English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

13 answers

He should have thought about stopping his urges before he killed Mary Jo.

.

2007-01-09 05:20:24 · answer #1 · answered by FozzieBear 7 · 5 3

There is really nothing Congress can do under the Constitution at this point after they approved military action against Iraq to stand in the way of a decision of the Commander-in-Chief except cut off military funding, which would make them look like they don't support the troops. Whether Bush is right or wrong doesn't really matter, Congress does not have the Constitutional authority to tell him how to conduct this war.

2007-01-09 13:30:57 · answer #2 · answered by msi_cord 7 · 0 0

"Today, therefore, I am introducing legislation to reclaim the rightful role of Congress and the people’s right to a full voice in the President’s plan to send more troops to Iraq. Congressman Ed Markey of Massachusetts will introduce similar legislation in the House of Representatives. Our bill will say that no additional troops can be sent and no additional dollars can be spent on such an escalation, unless and until Congress approves the President’s plan."



"For too long Congress refused to hold the White House accountable for its failed policies in Iraq. It endangered the lives of our brave young men and women in uniform for a civil war that has no military solution.

No more. Democrats swept the November elections because Americans wanted George Bush's policies challenged by the branch of government constitutionally charged with representing the people.....
One key fact even George Bush cannot ignore: Congress never authorized what's happening in Iraq now.

In 2002, the Bush Administration's case for war focused on Saddam's supposed stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction and alleged ties to al Qaeda. In October of the same year Congress authorized a war against the regime of Saddam Hussein, not to send our troops into a civil war. I voted against the resolution and feel an escalation of this war only compounds the original mistake of going in the first place.

In 2007, Saddam Hussein is dead. Weapons of mass destruction were never found -- nor was any evidence that Saddam and al Qaeda were working together.

The 2002 authorization for the use of force has nothing to do with today's reality. Back then it was simply bad policy. Today, when it comes to escalation, it is obsolete.

A serious escalation of the war requires the people's consent. Our Commander in Chief has shown that he is seriously out of touch. He has ignored the reality that Iraq is embroiled in a civil war. When military generals spoke out against escalation, he replaced them. When voters clearly demanded an end to the war, he decided to escalate instead.

Never has America's system of checks and balances been so threatened, and never has the courage to act been more important.

Escalating the war in Iraq is not President Bush's decision alone. He must ask for the people's consent -- and Congressional approval is the only way he can get it."

Ted Kennedy

2007-01-09 14:03:37 · answer #3 · answered by wyldfyr 7 · 1 1

i was on a plane once and was talking to a soldier coming home from iraq. he said that there was no way he was coming back, and that a lot of his friends in the army said the same thing. if there is this surge, then there's just going to be a scramble to get 20 thou. troops in iraq. it will deff. lower the US already low moral. go ted!

2007-01-09 13:24:15 · answer #4 · answered by Alex 2 · 4 0

It's way past the time for Fat Teddy to sit down. He hasn't introduced anything worthwhile in over 30 years, his time is done. No, it isn't right. But not surprising, his headline grab is to be expected. The man is a joke, a poster child for MADD.

2007-01-09 13:30:20 · answer #5 · answered by Rich B 5 · 0 1

Absolutely. The American people made it clear on Nov. 7th that more of the same is not okay, that Iraq is a failure and that our troops should be coming home. Bush is in complete denial. He says he listens only to the "Generals on the ground", but then if they don't agree with him, he replaces them with YES men.

The first thing a person standing in a hole should do is STOP DIGGING. George Jr. never learned that lesson, it seems.

2007-01-09 13:21:39 · answer #6 · answered by hgheartland 2 · 2 3

Too bad someone didn't stop his urge to surge into the water in that car!

To answer your question, NO.

2007-01-09 13:47:35 · answer #7 · answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7 · 0 3

I'm sorry, but really, I can't take ole Ted Kennedy seriously anymore, after his shady past

But I will try. He is wrong because his opposition to Bush is getting in the way of simple logic that could be used to win the way

2007-01-09 13:23:54 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2 4

Is Ted Kennedy ever right about anything?

2007-01-09 13:21:18 · answer #9 · answered by Chicken Jones 4 · 4 3

Absolutely, he is a patriot and has the guts to stand up against Bush and his criminal posse.

2007-01-09 13:28:44 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

fedest.com, questions and answers