Hey Democrats, Quit Playing Games and Lead
by Big Dog on Jan 10, 2007 at 17:56 Political
The Democrats have been out of the majority for a few short years and they act like they do not know how to lead. OK, now that I think about it they don’t know how to lead. For a few years now the Democrats have been telling America that Bush has screwed up the war (the one he lied us into) and that we need more troops. They routinely quote GEN Shinseki and his assertion that we would need half a million troops. The Bush administration decided to go with fewer troops and there has been a price to pay. The lack of troops has been a battle cry (in as much as liberals can battle) of the left. So, now that Bush is going to send more troops to Iraq what are they doing? The liberals who said we do not have enough troops are saying we do not need more troops. Pelosi, as I pointed out in the previous post, said that we should send more to stabilize. Now she is fighting the idea. Harry Reid was all for more troops, now he is not. The Democrats are going to have a symbolic vote on this issue. They are trying to force Republicans to express their support or disapproval of the plan to send more troops.
I want to know what purpose it serves. Congress has no authority to vote on sending troops, despite the effort of Ted Kennedy to violate the Constitution. Yes, the Boozer has introduced legislation to require the President to get Congressional approval before sending more troops to Iraq. The Congress can not make laws to interfere with the President’s duties as Commander in Chief. The President can send the troops where he wants and when he wants. Congress gets to allocate the money and the is their prerogative. I imagine Kennedy would have the DTs if Bush tried to decide how money was spent or take control of some other aspect of the legislative branch. However, Kennedy is trying to encroach on the Executive, must be his failed dreams of being President.
So now they will have a symbolic vote. What exactly is that other than a waste of time. If the vote had some significance and carried weight then it might mean something but this will be for show. If I were a Republican I would just skip the vote. It will not mean a thing because even if 100% of the members vote not to send troops, or not to spend money, or to call Bush a jackass, the fact is they can not stop him from sending the troops. They are going to go with or without the money and with or without the blessing of Congress. This is nothing more than an attempt to pigeon hole Republicans who should just tell Pelosi and Reid, respectively, to go screw themselves. I would tell them to pound sand and I would lambaste Kennedy as a buffoon who is trying to circumvent the Constitution, but that is just me. I do not, nor would I, ever have to be nice to those idiots.
How about the Democrats get out there and act like the majority and try accomplishing something? How about instead of symbolic votes they get down to work? It is high time they stopped reliving their hippie days of symbolic protests and actually get something done. In case they are unaware, they can no longer run around and blame everything on Bush. They are in the majority and they get the responsibility for what goes on so they need to stop playing the games they vowed to end and get their asses to work. I am tired of wasting money paying them. I would fire the whole lot (from both parties) if I were in charge.
If the Democrats are so hung up on symbolism and think this symbolic vote is cute then I have an idea. Why don’t we consider the vote in November as a symbolic one and say that they did not win? Hell, they must not have wanted it because they have yet to act like leaders.
These are the kinds of games you get when you ask people like those at the Daily Kos to help you set your agenda. Next they will be playing in the sand and take nap time.
Source:
New York Times
Others:
Right on the Right | Stop the ACLU
Tags: Political