Oh...NOT against Congressmen in particular, just against what they are doing.
Then, let's have a non-binding resolution against border security. Again, not against the agents, just the job that they are doing...
It's a total package and we are dissing our troops with this nonsense. It doesn't even MEAN anything other than a slap in the face to our brave troops who are keeping us safe. This is political and being done for no other reason.
2007-02-20 00:57:45 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
No...
And PLEASE don't bypass this answer. I agree with you in spirit.
But here's the problem. The American people by their words and their votes have essentially been passing the equivallent of a "nonbinding resolution" against the congress for years.
At its core, a nonbinding resolution is merely a way of expressing an opinion, but in the end, it has no effect. It is all talk and no action.
The same can be said of the American people, many of whom grumble about the situation in the government, but then less than half of those who are able get out and vote. And even those who do... How many of them merely vote for one side or another merely because they're not "the other guy"? I think that's partially what happened in this past election.
The American People's "nonbinding resolutions" have allowed senators like John Kerry, John Murtha, Robyrt 'KKK' Byrd, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, and others like them, to retain positions of power in this nation without their being truly deserving or representing the views of this nation.
What we need is a REAL resolution. What we need is for the American People to stand up and, through their votes and their own personal campaigns (we all wage them in some form or another), kick these punks, who no longer represent the views of the American People as a whole, out of office!
No more talk! MORE ACTION!
Thankyou.
2007-02-20 01:08:48 · answer #1 · answered by Firestorm 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
The American People had a binding resolution last November, and it's a pink slip to you neo-cons.
Unlike in 2004, when your side claimed to have a (2%) mandate, we actually do have a mandate now. And that mandate says down with regressive policies and warmongering!
2007-02-21 03:07:08 · answer #2 · answered by leftist1234 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
"In the Reagan years we all felt PROUD to be Americans and we were PROUD of our country." You felt proud of this country because of Reagan? Reagan orchestrated the sale of arms to Iran and the Iraqis in order to fuel a war with the purpose of funding Nicaraguan right wing death squads... and his actions via the proxy war in Afghanistan directly resulted in the creation and rise to power of the Taliban and Al Qaida... for all intents and purposes, No Reagan would have meant no 9/11. It sounds like you have the concepts of shame and pride backwards.
2016-05-23 22:24:07 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think the 2008 Congressional elections should be made Non Binding. Maybe they can take the hint.
2007-02-20 01:08:00 · answer #4 · answered by Evita Rodham Clinton 5 · 3⤊ 2⤋
No, your idea is ridiculous.
HERE IS HOW GOP TRAITORS UNDERMINED AMERICAN RESOLVE DURING CLINTON'S SUCCESSFUL OPERATION IN THE BALKANS. REMEMBER, NOT ONE AMERICAN SOLDIER DIED.
"President Clinton is once again releasing American military might on a foreign country with an ill-defined objective and no exit strategy. He has yet to tell the Congress how much this operation will cost. And he has not informed our nation's armed forces about how long they will be away from home. These strikes do not make for a sound foreign policy."-Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA)
"No goal, no objective, not until we have those things and a compelling case is made, then I say, back out of it, because innocent people are going to die for nothing. That's why I'm against it." -Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/5/99
"American foreign policy is now one huge big mystery. Simply put, the administration is trying to lead the world with a feel-good foreign policy." -Representative Tom Delay (R-TX), 1999
"If we are going to commit American troops, we must be certain they have a clear mission, an achievable goal and an exit strategy." -Karen Hughes, speaking on behalf of presidential candidate George W. Bush, 1999
"I had doubts about the bombing campaign from the beginning...I didn't think we had done enough in the diplomatic area." -Senator Trent Lott (R-MS), 1999
"You think Vietnam was bad? Vietnam is nothing next to Kosovo." -Tony Snow, Fox News 3/24/99
"Well, I just think it's a bad idea. What's going to happen is they're going to be over there for 10, 15, maybe 20 years" -Joe Scarborough (R-FL), 1999
"I'm on the Senate Intelligence Committee, so you can trust me and believe me when I say we're running out of cruise missles. I can't tell you exactly how many we have left, for security reasons, but we're almost out of cruise missles."
-Senator Inhofe (R-OK), 1999
"I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarified rules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our overextended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today" -Representative Tom Delay (R-TX), 1999
"I don't know that Milosevic will ever raise a white flag" -Senator Don Nickles (R-OK), 1999
"Explain to the mothers and fathers of American servicemen that may come home in body bags why their son or daughter have to give up their life?" -Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/6/99
"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." -Governor George W. Bush (R-TX), 1999
"This is President Clinton's war, and when he falls flat on his face, that's his problem." -Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN), 1999
"The two powers that have ICBMs that can reach the United States are Russia and China. Here we go in. We're taking on not just Milosevic. We can't just say, 'that little guy, we can whip him.' We have these two other powers that have missiles that can reach us, and we have zero defense thanks to this president."-Senator James Inhofe (R-OK), 1999
"You can support the troops but not the president" -Representative Tom Delay (R-TX), 1999
"Bombing a sovereign nation for ill-defined reasons with vague objectives undermines the American stature in the world. The international respect and trust for America has diminished every time we casually let the bombs fly." -Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)
2007-02-20 01:05:24 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 6⤋
We can and should. I have all ready reviewed the vote and have called a congressman's and Senators Office. If enough people let their voices be heard in he right place (their offices instead of Yahoo Answers) things would change fast and wind bags like Murtha would shut up.
2007-02-20 01:07:09 · answer #6 · answered by suburbandude 2 · 4⤊ 4⤋
We had one last November.
And WRONG! We are NOT dissing our troops. The resolution referred only to a strategy -- a small part in the overall effort.
Those who blow it up to the point of claiming is ids dissing the troops is playing politics.
2007-02-20 01:06:46 · answer #7 · answered by Timothy B 3 · 4⤊ 6⤋
Expect more of this BS as long as Democrats are in control of Congress. The last time they had a majority in both houses they were more interested in passing legislation on creating new "Hallmark holidays" then actually passing meaningful legislation. It looks like now they just want to use their position to whine about the president even more than they already were instead of passing anything of substance.
2007-02-20 01:16:25 · answer #8 · answered by C B 6 · 4⤊ 6⤋
I have absolutely no idea what your point is.
Sounds like sour grapes because your party didn't win, so you're going to oppose everything done by the Democratic Congresspeople.
Isn't that what you guys were slamming liberals for about four months ago?
2007-02-20 01:09:08 · answer #9 · answered by Bush Invented the Google 6 · 5⤊ 5⤋
What a good question! I still can't get over them wasting our tax dollars and their time over this! I hope this is not a sign of the times to come!
2007-02-20 01:09:26 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 5⤋