Toothless Dog To Bite Bush
This week the President will be attacked by a toothless dog. Not exactly a scary proposition, but still it's the best that the ultra politically concerned congress can come up with.
With tens of thousands protesting the war, and celebrity protesters like Sean Penn and "Hanoi" Jane Fonda present, you'd think Congress would feel emboldened to do something meaningful with their vote on the Iraq war.
No, instead of taking a real stand, and cutting off funding for the war, Congress will instead debate (as though they have meaning) a few non-binding resolutions saying the President's policy in Iraq isn't in the best interest of the U.S.A.
Both GOP and Democrat(ic) members will introduce resolutions that have no effect, other than to say "We don't like the policy, and we are weak willed ninnies".
But why, with public support for the President so low, and the war even lower, don't they do something meaningful? The answer is simple, there is a Presidential election next year, and keeping Iraq as an issue is more important (to them) than actually doing what they believe to be right.
Secondly, they aren't at all sure that a good outcome will happen if we abandon Iraq, and not only in Iraq. Iran is a major concern, and while the Congressmen and women would like us to believe the whole world will love us if we leave Iraq, they know that Iran is relishing the idea.
Iran, for those who haven't paid attention to anything but Iraq in the Middle East, has been building quite an arsenal over the last decade. They have threatened at times to close the Strait of Hormuz, where a good portion of the worlds oil is shipped, and in the past shot tankers trying to leave (think back to the 1980's). In fact, the tanker war of the '80's is what originally ramped up our presence in the Gulf.
The weak-willed in Congress knows that the only reason Iran doesn't try similar tactics, and to take over a weak Iraq, is US presence there. By cutting off funding for Iraq, they'd also be removing the only thing that keeps Iran at bay in the Gulf.
Going into 2008 the last thing the Democratic majority needs is a (huge) spike in oil prices, brought by a policy they voted for, and an imboldened Iran flexing it's muscle in the region.
So instead of taking what they believe to be the morally correct action in Iraq, they will instead take what is the politically expedient action, say a lot, and do nothing.
That folks, is what we elected last November.
Technorati Tags: Iraq, Iran, Middle East, Politics, Democrats, Bush, Resolutions, War, Protests
With tens of thousands protesting the war, and celebrity protesters like Sean Penn and "Hanoi" Jane Fonda present, you'd think Congress would feel emboldened to do something meaningful with their vote on the Iraq war.
No, instead of taking a real stand, and cutting off funding for the war, Congress will instead debate (as though they have meaning) a few non-binding resolutions saying the President's policy in Iraq isn't in the best interest of the U.S.A.
Both GOP and Democrat(ic) members will introduce resolutions that have no effect, other than to say "We don't like the policy, and we are weak willed ninnies".
But why, with public support for the President so low, and the war even lower, don't they do something meaningful? The answer is simple, there is a Presidential election next year, and keeping Iraq as an issue is more important (to them) than actually doing what they believe to be right.
Secondly, they aren't at all sure that a good outcome will happen if we abandon Iraq, and not only in Iraq. Iran is a major concern, and while the Congressmen and women would like us to believe the whole world will love us if we leave Iraq, they know that Iran is relishing the idea.
Iran, for those who haven't paid attention to anything but Iraq in the Middle East, has been building quite an arsenal over the last decade. They have threatened at times to close the Strait of Hormuz, where a good portion of the worlds oil is shipped, and in the past shot tankers trying to leave (think back to the 1980's). In fact, the tanker war of the '80's is what originally ramped up our presence in the Gulf.
The weak-willed in Congress knows that the only reason Iran doesn't try similar tactics, and to take over a weak Iraq, is US presence there. By cutting off funding for Iraq, they'd also be removing the only thing that keeps Iran at bay in the Gulf.
Going into 2008 the last thing the Democratic majority needs is a (huge) spike in oil prices, brought by a policy they voted for, and an imboldened Iran flexing it's muscle in the region.
So instead of taking what they believe to be the morally correct action in Iraq, they will instead take what is the politically expedient action, say a lot, and do nothing.
That folks, is what we elected last November.
Technorati Tags: Iraq, Iran, Middle East, Politics, Democrats, Bush, Resolutions, War, Protests
posted by Crazy Politico at 9:04 AM
0Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home