By Harry Reid: President Bush has to understand there’s a new Congress. For six years, he’s ignored Congress. The Republican-dominated House and Senate gave President Bush everything he wanted, and look at the fix we’re in as a country. We have 3,300 dead Americans in Iraq, we have 25,000 wounded, we have a President who didn’t take care of the necessities so that these men and women coming back to America after fighting in Iraq would have proper training to get them well. It simply has been a mismatch from the very beginning.

So I say to President Bush: Understand that this Congress has done what the American people asked us to do. You listen to the American people for a change.”

Labels: congress, George Bush, harry reid

By rreppy: This is the letter I have sent to every Congressman today. Anyone who wants to use it has my permission to do so. I urge you Yanks to write your representatives, because believe me buckos, this is a big deal. The prez is essentially saying he is exempt from the subpoena power of the Congress. No, no, no; he isn't.

Dear Senator:
Who the hell does this president think he is to think he is above the law? What divine right of kings does he invoke to ignore and defy Congressional subpoenas? He thinks he is offering a "compromise" by "allowing" access to Karl Rove and his staff. It's not his to offer! If Congress subpoenas Rove then he is to show up and that's that. If he ignores the subpoena then Congress should call out the National Guard or the Marines or whoever to grab Rove out of his house and march him to Chambers, in handcuffs if need be, and apply the law like it would be applied to any of us.

Bush is setting the ridiculously dangerous precedent here of unilaterally declaring the president to be Above the Law. Since when? Since when are we no longer a Republic, a nation of Law, with equal branches of government and an Executive that is NOT above the Constitution. This is not to be borne! He has gone too far. He has crossed the line.

When Bush took the oath of office - only after the unprecedented and questionably legal ploy of a decision by a Supreme Court full of cronies appointed by his father to forbid an accurate counting of votes, it is worth remembering - he swore to uphold the Constitution. Yet no-one in the history of this great nation had done more to weaken and abuse it. If breaking his oath is not grounds for Impeachment, then what is? Has the Oath become meaningless, or shall we, as a People, hold our leaders to it?

This is a battle Bush must lose and Congress must win, or the fabric of America is torn forever, and we will have become a dictatorship in fact, with no way for the Legislative and Judicial branches to exercise any real control over an Executive gone beserk with power.

Join us at the ARGville forum for further discussion on this topic: Constitutional crisis

Labels: congress, constitutional crisis, George Bush

By Wes Clark, commenting on the non-binding Iraq resolution being discussed in the House: The purpose of any Resolution is to demonstrate strength of resistance to the President's strategy- so a non binding resolution is ok as a first step if it gets a broad measure of support. But in order to affect the president's strategy, the Democrats have to threaten something the President wants. This is what our Congressional leadership should be working on...is it confirmation of judges, approval of budget requests, supplementals, or whatever...the power of the purse, as well as the power to investigate, are essential powers of the Congress. I would like to see our top Congressional leaders go to the White House - after they've shown they have the leverage - and force the President to modify his strategy. I've pretty much explained what the strategy should be...but the key question now is, do we have the Congressional leverage?

Labels: congress, Iraq war, resolution, wes clark

By William E. Odom, (select quotes from his opinion article about the Iraq war): "the president's policy is based on illusions, not realities."... "to expect any Iraqi leader who can hold his country together to be pro-American, or to share American goals, is to abandon common sense."... "We are now fighting to prevent what our invasion made inevitable!"... "One of the president's initial war aims, the creation of a democracy in Iraq, ensured increased Iranian influence, both in Iraq and the region."... "it was the U.S. invasion that opened Iraq's doors to al-Qaeda. The longer U.S. forces have remained there, the stronger al-Qaeda has become."... "If Congress cannot act, it, too, will live in infamy."

Labels: congress, Iraq war, opinion, william odom

By matt: It appears that Bush is trying to kill two birds with one stone: begin the process of gutting Social Security while at the same time sacrificing the future retirement security of the poorest working Americans in an attempt to stimulate spending now with the refunded taxes. It’s comforting to hear that Congressional Democrats describe this plan as “dead on arrival,” but this and Bush’s executive order governing agency regulations certainly are warning shots to anyone who thinks that Bush is a lame duck with two years left.

Labels: congress, democrats, George Bush, social security

By VictorM: The Bush administration will ask Congress for another $100 billion for military and diplomatic operations in Iraq and Afghanistan this year and seek $145 billion for 2008. The answer should be No!

Labels: congress, funding, Iraq, war

By James Fallows: War with Iran would be a catastrophe that would make us look back fondly on the minor inconvenience of being bogged down in Iraq. While the Congress flounders about what, exactly, it can do about Iraq, it can do something useful, while it still matters, in making clear that it will authorize no money and provide no endorsement for military action against Iran.

Labels: congress, iran, james fallows

By VictorM: During the anti-war march in Washington, DC yesterday, the dominant theme, besides bringing the troops home, was the push to have Congress assert its authority to control the purse and consequently shut down the funding for this criminal war in Iraq. According to a Newsweek poll “Congress is criticized by nearly two-thirds (64 percent) of Americans for not being assertive enough in challenging the Bush administration’s conduct of the war.” Undoubtedly, right-wing crybabies will try to blame Congress for losing the Iraq war, but come on, let’s face it, who cares what these people have to say anymore? This Democratic-controlled Congress better grow some balls and do what the American people demand.

Labels: congress, democrats, Iraq war

By VictorM: Democrats took over the House and Senate. The Washington Post says: "Last night, the House nearly unanimously approved a broad package of internal rules changes designed to sever the cozy links that have developed between lawmakers and lobbyists... The measures were approved 430 to 1... This was a remarkable change considering that House Republicans could barely pass a far weaker measure last May and ultimately did not enact any measure because they could not reach agreement with the Senate." Regardless of your party affiliation, you have to question why Republicans, who controlled all branches of government, had problems with this issue but the Democrats could hit the ground running with it. If nothing else, this is a sign of how rotten things have been with the Republican majority.

Labels: congress, democrats, ethics reform, republicans