home

On Gitmo, Iraq and Vetoes

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Terror Detainees
Posted on Fri Apr 06, 2007 at 07:49:58 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Jeralyn posted about the NYTimes editorial calling on Senate Leader Reid and Speaker Pelosi to work to repeal the travesty that is the Military Commissions Act of 2006.

What the Times does not talk about is the fact that Bush will veto any such bill, assuming their are the necessary votes to pass a repeal and overcome a GOP filibuster.

I like this exercise because, as you may know, I support the Reid-Feingold "not funding" the Iraq Debacle bill. I am always asked, where are the votes? What about the filibuster? What about the veto? My response is always the same - filibusters and vetoes do not fund the Iraq Debacle. Do not flinch when the time comes (in the Reid-Feingold bill, the time is March 31, 2008.) Does the same strategy apply for Gitmo? It could. I think there are other avenues for closing Gitmo and restoring the rule of law on enemy combatants and habeas. I n short, to stop the Iraq Debacle, there are no other options. To stop Gitmo, there are imo.

< N.Y. Times to Reid and Pelosi: Do Something About "Guantanamo Follies" | The Note's Mark Halperin Gets Testy >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    On Gitmo, Iraq and Vetoes | 3 comments (3 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Power of the Purse (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by jsj20002 on Fri Apr 06, 2007 at 08:36:01 AM EST
    It is discouraging that the new Democratic Congress has not yet been interested in creative financing.  Congress could easily insert a clause in every appropriations bill that would prohibit the expenditure of any funds to provide staff support or travel funds to the Vice President.  With a little courage, Congress could also refuse to pay the salaries and travel expenses of Karl Rove and any number of political hacks that have been placed in high positions within the government.    

    Why not the Court? (none / 0) (#2)
    by Fritz on Fri Apr 06, 2007 at 09:05:47 AM EST
    Bush should just veto the Supreme Court budget altogether, then really do what he wants!   You people are so drunk with power.  You actually think the Democratic majority was for your policies.  Come 2008, those same moderates that put Nancy in office will throw her right back out.  

    Parent
    Send the bill up even with the veto threat. (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by kindness on Fri Apr 06, 2007 at 10:06:50 AM EST
    C'mon now....It doesn't take an advertising genius to figure out that each veto of a politically popular democratic pushed position strengthens Democrats hands down the road and as a bonus tarnishes the Republican's standing.

    Dumbya can't run again, but we can use these things against whomever the '08 nominee is.  Additionally, it might not have enough traction to overcome an '07 veto, but I bet it would stand a great chance of overcoming an '08 veto just in time for the Presidential elections.

    On Gitmo, Iraq and Vetoes | 3 comments (3 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment