| Submit your comments on this article | ||
| Fifth Column | ||
| Senator Feilgold pushes resolution to cut funding of troops Iraq | ||
| 2007-01-26 | ||
Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., has scheduled a hearing next Tuesday in his Judiciary Committee subcommittee to explore whether Congress has the authority to cut off funding for the U.S. military campaign in Iraq. The move comes as Congress prepares to vote on a congressional resolution opposing President Bush's escalation of the war.
Republicans "would like this debate to be as whether or not we are going to be cutting off money for the troops," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid recently told The Politico. "The logical conclusion is that a lot of things can happen. But right now, the most important thing is to tell the president that what he has done with the escalation is wrong. And that's what we are doing, bi-partisanly." Feingold, who chairs the Subcommittee on the Constitution, will question several witnesses, including a Library of Congress official and legal experts from Harvard, Duke, and the University of Virginia, on the issue. Senior Bush administration officials have publicly argued that Congress' has no such right, but
"Congress holds the power of the purse and of the president continues to advance his failed Iraq policy, we have have the responsibility to use that power to safely redeploy our troops from Iraq," Feingold said in a statement released by his office on Thursday. "I will soon be introducing legislation to use the power of the purse to end what is clearly one of the greatest mistakes in the history of the nation's foreign policy." | ||
| Posted by:Jackal |
| #15 The depth of my loathing for most members of Congress scares me sometimes. |
| Posted by: xbalanke 2007-01-26 22:25 |
| #14 Looks like the administration is finally taking a stand against this kind of shit. Gates had something to say about the donks resolutions today. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070126/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_iraq |
| Posted by: Mike N. 2007-01-26 17:27 |
| #13 Feingold voted to confirm General Patreus, but he's on record for opposing Bush's War and wants to cut funding for the troops. Democrats in gneneral and certain RINOS in particular speaketh out both sides of the mouth, don't you think? |
| Posted by: Mark Z 2007-01-26 14:17 |
| #12 The republicans should introduce one of those silly symbolic resolutions that denounces Feingolds attempt to cut troop funding in the middle of a war. |
| Posted by: Mike N. 2007-01-26 13:56 |
| #11 The War has a domestic component. Feingold is merely making it more obvious, and will force more Democrats to give direct evidence of their desire to see the West destroyed. During the Peloponnesian war, Athenians switched leadership a number of times. They even executed victorious generals. We shouldn't assume America will not witness insane domestic political battles too. |
| Posted by: Kalle (kafir forever) 2007-01-26 11:20 |
| #10 Feingold is posturing for the "we told you so" vote in the hopes that America will lose this war. As told in my previous post Feingold's resolution has greatly increased the chances for terrorists winning the war. |
| Posted by: JFM 2007-01-26 10:47 |
| #9 Mewonders if any of the Donk Congress critters were so concerned about the "Constitutionality" of this (exact same) issue back in the 70s? Vietnam redux anyone? |
| Posted by: BA 2007-01-26 10:37 |
| #8 They can pass all the troop fund cutting bills they want, one a day for all I care. Remember the process here. The Congress has to pass it as well and then Bush will get to Veto it. They will go into suplemental emergency funding, like during the Clinton era. It will take a 2/3's vote to over ride Bush and that will NEVER happen. Feingold is posturing for the "we told you so" vote in the hopes that America will lose this war. He is aslo going to force a rift in the Democratic party. I wish him the best and gods speed on getting his "binding" resolution to the floor. This will seperate the wheat from the chaff and force the Dems to pick a side. I love him, the blessid moonbat! He has put a gun to the back of the Dem parties head in an effort to shoot himself in the foot. |
| Posted by: 49 Pan 2007-01-26 10:17 |
| #7 Not Sure, but I'D bet a charge of treason would do it. |
| Posted by: Redneck Jim 2007-01-26 09:55 |
| #6 So when do we cut off Feilgold's funding? |
| Posted by: DarthVader 2007-01-26 09:20 |
| #5 "If one soldier or marine dies, or is injured because of this moron..." Hundreds already have. This war is not a contest of arms; it is a contest of wills. And the enemy keeps fighting on largely because he is not oblivious to the obvious: hearing what our Democrats are saying, he rightly calculates that his dedication and staying power are superior to ours and that we will eventually give up and go home if only he can hang in there a while longer. So he keeps on killing Americans. Russ Feingold and his kind are murdering American soldiers. |
| Posted by: Dave D. 2007-01-26 06:34 |
| #4 This will have two consequences: 1) Jiahadis will think that they will win if they persist. 2) Neutral irakis will think that they better congratiate Irak's future masters (ie jihadis) if they want to survive, so better give them shelter, supplies and/or participate in operations. |
| Posted by: JFM 2007-01-26 05:30 |
| #3 If one soldier or marine dies, or is injured because of this moron... |
| Posted by: anymouse 2007-01-26 00:39 |
| #2 Thanks Wisconsin! I was worried for a second that there would be nobody to pick up where Wellstone left off. fuckface |
| Posted by: Mike N. 2007-01-26 00:25 |
| #1 Bring it on, idiot. Pick up where John f'nKerry left off. The Dems line up needs a new Designated Moron. |
| Posted by: USN, ret. 2007-01-26 00:05 |