I Think It's Somewhere in Article I

Jacob Sullum | January 30, 2007

Moving beyond nonbinding resolutions expressing disapproval for the troop increase in Iraq, members of the Senate Judiciary Committee (all the Democrats, including Arlen Specter) are suggesting that Congress might actually have the authority to cut off funding for the surge. Since even Dick Cheney concedes that much, I'm not sure why the committee needed to solicit expert testimony on the issue. Still, it looks like a sign that members of Congress might be prepared to go out on a limb and enforce the will of the American people, which in this case would be a good thing.

Comments

|1.30.07 @ 4:38PM|#

Why does Dick Cheney hate America?

|1.30.07 @ 4:47PM|#

Completely and utterly off topic:

UAE are Arabian Gulf 18 champions! First time ever!

Abu Dhabi is rockin'.

Warren|1.30.07 @ 4:52PM|#

...which in this case would be a good thing.

Bringing an end to US involvement in Iraq would be a good thing. It's not clear to me this would accomplish that.

What is really needed are articles of impeachment followed by war crime tribunals... followed by sentencing to federal pound-em-in-the-ass prison.

|1.30.07 @ 4:54PM|#

The Senate is so full of spineless blowhards who apparently feel the need to justify every little step they take in working to finally end this Iraq War. I think the reason that they don't just appeal to the wording of the Constitution directly is because the citizenry of this country might start realizing that the plain language of that document can actually apply to all sorts of circumstances that it doesn't at the present.

|1.30.07 @ 4:59PM|#

As much I am in disagreement with what's going on over in Iraq, I don't think it would be a good idea to defund our troops. Good lord.

First and for most, it would be political suicide, secondly worse case scenario..what if our troops are in battle and need amo, and oh yeah the Government said no more money for bullets. Like I said...WORSE CASE SCENARIO. Don't jump on me for that one. I know, I know, I sound like some whack-job neo-con. But come on, defunding our Troops while in battle?? Think about it...

And Kwix..Your question is sophmoric, if I wanted to read something like that. I'd head on over to D.U.

|1.30.07 @ 5:12PM|#

But, if Congress applies the Constitution now, what's to keep them from doing it again and again?

The Wine Commonsewer|1.30.07 @ 5:12PM|#

Without taking sides, why does CONgress feel the need to check it out. Like Nance used to say, Just Say No, assuming that's what they really want to do.

|1.30.07 @ 5:13PM|#

RegularRon,

I'm sure that you can rent a sense of humor somewhere. It would be helpful if you want to keep reading the comment sections of this blog.

Also, defunding the occupation would be about bringing the troops home so that they don't have to fire as many expensive bullets. All Congress can do is cut off the cash, if the President wants to keep them there without bullets, that is quite specifically his fault.

Dave B.|1.30.07 @ 5:14PM|#

RegularRon - The whole point of defunding our troops is that they would then have to leave battle. No one wants to defund them and leave them fighting.

|1.30.07 @ 5:18PM|#

I'm not sure it's political suicide to defund the meat grinder, but it most certainly would be political suicide to keep troops there after it is defunded. Here's my concern about the whole thing. The left seems to be concered about Darfur, yet it seems that pulling our troops out immediately could lead to something similar to Darfur. Who wants to be blamed for genocide?

SGT Fury|1.30.07 @ 5:28PM|#

You guys don't like the War eh?
Like that illegal/immoral war we waged on innocent Nazis when everybody knew they had nothing to do with Pearl Harbor.

Want to win in Iraq?
Change the rules of engagement...smoke mofos like we just don't care....leave stinking mess in flames and World in shuddering awe of American Imperial military power.Not my preferred strategy but it would clear the decks for President Rodham to focus on Health Care and Afforbable Child Care.

|1.30.07 @ 5:35PM|#

Make war no more.

|1.30.07 @ 5:52PM|#

You guys don't like the War eh?
Like that illegal/immoral war we waged on innocent Nazis when everybody knew they had nothing to do with Pearl Harbor.

