Summary of the week

Firedoglake has a great post summing up what Congress has been doing the past week, and what the new supplemental will look like.

Unfortunately, it looks like President Bush is going to throw a tantrum again.  Unitary executive?  Not anymore, sir.  Not anymore.

New ad campaign from VoteVets.org

VoteVets.org is launching a new ad campaign, the first of which features retired Maj. Gen. John Batiste.

VoteVets.org is today launching a three-ad series featuring three retired generals, two of whom were George Bush’s commanders on the ground. In the first ad, retired Major General John Batiste takes the President on, directly, when he says that he’s just ‘listening to commanders on the ground’ in Iraq. Batiste should know if the President is listening or not, since he was one of those commanders!

Next week, we’ll launch another ad with retired Major General Paul Eaton. And, after that, the campaign will wrap up with a powerful ad from former NATO Allied Supreme Commander, General Wesley Clark. Help keep our ads on the air. We’re trying to raise $100,000 to get these ads on nationally. Help us spread the word click here to donate.

These ads are a brilliant response to the Administrations latest talking point, which attempts to undermine Congress’ timeline bill by saying that it is against the will of our commanders on the ground.

[via Crooks and Liars]

Moderate Republicans in Congress are ready to turn

A delegation of Republican Congressmen recently traveled to the White House to express concern over his handling of the war.

WASHINGTON, May 9—Moderate Republicans gave President Bush a blunt warning on his Iraq policy at a private White House meeting this week, telling the president that conditions needed to improve markedly by fall or more Republicans would desert him on the war.

The White House session demonstrated the grave unease many Republicans are feeling about the war, even as they continue to stand with the president against Democratic efforts to force a withdrawal of forces through a spending measure that has been a flash point for weeks.

Participants in the Tuesday meeting between Mr. Bush, senior administration officials and 11 members of a moderate bloc of House Republicans said the lawmakers were unusually candid with the president, telling him that public support for the war was crumbling in their swing districts.

Keep raising hell, America. Now’s the time to call your Congressman. Now’s the time to rally. Make these Republicans turn sooner than the fall. We need to get out now.

[via Truthdig]

Iraqi Parliament might beat Congress to the punch

It turns out that the Iraqi Parliament hates this war as much as the Dems in Congress do.

On Tuesday, without note in the U.S. media, more than half of the members of Iraq’s parliament rejected the continuing occupation of their country. 144 lawmakers signed onto a legislative petition calling on the United States to set a timetable for withdrawal, according to Nassar Al-Rubaie, a spokesman for the Al Sadr movement, the nationalist Shia group that sponsored the petition.

It’s a hugely significant development. Lawmakers demanding an end to the occupation now have the upper hand in the Iraqi legislature for the first time; previous attempts at a similar resolution fell just short of the 138 votes needed to pass (there are 275 members of the Iraqi parliament, but many have fled the country’s civil conflict, and at times it’s been difficult to arrive at a quorum)….

What does it say when the people we are supposed to be helping kick us out? Are you going to ignore this too, Mr. President?

[via DailyKos]

Hostage situation

Well, he did it like he said he would. President Bush has begun the showdown. Thanks to Krugman, we have a whole new way of looking at this situation. An embattled President Bush, barricaded in the White House, desperately holding the troops hostage to prevent any control over the war from escaping him.

The people are against him.

His own party is distancing themselves from him.

We need Congress to stay strong. We need them to not back down from this juvenile effort to maintain a status quo that has never worked.

Call your Congressmen and tell them not to back down, and that you support a timeline for withdrawal.

Visit Congress.org to get all the info about your representatives/senators.

Bush follows through with veto

Today, President Bush followed through with his many threats to veto any legislation with “artificial” timetables.

Twelve weeks ago, I asked the Congress to pass an emergency war spending bill that would provide our brave men and women in uniform with the funds and flexibility they need. Instead, members of the House and the Senate passed a bill that substitutes the opinions of politicians for the judgment of our military commanders. So a few minutes ago, I vetoed the bill.

He went on in his remarks to repeat the broken record he’s been spinning for three weeks, which has had no affect on anyone. He called the deadlines “rigid and artificial,” and claimed that they would be “setting a date for failure.” He went on to claim that the bill would “impose impossible conditions on our commanders in combat.” These “impossible conditions” include returning the maximum tour of duty to 12 months, from 15, and ensuring that our troops have proper training before being deployed. Sounds pretty impossible to me.

But by far my favorite is this:

In the months since our military has been implementing this plan, we’ve begun to see some important results.

For example, Iraqi and coalition forces have closed down an al Qaeda car-bomb network, they’ve captured a Shi’a militia leader implicated in the kidnapping and killing of American soldiers, they’ve broken up a death squad that had terrorized hundreds of residents in a Baghdad neighborhood.

