House Liberals Entertain Alternate Scheme: Deauthorize The War

http://electioncentral.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2007/may/09/house_liberals_entertain_new_scheme_deauthorize_the_war

House Liberals Entertain Alternate Scheme: Deauthorize The War
By Greg Sargent | bio

Okay, here's an interesting little bit of news from the behind-the-scenes negotiating among House Dems over what to do next about the war.

Apparently some liberal members are batting around an idea which, while definitely a long shot, is interesting: To try to persuade the House Dem leadership to allow a House vote soon on whether to deauthorize the war, in a similar manner to the approach now favored by Hillary.

Last night a dozen or so liberal members -- Lynn Woolsey, Barbara Lee, Dennis Kucinich, etc. -- gathered behind closed doors and at the meeting someone floated the deauthorization concept, a source who was present tells me. In the meeting, the source says, there was a fair amount of dissatisfaction expressed with the House leadership's current favored approach, which would fund the war through July and require another vote to release further short-term funds.

One member then suggested that since many in the room were cool to leadership's approach, why not get something in return for their support?

The thinking was that a group of liberals would go to leadership and promise to back the new measure only if the leadership also allowed a vote on deauthorization of the war, too.

"The idea was to basically trade their support of the current leadership position for a deauthorization vote," the source says. "The point would be that (a) You would be forcing Republicans to vote on whether or not to extend the President's war authority; and (b) You'd allow moderate Dems to correct their original vote for the war. This would change the dynamic in a big way because the President could no longer keep attacking Congress' opposition to the war by saying that Congress had voted to authorize it."

The idea of the House deauthorizing the war isn't new -- it's been floated in various forms over the last year -- but there was more support in the room for it than it has gained in the past, according to a second person who was there.

Still, the chances are slim that it will go anywhere in the real world -- no decision was made to go forward with it last night, and the leadership would almost certainly nix it. Nonetheless, it seemed interesting to us, and we just wanted to pass it along for comment. Meanwhile, the vote on the House measure is set for tomorrow.

Congress should stop funding the war, period.

People can play all the deauthorization games they want: Bush will just say his original authorization was unlimited, that he's the commander guy and it can't be revoked in the middle of his "war". And his Court will back him.

The only way to deauthorize the war is to stop paying for it.

Well of course they would. They're only the fucking majority party; why on earth would anyone think they actually meant it when they swore to us last year that, if elected, they'd end the war. And nyah, nyah, they had their fingers crossed, so nix nix nix.

Jesus Christ! Let's say the same deauthorization plan was floated a year ago. Well, as the article says, "... the leadership would almost certainly nix it." And that's what you'd expect from fucking republicans. However, there's new leadership in town. One might expect that they might eventually learn what it means to be an opposition party.

Oh... and Miss Nancy? I don't give a rat's ass about bipartisanship. I want impeachment, conviction and, preferably, the gallows for the entire treasonous lot of rat bastards. Failing execution, I'd settle for life without possibility of parole at Abu Ghraib under the tender care of our tax-payer funded torture experts.

Anything that moves Congress away from that overarching objective is just useless appeasement, which is to say, the same old tired behavior I've come to expect from the party of spineless, unprincipled, craven suck-ups. At least the GOP stands for something, horrible as that something is. This pack of weasels stands for nothing except their own reelections, with maybe 10 or so notable exceptions -- DK, Barbara Lee, Woolsey, Watson, Lewis, Waxman, occasionally Conyers and Murtha, and a few more who seem to have some actual motivation. The rest are just sucking up tax dollars and wasting precious air.

I intend to spend much energy, and as much money as I can, to defeat my very own Vichy Dem in next year's primary and replace her with a progressive flame thrower. And if she manages to win, I'll vote Green. These people are going to have to learn sooner or later that they need to earn the progressive vote. They've assumed it was theirs because no progressive in their right mind would vote repulsican. But I swear to Christ that they've had my last free pass. If BushCo isn't hideous enough to drive them to action, nothing is. As such, they're just as rotten as the GOPers, just less honest.

Nightie-night, Nancy. A spine's a powerful thing. Too bad you can't have one grafted on temporarily just to see how it feels.



wp

Great rant, and I sorrowfully agree. I just keep hoping they'll surprise us.