March 1, 2007
Democrats' NEW New Peacenik Position
Ooh, this one is really good:
House Democratic leaders have coalesced around legislation that would require troops to come home from Iraq within six months if that country's leaders fail to meet promises to help reduce violence there, party officials said Thursday.
Let's see if I can unpack this: In other words, if al-Qaeda strikes, creating "violence" in Iraq... then under the newest Democratic proposal, our response would be to pull our troops out! That'll scare the robes off Mr. Masri.
The Democrats also tossed this into the bill, kind of offhandedly, as if it were no big deal:
The legislation also would require Bush to seek congressional approval for any military operations in Iran.
Think about that one: If Iran sent bombers into Iraq, and they directly attacked American troops then scurried back across the border -- we could not respond until we first got a congressional authorization for the use of military force... which of course would require:
- Six weeks of hearings on the WMD question in Iraq;
- A post-resignation performance review of Donald Rumsfeld;
- Impeachment proceedings against the president and vice president (spearheaded by Squeaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Haight-Ashbury, 100%, of course);
- Revisiting the confirmation hearings of Roberts and Alito, with an eye towards a revote;
- "Living Wage" legislation of $25 per hour;
- Free drugs for everyone at government expense;
- The repeal of the Patriot act, to be replaced by the Diplomatic Engagement Furthering Efforts Against Terrorism act;
- And lengthy consideration of the Kerry bill to ban all commercial advertising by Vietnam veterans who refused to join the Winter Soldier project when they had the chance, those scoundrels.
By which point, Iran and southern Iraq would have merged; independent Kurdistan would be formed from pieces of Iraq, Turkey, and Iran; and the erstwhile Sunni portions of Iraq would be renamed Independent Wahhabistan.
I suspect this legislation will squeak through the House; but there is no way it's going to get even a majority in the Senate, let alone the 60 votes needed for cloture -- and let even further alone the 67 votes necessary to override President Bush's predestined veto.
Isn't there some point beyond which doomed-to-fail "protest" votes simply become legislative self-abuse?
Hatched by Dafydd on this day, March 1, 2007, at the time of 6:13 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this hissing: http://biglizards.net/mt3.36/earendiltrack.cgi/1843
Comments
The following hissed in response by: Bill Faith
Fetch a rope. Fetch a buncha ropes. I excerpted and linked at New Surrendercrat Strategy: Betray The Troops -- Update 17.
The above hissed in response by: Bill Faith ![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://biglizards.net/blog/nav-commenters.gif)
at March 2, 2007 12:40 AM
The following hissed in response by: Terrye
This is getting ridiculous. Maybe they will decide to spare themselves the humiliation and not bring this thing up.
The above hissed in response by: Terrye at March 2, 2007 3:26 AM
The following hissed in response by: snochasr
Let's just try them all for treason, right now. Don't you think that telling Iran what we will not do, regardless, is giving aid and comfort to Iran, an enemy by their own admission? And stupid besides?
The above hissed in response by: snochasr at March 2, 2007 5:42 AM
Post a comment
Thanks for hissing in, . Now you can slither in with a comment, o wise. (sign out)
(If you haven't hissed a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Hang loose; don't shed your skin!)© 2005-2009 by Dafydd ab Hugh - All Rights Reserved
)
