, they would not fund it anymore. This would most definitely send a very loud & clear message to the Iraqui government.

As it stands now, this action seems to be the only recourse available to Congress. ???

Think of the fireworks!
 
posted 792 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
 
Awww, ta heck with it all.
Let's have a piece of pie and a nap!
 
posted 792 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
lindainks55 said:
 
Tracy Phillips for President. His suggestions for our future make so much sense!
 
posted 792 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
Danny said:
 
Tracy,

If it can be Cherry pie with Ice cream count me in!
 
posted 792 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 

Search