Post by powers on May 4, 2007 13:18:25 GMT -5
The Democrats are standing united on the bill that was vetoed and divided over all of the options offered since. The President wants to compromise and believes that word means "have the other side give in." He lambasts them for trying to run the war, and his staff and supporters lambast them for not giving other strategies to fight the war. They cannot win, clearly. As a non-political member of the society, I came up with a solution to fund the troops and ensure that this is the last time money will be wasted. Is it the best idea? Maybe not, but it's the only one that I have heard that cannot be shot down from either side. Read my article, here or on unrepresentedvoice.powersandmorrison.com
Solving the Supplemental
The Congress is attempting to be representatives of the people in putting an end to this highly unwarranted and disliked war. The Executive Branch is calling for a compromise that does not “tie the hands” of the commanders in Iraq. There is no compromise between ending a war and continuing an open-ended occupation when both sides stand firm on their core beliefs. If anyone in the Capitol is listening, I have found a solution. Pass a 150 billion dollar supplemental solely for the troops. Give them 50% more than they ask for and have only one stipulation that will not tie the hands of the soldiers on the ground, the commanders in a bunker, or the “commander-in-chief” surrounded by security. Add to the bill that there will be no more money, emergency or budgeted, for the ongoing occupation in Iraq and Afghanistan until they are presented with a plan. More than just a tactic, more than a “stay the course” or “adapt to win” sound byte, but an actual, discussed, well-planned plan. They will have the rest of the year with money to spare for better equipment or unexpected snags. They may show some sense and save some of the money, seeing that the years budget was not enough to last 6 months this year. They may do what they would like provided they finish the war before the money is out or present, behind closed doors, an actual strategy to bring stability to the region. They must not allocate more funds to be spent without receiving approval for these funds. There is no sense to running any portion of the government with the thought that the funds will follow and surely be there. Figure out how to pay for something before it is implemented.
The President can be blamed by opponents for starting a surge without the funding and Congress can be blamed by the others for not funding ongoing operations. A compromise would be funding, but not a blank check; a chance to succeed but not a continuation of the same changing goals that we have seen this war morph through with no clear strategy other than “trying harder.” Give this war an ending or an ability to win, but right now, we in America have neither, and the two sides cannot meet in the middle.
Powers Note: I'm a patriot, I don't just complain to my readers, I've written to Senators Harry Reid, Claire McCaskil, and Speaker Pelosi. I can't introduce a bill to Congress, but I can at least introduce an idea to the leaders of Congress. We'll see if they want to make more statements, more meaningless resolutions and non-binding 'benchmarks," or more progress for our nation.
Solving the Supplemental
The Congress is attempting to be representatives of the people in putting an end to this highly unwarranted and disliked war. The Executive Branch is calling for a compromise that does not “tie the hands” of the commanders in Iraq. There is no compromise between ending a war and continuing an open-ended occupation when both sides stand firm on their core beliefs. If anyone in the Capitol is listening, I have found a solution. Pass a 150 billion dollar supplemental solely for the troops. Give them 50% more than they ask for and have only one stipulation that will not tie the hands of the soldiers on the ground, the commanders in a bunker, or the “commander-in-chief” surrounded by security. Add to the bill that there will be no more money, emergency or budgeted, for the ongoing occupation in Iraq and Afghanistan until they are presented with a plan. More than just a tactic, more than a “stay the course” or “adapt to win” sound byte, but an actual, discussed, well-planned plan. They will have the rest of the year with money to spare for better equipment or unexpected snags. They may show some sense and save some of the money, seeing that the years budget was not enough to last 6 months this year. They may do what they would like provided they finish the war before the money is out or present, behind closed doors, an actual strategy to bring stability to the region. They must not allocate more funds to be spent without receiving approval for these funds. There is no sense to running any portion of the government with the thought that the funds will follow and surely be there. Figure out how to pay for something before it is implemented.
The President can be blamed by opponents for starting a surge without the funding and Congress can be blamed by the others for not funding ongoing operations. A compromise would be funding, but not a blank check; a chance to succeed but not a continuation of the same changing goals that we have seen this war morph through with no clear strategy other than “trying harder.” Give this war an ending or an ability to win, but right now, we in America have neither, and the two sides cannot meet in the middle.
Powers Note: I'm a patriot, I don't just complain to my readers, I've written to Senators Harry Reid, Claire McCaskil, and Speaker Pelosi. I can't introduce a bill to Congress, but I can at least introduce an idea to the leaders of Congress. We'll see if they want to make more statements, more meaningless resolutions and non-binding 'benchmarks," or more progress for our nation.