I guess those history books lied to me when they said that FDR didn't call for a declaration of war on Germany immediately after Pearl Harbor, but instead waited until Germany declared war on the U.S.

|1.30.07 @ 5:53PM|#

You guys all miss the big issue. The problem is not Iraq; the problem is the ~1100 bases we have throughout the world. We are a world-wide empire. We will be intervening as long as we are capable of it. Pull back the empire and we'll be nearly incapable of overseas warfare. Anyway, after the troops are pulled from Iraq, they'll just be sent to some other place like Sudan (you know, a politically correct place to intervene--see the Clinton admin.).

|1.30.07 @ 5:59PM|#

Yea, Joseph Liberman was not relected because he supported the war.
Jacob, your such a schmuck. You can't trust the polls.
Some people don't like the way Bush is conducting the war because he is too SOFT.
Understand that dick?

|1.30.07 @ 6:17PM|#

How come I get the feeling that this is going to get Freeped?

SGT Fury|1.30.07 @ 6:23PM|#

Seamus,

We were already at war with Iraq-since 1991.Full UN license to go in and kick ass anytime we wanted too.

Before Dec 1941 we were heavily supplying the Enemies of Germany with WMDs too.

I'm all for pulling our bases out of Europe -and it might help debase the Euro a bit-especially if they revert to their "traditional" ways.

|1.30.07 @ 6:26PM|#

SGT Fury sounds like the name of a specialized male prostitute, or an eight year old boy playing soldier.

|1.30.07 @ 6:33PM|#

SGT Fury sounds like the name of a specialized male prostitute
Umm, Joe, that would be Sgt. Furry.

|1.30.07 @ 6:39PM|#

And Kwix..Your question is sophmoric, if I wanted to read something like that. I'd head on over to D.U.

Ah, for a RegularRon, you don't get a regular running joke. As for my question being sophomoric, thank you! I thought it was freshmanic myself.

|1.30.07 @ 6:57PM|#

Kwix:

Way to take the bite out of an insult!

|1.30.07 @ 7:06PM|#

Kwix,

If you take "site:reason.com" out of the google search. the first hit that is a serious article is by Daniel Pipes of all people. Surprise, surprise. "Why does the world hate America?"

The lack of comprehension of the idioms used by commenters here struck me last week. I got this email:

Hi,

I was just curious if you were joking when you wrote you hate black people? I noticed that no one commented on your comment in a thread that was pretty heated. I don't think that anyone was stating that "you're all closet racist". The party theme wasn't well thought out and unfortunately they have pics to back up a bad decision that will haunt them. Hopefully you really don't hate all black people.


highnumber | January 25, 2007, 5:05pm | #
And I just bet all of you "have lots of black friends". So sad... The difference is that you still lock your doors and close your minds and just play pretend when one of "them" is around. Refute this and I say you are a liar.

Who the f**k are these people? The topic of race is brought up and all the sudden we're all closet racists?

God, I hate black people!
Whoops! I meant to say
Go Bears!

I wrote back:

H&R comments have a "meta" quality that may not be appreciated by an infrequent reader or a skimmer. The irony is allowed to get suddenly thick there. Frequent commentors tend to recognize it intuitively in other frequent commentors.
Frankly, some of it is probably done as shock value. It works.
There! Now you know some of the secrets. Are you happy?

Are we too oblique?

Sgt Furry and his Howling Cat-|1.30.07 @ 7:09PM|#

OK I understand how hardcore fundy libertarians are against War-they want to fight the hijacked jet-liners,anthrax and dirty bombs with their rifles-1775 Yeoman Farmer style.

Anarcho-capitalists want to hire mercenary Armies.

Now liberals like Joe just want BusHitler and the superstitious Bible-Bangin' Repukes to look bad.....So they can take over and run the show. Hope your law enforcement approach, UN troops, and World Court work out for ya when the Islamists attack next time. Of course if America wants to see The Real Terrorist we just look in the mirror ...Right Joe?

|1.30.07 @ 7:24PM|#

You got all that from how I made fun of your name?

Quick, how much change do I have in my pocket?

I suppose I could lay out my ideas for more effectively fighting terrorists than your strategy (Step 1: Lose War. Step 2: Say you're winning and keep losing), but I'd rather just make fun of your name.

FYI, I don't want you people to screw up so you can be replaced. I want to replace you, because you screw up everything you touch.

Capt. Reason|1.30.07 @ 7:34PM|#

SGT Fury, stand down. Germany declared war on the United States 11DEC1941, a move designed to demonstrate its support of the Tripartite Pact. Congress declared war later that day, in RESPONSE, with the benefit of public opinion overwhelmingly in support of defense against a hostile foreign nation.

SGT Fury|1.30.07 @ 7:35PM|#

Well we didn't screw up the judicial appointments- despite Bush nominating Harriet Miers.

