On the day of the State of the Union address, which some have dubbed the State of Disarray Speech, Pres. Bush faces little support or sympathy from the electorate. Today, Congress is debating alternative measures to Bushs troop escalation, which returns troop levels in Iraq to a previous 50,000 but for how long and under what mission remains highly controversial.
Yesterday, Sen. Warner, formerly a Sec of Defense during the Vietnam war years, a Republican stalwart, offered a centrist resolution as opposition to Pres. Bushs plan. Last week, Sen. Biden introduced his resolution with Sen. Hagels co-sponsorship. Just so you know, Sen. Warner has already announced he does not plan to seek reelection in 2008 and Senators Biden and Hagel are or may be, respectively, presidential candidates in 2008. Thanks to Talking Points Memo, I can share this with you, showing the difference between the Biden-Hagel resolution and the Warner-Collins resolution: Biden: it is not in the national interest of the United States to deepen its military involvement in Iraq, particularly by escalating the United States military force presence in Iraq... Warner: ..the Senate disagrees with the plan to augment our forces by 21,500, and urges the President instead to consider all options and alternatives for achieving the strategic goals set forth below with reduced force levels than proposed. Obviously, Sen. Warners version is designed to give weary Republicans some political cover against angry constituents. However, troops have already been dispatched and continue to arrive, without the consent of Congress. This is legally possible for the Commander in Chief to do in the short term, but requires Congressional support to maintain, nevertheless. Speaker Pelosi suggested this weekend that Bush was rushing to send troops oversees so that Congress would find it difficult to defund his escalation, and his National Security Advisor openly agreed. National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley, in an interview on NBCs "Meet the Press" said that the White House has sufficient money under its control to deploy the troops as planned, and he suggested that once the troops are in place, Congress would be reluctant to cut off funding. "I think once they get in harm's way, Congress's tradition is to support those troops," Mr. Hadley said. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/14/washington/15troopscnd.html?ex=1169614800&; en=a994696554df7feb&ei=5070 <http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/14/washington/15troopscnd.html?ex=1169614800 &en=a994696554df7feb&ei=5070> AND 011707 The Pentagon has hidden at least $1.4 billion in other agencies' accounts instead of returning unspent money to the U.S. Treasury, the Defense Department's internal watchdog told Congress Wednesday. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-01-17-pentagon-funds_x.htm <http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-01-17-pentagon-funds_x.htm> So the White House has provided itself with a buffer from checks and balances, at least for the moment, but at great risk. What about public support, the ability of a government to sustain war in democracy? To suggest they think the president is more isolated and detached is an understatement. His resolve looks more like willful delusion, hoping against the odds, that Americans will find him heroic one day instead of willfully rejecting expert opinion and consent of Congress. kwc POLLS Newsweek Jan 20, 2007: Pres. Bushs call for a surge in troops is opposed by two-thirds (68%) of Americans and supported by only a quarter (26%). Almost half of all respondents (46%) want to see American troops pulled out as soon as possible. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16720627/site/newsweek/site/newsweek/ <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16720627/site/newsweek/site/newsweek/> Jan 21: On the eve of the State of the Union address, ABC took a poll and titled it, State of the Union is unhappy with Bush. His approval ratings are the lowest since Nixon in 1974. For Bush, the bad news just starts there. Dismay over the unpopular war is dragging him down across the board, from his personal ratings to his position vis-à-vis the resurgent Democrats. Today 71% in this ABC News/Washington Post poll say the country is headed seriously off on the wrong track the most since budget battles led to a highly unpopular government shutdown in early 1996. Bush's war leadership clearly is the prime complaint: 64% call the war a mistake, more than said so about Vietnam during that conflict. The intensity of sentiment, moreover, has only grown: 51% of Americans now "strongly" disapprove of Bush's job performance overall, a majority for the first time. Just 17% strongly approve a 3-1 negative ratio. http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/PollVault/story?id=2811599&page=1 <http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/PollVault/story?id=2811599&page=1> Jan 22 CBS News poll Bushs overall approval rating has fallen to just 28%, a new low, while more than twice as many (64%) disapprove of the way hes handling his job. Two-thirds of Americans remain opposed to the presidents plan for sending more than 20,000 additional U.S. troops to Iraq roughly the same number as after Mr. Bush announced the plan. And 72% believe he should seek congressional approval for the troop increase. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/22/opinion/polls/main2384943.shtml <http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/22/opinion/polls/main2384943.shtml> Jan 23 Views of US drop sharply in worldwide poll of 26,000: Nearly three-quarters of those polled in 25 countries disapprove of US policies toward Iraq, and more than two-thirds said the US military presence in the Middle East does more harm than good. Nearly half of those polled in Europe, Africa, Asia, South America and the Middle East said the US is now playing a mainly negative role in the world. In the 18 countries previously polled by the BBC, people who said the United States was having a generally positive influence in the world dropped to 29%, from 36% last year and 40% the year before. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/22/AR2007012201 300.html <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/22/AR200701220 1300.html>
_______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
