Quote from bethin
Right......that's why it passed in the house where there are republicans.
Yeah, but. The great Democrat revolution has yielded how many laws to date? It only passed in the house, barely (218-212), so that Democrats could pontificate over provisions they know full well would not survive in the Senate.
THAT was my WHOLE point, that the exercise was symbolism that the Democrats dare not translate into fact.
IF they TRULY wanted to translate it to fact, why send the President ANY re-authorization bill? In fact, ANY such bill will ultimately be Democrat complicity in the ongoing war in Iraq. If the HOUSE truly wanted to vindicate its point of view, it need not employ the devices of the SENATE or the Administration. It need only not act on this matter, at all. . .
Within short order, without that re-authorization, the President would run out of discretionary spending to continue to fund the war.
Incidentally, that time frame would only JUST include the amount of time necessary to gauge the success of the surge. IF successful, the House could always send an authorization bill later. If the surge is unsuccessful, then the first 'timetable' for withdrawal in this bill would be fully expressed, with no additional effort on the part of the House, at all.
But then, there wouldn't be those wonderful headlines. THAT is what THIS is about. Politics.