Hmmm. It’s going that good over there, huh? So good, that the best claims of progress you can give in your national address is vague accomplishment 1, 2, and 3. My God, just look at the articles: an, a, a. He might as well just said, “Uhhhhh, yeah, well we caught some guy who was killing some people, so there.”

The President ended his address with this statement. “Thank you for listening.” I’m sorry, Mr. President, I don’t think anyone was.

[via DailyKos]

Battle lines are drawn

Well, the House and Senate have both passed the compromised version of the Iraq supplemental, which includes a timeline for withdrawal of troops from Iraq. President Bush has been on a campaign to marginalize the bill as nothing more than partisan politics for the past two weeks, and has promised a veto of any legislation that contains a timeline. So, the battle lines have been drawn. Who will blink?

Let’s hear where you stand. Call the White House, and tell President Bush that you support a timeline. Tell him that his veto will be against the will of the American people. Tell him that we no longer trust him to conduct this war.

I doubt he’ll listen, but its worth a shot. Someday, his conscience has to start working.

Call the White House: 202-456-1111

Email the White House: comments@whitehouse.gov

Retired Generals endorse Congress’ plan for withdrawal

Yesterday, President Bush trotted out on the South Lawn to do his latest bashing of the Iraq supplemental, which should be on his desk for a veto by the end of the week. His latest spin has been focused on civilians legislating decisions for our generals.

But instead of fashioning a bill I could sign, the Democratic leaders chose to further delay funding our troops, and they chose to make a political statement. That’s their right. But it is wrong for our troops and it’s wrong for our country. To accept the bill proposed by the Democratic leadership would be to accept a policy that directly contradicts the judgment of our military commanders.

(emphasis added)

Well…not all of them. Yesterday, several retired generals with ground experience in Iraq have endorsed the Dems plan for withdrawal, stating that it “reflects the thinking of the Iraq Study Group” and that it provides “great leverage for moving the Iraqi government down the more disciplined path.” I wonder why these guys are retired…

[via Think Progress]

Krugman brilliantly reframes the debate

Paul Krugman, in his New York Times column [TimesSelect required] today, gives us a brand new perspective on the debate over the Iraq Supplemental Spending Bill, and it is dead on.

There are two ways to describe the confrontation between Congress and the Bush administration over funding for the Iraq surge. You can pretend that it’s a normal political dispute. Or you can see it for what it really is: a hostage situation, in which a beleaguered President Bush, barricaded in the White House, is threatening dire consequences for innocent bystanders — the troops — if his demands aren’t met.

If this were a normal political dispute, Democrats in Congress would clearly hold the upper hand: by a huge margin, Americans say they want a timetable for withdrawal, and by a large margin they also say they trust Congress, not Mr. Bush, to do a better job handling the situation in Iraq.

But this isn’t a normal political dispute. Mr. Bush isn’t really trying to win the argument on the merits. He’s just betting that the people outside the barricade care more than he does about the fate of those innocent bystanders.

…

Confronting Mr. Bush on Iraq has become a patriotic duty.

(emphasis added)

Krugman never ceases to amaze me. He is easily my favorite Times columnist, and if you haven’t checked out his book, it’s a must read if you’re into economics.

[via Crooks and Liars]

American people support Dems in Congress, over Bush, in setting Iraq policy

From the WaPo [via DailyKos]:

Democrats appear to be standing on firm political ground, as they work toward a final bill. A Washington Post-ABC News poll of 1,141 adults, conducted April 12-15, found that 58 percent trusted the Democrats in Congress to do a better job handling the situation in Iraq, compared with 33 percent who trusted Bush.

The president has taken advantage of Congress’s spring recess to pound Democrats over their legislation, which would impose benchmarks for the Iraqi government to meet; create strict rules for resting, equipping and training combat troops; and set a 2008 date for the final withdrawal of U.S. troops. Despite those efforts, Bush has lost a little ground to Democrats, who in February were trusted by 54 percent to set Iraq policy.

Try as he might, Bush and Co. can’t seem to fool the American people anymore, with his crazy claims. It’s just like Pres. Bush said, “Fool me once, shame on…[awkward pause].” Ahhh. Never mind.

Good news though. It appears the Bush administration can get fooled twice, after looking at this analysis from Dan Froomkin, comparing the recent Bush attack on Congress to his failed attempt to radically overhaul Social Security two years ago. [via Think Progress]

The meticulously choreographed settings, the carefully controlled audiences, the mind-numbing repetition of hoary talking points (with a particular emphasis on stoking fears) — it’s like deja vu.

Hopefully the result, is like deja-vu as well.