calteacherguy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-25-07 10:36 PM
Original message |
What is the current status of the Webb/Clinton ammendment on Iran? |
|
I'm talking about the one to require congressional approval before military action is taken. I thought the constitution said Congress only had power to declare war anyway, but regardless, does anyone know where this ammendment is? When is it going to be voted on?
|
TwilightGardener
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-25-07 10:57 PM
Response to Original message |
1. I don't think it's in any danger of being brought to a vote anytime soon-- |
|
it's risky: no one wants to hand Chimpy a victory like this if it's defeated, and we're on a losing streak with getting anything anti-Chimpy or anti-war passed. No one wants to challenge him on Iran and lose.
|
calteacherguy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-25-07 11:30 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
3. That's unacceptable. We need to pressure Congress! |
|
Why are the candidates taking a leadership role on this? They should hold a joint news conference and endorse it!
|
TwilightGardener
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-25-07 11:50 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
4. The top tier isn't going to come out really strong against actions |
|
toward Iran, because it's a fluid situation. They all have made statements and such pushing for diplomacy, Congressional authority, and warning that military action is a last resort, but they're not going to lead the way, because we're one lie, one misstep, one bad incident away from dropping a bomb on Iran--and neither Obama or Clinton want a voting record that will end up putting them in an unpopular situation in the next couple months. I can't say I blame them--it's safer to follow than to lead at this point. You just won't get leadership and real change in an election season, at least not from candidates--it's rhetoric only until Nov. 2008. We do have Jim Webb and Chuck Hagel speaking out on Iran, because they're safe--not running for anything.
|
movonne
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-25-07 11:04 PM
Response to Original message |
2. Is this after hillary signed the Lieberman - Kyl amendment.. |
Bitwit1234
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Oct-26-07 12:05 AM
Response to Original message |
5. Webb told Matthews he is trying to bring it to a vote |
BootinUp
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Oct-26-07 05:47 AM
Response to Original message |
6. Yeah, its stuck in Committee, Bidens Committee |
jmp
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Oct-26-07 06:46 AM
Response to Original message |
7. We are left to assume that Hillary doesn't have ... |
|
The political clout to get it to the floor for a vote.
|
Tom Rinaldo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Oct-26-07 07:52 AM
Response to Reply #7 |
8. Biden also then, he won't even sponser it... |
|
Each Senator must be held accountable, it shouldn't depend on someone else's "clout" for them to do the right thing on preventing Bush from going to war again. Are you saying this shows that Clinton lacks the clout, but Dodd, Obama, and Biden lack both the interest AND the clout?
|
karynnj
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Oct-26-07 08:28 AM
Response to Original message |
9. It now has 2 co-sponsors |
|
S.759 Title: A bill to prohibit the use of funds for military operations in Iran. Sponsor: Sen Webb, Jim (introduced 3/5/2007) Cosponsors (2) Related Bills: H.R.3119 Latest Major Action: 3/5/2007 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. COSPONSORS(2), ALPHABETICAL : (Sort: by date)
Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham - 10/1/2007 Sen Whitehouse, Sheldon - 10/24/2007
I doubt that Clinton is putting much effort into this as it is hard to believe that she couldn't influence more people. I've heard nothing of Webb or Clinton pushing to take it to a vote.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu May 02nd 2024, 03:01 PM
Response to Original message |