We didn't screw up the 2004 election even though we ran a weak intellectually challenged candidate too.

The economy isn't doing too bad either!

Al Qaeda has only successfully attacked us once
unlike the last regime where they hit us 4 or 5 times with no effectual response.

|1.30.07 @ 7:42PM|#

Harriet Miers was the beginning of the end of the Republicans' majority, 2004 was the closest any wartime president ever came to losing an election, and the economy's been in the crapper for most of the past six years.

And that "only one" attack killed more Americans than all the other terrorist attacks in American history, about a month after the President was told it was coming.

Stephen Decatur|1.30.07 @ 7:46PM|#

"Our country! In her intercourse with foreign nations may she always be in the right; but right or wrong, our country!"

|1.30.07 @ 7:49PM|#

"Our country" needs to stop shooting itself in the foot. She doesn't need enablers; she needs an intervention, because she's self destruction.

Our country needs real friends, not suck-ups.

|1.30.07 @ 7:51PM|#

Our country needs real friends, not suck-ups.

Back to the French, are we?

SGT Fury|1.30.07 @ 7:56PM|#

Hey Joe,

You watching too many Alex Jones videos?

..........a month after the President was told it was coming.........

All this time I thought it was the Jews running a flase flag attack- You need to keep me apprised of the latest lefty conspiracy theory

I wonder if we would have been caught off guard if there was say a TRANSITION between the Presidents instead of a sore loser trying to steal the election btween November and January.
Maybe the Dems could have passed along a little intelligence when they weren't stealing the W keys off the White House computers.

I mean your boys did try to fight this terrorism thing-we have the documents in the National Archives to prove it.....

And Terrorism is hard- it is not like anybody was going to just hand you the head of Al Qaeda...... I mean if they did...Who could turn that down..........

|1.30.07 @ 8:06PM|#

Who's Alex Jones? Honestly, I've never heard of the guy. Is he one of the loonies somebody at National Review found in a news story, and convinced his readers is the voice of the Democratic Party?

"You need to keep me apprised of the latest lefty conspiracy theory" OK. A CIA briefer gave the President an intelligence assessment titled "Bin Laden Determind to Strike in the U.S." and the President replied, "OK, you've covered your ass," then went on vacation.

"I wonder if we would have been caught off guard if there was say a TRANSITION between the Presidents instead of a sore loser trying to steal the election btween November and January." It didn't seem to stop them from formulating an energy policy, putting together an enormous tax bill, and demoting the Chief of Counterterrorist to sub-Cabinet level.

|1.30.07 @ 8:17PM|#

Obama introduced a withdrawel bill, and Feingold is introducing another one tomorrow.

Now that Big Time's bluff has been called, he'll have to go back to calling 2/3 of the country traitors.

SGT Fury|1.30.07 @ 8:25PM|#

Bin Laden Determind to Strike in the U.S.

That breaking news was from 1998
Just after Clinton turned down Sudan's offer of bin Laden around the time we were threatening to go to war with Iraq

SGT Fury|1.30.07 @ 8:28PM|#

It is better Feingold works on his surrender resolution than further eviscerate the First Amendment.

|1.30.07 @ 8:29PM|#

No, that breaking news was from 2001.

As of 1998, bin Laden was attacking American interests overseas.

|1.30.07 @ 8:30PM|#

I'm sure you'll be right there telling the returning troops that they surrendered, "SGT."

I'll be thanking them for a job well done.

|1.30.07 @ 9:02PM|#

I don't understand why Congress could not do more than just cut off funds. Article I gives congress the power "To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces." On the other hand Article II simply says the President "shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States." Why doesn't this mean that within the regulations set by the Congress the Pres can make whatever decisions? Couldn't prohibiting a troop surge in Iraq be one of the regulations the Congress has power over?

|1.30.07 @ 9:27PM|#

Raise the top tax bracket rate by 2% per month until we're out of Iraq, at which point it drops down to where it is now.

If Cheney wants to play RISK: Persian Gulf Edition for the next two years, let his base feel some of the pain.

SGT Fury|1.30.07 @ 9:49PM|#

joe,

They won't be the ones who surrender- it is your Heroes in the legislature. I'm sure the troops will appreciate your "thanks" - may as well quit early in the 4th quarter-no sense playing it out and lose the game anyway.

|1.30.07 @ 10:16PM|#

"SGT" (Don't you feel bad posing as a servicemember?),

It isn't a matter of losing the game anyway.

