Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
As a liberal with friends in Iraq, I don't want them to be underfunded while they're at war. The idea is to cut funding to get them home, but what if the bluff is called? What if they insist on keeping them in Iraq despite a cut in funding? That's a massive risk with our troops safety. That is where the divide in the liberal strategy lies. We want to end the war, but we also recognize the amazing sacrifice of our troops and we want them to be safe.
The best way to end the war is to push decent legislation about ending the war through the Senate and to get BIG support. The idea is to bypass the veto-machine in the oval office.
|
Clinton suggested a vote for re-authorization of the war. Perhaps something can be put on the table to fund the troops fully until they are removed from Iraq based on funding and a vote to change the mission.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ubertuber
Sorry Ace, I'm not sure how you got from the first two sentences to the rest. Could you clarify or say it a different way?
|
O.k.
Quote:
|
The way I see it (which is not necessarily the way the world is working at the moment), our government isn't supposed to be run by the Democratic and Republican parties. It's supposed to be run by the Legislative and Executive branches, with occasional mediation by the Judiciary.
|
In theory this assumes that the Legislative branch works cooperatively. However, they do not. The Executive branch currently controls the Republicans in the Legislature. Holding party lines is too easy. We need people to vote convictions and not party loyalty.
Quote:
|
It would be entirely appropriate for Congress, when giving money, to indicate what the money should be buying. Further, it would be appropriate for the Executive to figure out how to do those things with the money.
|
Again, in theory this seems correct. However, if the nation has lost confidence in its Executive Branch, then the Legislative Branch has to assume (or take) greater responsibility. I see no real alternative to supporting Bush's plan or supporting another plan. I don't understand how compromise works, and if there is no compromise, what is the Legislative Branch willing to do?