Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I'm not sure what S_A_M's issue is about "playing politics" with the war. The war is by far and away the most important to voters right now. If you check the polls, it comes in at 40-something%, and the next issue is in the single digits. Since Congress is expressing itself on policy but not tying the President's hands, what's the problem? How can they "push it too far"?
|
I mean, quite simply, what I said.
I fear that both sides may be formulating policy and taking actions based on considerations of political popularity rather than merit, with possible detrimental effects to the "success" of this important mission (i.e. getting the best possible outcome now).
Or, they all may be acting based on their best judgment, with which I disagree. Hard to tell.
Yes, the issue is critically important to the voters, and the Democrats certainly have to push the issue. I'm not suggesting they are wrong to do so. Both sides have to satisfy the folks who elected them and/or will be voting on them in the future, at least to some extent. (That's why I was hoping our party would have a less complete victory.)
As to tying the President's hands -- some members of the House would love to do that (i.e. prevent a surge and force withdrawal) through the funding mechanism -- but I don't think you can really use that in such a delicate and precise manner. We are far fromt the point where Congress would just cut off funding for the whole operation.
S_A_M
Threaded Mode