The Casino has most of our money, and you want to gamble with the rest. I think you people have cleaned out the bank account enough as it is.

|1.30.07 @ 10:25PM|#

joe, out of curiosity, what should President Bush have done with the knowledge that Bin Laden wanted to attack America? And would you have supported whatever action he would have taken, given that it was based strictly on intelligence hearsay?

|1.30.07 @ 10:34PM|#

I think Ken is on the right track, but I think it's a mistake to allow Congress, via funding or "regulation", to micromanage the conduct of military operations -- where reinforcements go, whether offensives take place, etc.

Congress is supposed to have the power to declare war, and by extension to undeclare it. I think it should be within their power here to order a withdrawal from Iraq. But if they're unwilling or unable to do that, I don't think they should be interfering with operational decisions like whether to "surge".

Guy Montag|1.31.07 @ 12:35AM|#

I guess those history books lied to me when they said that FDR didn't call for a declaration of war on Germany immediately after Pearl Harbor, but instead waited until Germany declared war on the U.S.

FDR declared open warfare on German warships on 11 September 1941, without so much as a by-your-leave to the Congress.

Jefferson went to war withough Congressional permission also. Plenty of other examples too.

When you have a point, other than wanting the US to fail and your buddies in Iran/Syria and 'palestine' to win, please let us know.

|1.31.07 @ 5:46AM|#

I mean your boys did try to fight this terrorism thing-we have the documents in the National Archives to prove it.... - Sgt. Fury

Well, those Sandy Berger didn't get to.

What I want to know, Nick, is why you guys at S.H.I.E.L.D. were caught napping on 9/11.

And, BTW, whoever posted Make War No More, that was the tag at the end of the Sgt. Rock stories. When that showed up, you knew war comics were changing.

As for our Congress, I can't understand these people. I'm a constituent of Feingold, and he got a lot of love from the anti-war crowd when he voted against the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act. What he should have done regarding the use of force in Iraq was introduce a Declaration of War resolution, which he could always vote against, in order to get the other members on record. Yes, presidents have fought quasi-wars, police actions and other types of conflicts short of declared war for about as long as the Republic has been around. It is still the Congress' duty to declare war on another state before we go and make protracted war on it.

Kevin

|1.31.07 @ 8:29AM|#

I agree with Ken. And I would like to agree with Jon H, except that by the time such a proposal made it out of committee there would be so many loopholes that the tax hike would only apply to 3 categories:

1) Defense contractors (as political cover, but the fine print says that all of their contracts are augmented to offset the new tax, so it means nothing).

2) George Soros: You'll have to ask Dennis Hastert about this one.

3) Rosie O'Donnell and Donald Trump: Because some things just make sense.

|1.31.07 @ 9:40AM|#

Floyd,

"joe, out of curiosity, what should President Bush have done with the knowledge that Bin Laden wanted to attack America?"

Put the word out, above his own signature, among the entirety of the national security and law enforcement establishment, that Al Qaeda was expected to attempt a terrorist attack soon. At a minimum, this would have encouraged those organs to take a harder look at their counter-terror cases. Maybe the FBI would have decided that looking throgh Massaoui's laptop was a good idea after all.

|1.31.07 @ 9:47AM|#

"I guess those history books lied to me when they said that FDR didn't call for a declaration of war on Germany immediately after Pearl Harbor, but instead waited until Germany declared war on the U.S."

Just like Manny Noriega.

You were on board for the Panama adventure in '89, too then, eh?

|1.31.07 @ 10:42AM|#

OK I understand how hardcore fundy libertarians are against War-they want to fight the hijacked jet-liners,anthrax and dirty bombs with their rifles-1775 Yeoman Farmer style.

Whatever happend to the Anthrax attacks? How is your boy (Bush) doing in finding out who was behind them?

|1.31.07 @ 12:03PM|#

that Al Qaeda was expected to attempt a terrorist attack soon

Soon? There was no indication of timeframe in that original memo.

In any case, that memo was based, as you could guess, on CIA and FBI information. So sending out a directive of his own telling those agencies to, essentially, try harder, I doubt would have had any effect whatsoever. That sounds like a supreme case of wishful thinking.

|1.31.07 @ 1:35PM|#

It couldn't have hurt, Floyd, but the FBI's decision not to snoop into Moussaoui's laptop is pretty suggestive.

I guess we'll never know, one way or the other.