The Incredible Shrinking Clinton, Day Three: Hillary greenlights the mullahs
posted at 8:59 am on November 2, 2007 by Bryan
There are 30 Senate Democrats out there who, between them, couldn’t find a clue with the Hubble Space Telescope. On Thursday they signed a letter to President Bush that, if it were binding in any way, would negate the War Powers Act. It’s not binding. They know that. They’re just blowing smoke. And Hillary Clinton, the Drexel Damsel, the Violent Violet, is right there with them trying to shore up her nutroots cred after flip-flopping all over the stage on Tuesday like a stranded fish. It would be to laugh, if the subject of the letter weren’t so serious.
Sen. Hillary Clinton signed a letter to President George W. Bush on Thursday warning he has no authority from Congress for an attack on Iran, setting off a new round of fighting with Democratic presidential rival Barack Obama.
War Powers Act, sis. Look it up. The president has 60 days before he has to tell you and your comrades what he’s doing, and during those 60 days he can tell you to talk to the hand. It’s been the law since 1973.
The Dems’ letter is, among other things, an encroachment on the executive branch’s powers to prosecute foreign policy and on the president’s inherent authority as commander in chief. Not that the Democrats care about that. Politics trumps all.
Clinton, battered in a debate earlier this week for backing a resolution labeling an Iranian military unit a terrorist group, joined 29 other senators in signing a letter expressing concern about “provocative statements and actions” toward Iran by the Bush administration.
Democratic presidential rival Chris Dodd of Connecticut signed the letter, but rivals Obama of Illinois and Joseph Biden of Delaware did not.
No, Obama didn’t sign it. Instead, he pulled a *Gilda Radner and said “Neeeeever mind!”
Obama instead introduced a binding Senate measure nullifying the earlier resolution.
He didn’t even vote on the first one.
The net result of all this nonsense is that we are, once again, showing the mullahs that our government is hopelessly divided. You’d be hard pressed to find a more effective way of letting them know that we’re not going to deal with them then tactics like this one. The Democrats are more interested in slamming a lame duck president one more time than in dealing with a real and very dangerous problem, and they’re interested in that primarily because that’s where the most motivated part of their base is.
They’re all contemptible.
(via Assorted Babble)
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
I hope she keeps pulling stuff like this – and I hope it gets all the exposure that it can get.
nailinmyeye on November 2, 2007 at 9:04 AM
Yet another useless waste of time and paper. These guys are acting like the congress is like a blog more then a center of legislative consideration. They want to make their opinions heard go make a speech or start a diary at Daily Kos, oh wait most do have diaries over there, but quit wasting our time getting your lap dogs in the mass market media to regurgitate your sound bites and talking points.
LakeRuins on November 2, 2007 at 9:05 AM
Actually, that would have been Emily Litella, by Gilda Radner. ;)
MadisonConservative on November 2, 2007 at 9:06 AM
Sounds as though the War Powers Act is yet another misguided act of Congress that should be repealed asap.
Henry Bowman on November 2, 2007 at 9:06 AM
Fascinating seeing her implode this week.
JammieWearingFool on November 2, 2007 at 9:07 AM
I was dating myself by getting that wrong. That’s it!
Bryan on November 2, 2007 at 9:11 AM
Sooo… just where are the Appropriations Bills for LAST YEAR???
Romeo13 on November 2, 2007 at 9:13 AM
If true, NRO story about US bombing of Syrian plant shows Bush mettle.
JiangxiDad on November 2, 2007 at 9:17 AM
Keep it coming Bryan!
edgehead on November 2, 2007 at 9:19 AM
How much will this letter bring on eBay?
tgillian on November 2, 2007 at 9:20 AM
FANTASTIC!
JiangxiDad on November 2, 2007 at 9:24 AM
It’s fun watching her slip and slide, but even if that harridan dropped dead, the media would be carrying her around like Weekend at Bernie’s trying to get her elected. I’ve said since the start that when she goes off script, she’s a handgrenade ready to go off in her own face.
I still can’t believe they’re running her…she doesn’t have nearly Bill’s gifts in front of a camera; she looks and presents herself like a slightly demented Lesbian Studies Professor. Or, if you like, to keep with the Godfather motif (Clinton Crime Family) that Mark levin throws around, it’s like running Luca Brazzi. Hillary belongs on the muscle side of politics; she digs up dirt; she takes out people out on news shows; she shores up support (collects tribute); But you don’t put a dumb thug with a crocodile personality in front of a camera. She can’t hide what she is. Politics of the surreal.
austinnelly on November 2, 2007 at 9:30 AM
The mullahs must be protected at all costs. She needs their votes and money after all.
roninacreage on November 2, 2007 at 9:31 AM
Oh Pooh! I saw the “incredible shrinking Clinton” and was hoping for day three of the Hillary diet- You know, the one where the rest of us get to see less and less of her ample backside (literally and figuratively).
Personally, I think the War Powers Act should be repealed. It was done by Congress so that they didn’t have to take on any responsibility for the next Vietnam. It gives the POTUS flexibility in using the military branch of the instruments of power but that is already provided by the Constitutional role of CINC. Mostly the WPA gives Congress a way to blame 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue for an “unpopular war we never signed up for” and that’s precisely what the “rats” and RINOs are doing vis-a-vis Iraq when attempting to placate their strident moonbat constituency. If Congress doesn’t want to support the war, that lack of support needs to be clear and unambiguous with the consequences of that lack of support firmly at the foot of Capitol Hill.
highhopes on November 2, 2007 at 9:34 AM
How much will this letter bring on eBay?
Here’s a better idea. The RNC should make a Where’s Waldo thing out of it and hold a contest where citizens point out all the ways this piece of idiocy ignores the founding documents and over 200 years of executive power.
highhopes on November 2, 2007 at 9:38 AM
Question for Hillary:
Senator Clinton, you recently signed a letter to President Bush which alleges that he (and presumably any President) has no right to act vis a vis Iran without prior Congressional approval.
If you are elected President, will you disregard the 60 day provision of the War Powers act and wait for Congress to act before you take any military action, ever, no matter how dire the circumstances and imminent the threat?
Buy Danish on November 2, 2007 at 9:40 AM
Of course she will! That way, she can never be blamed (nor will she ever have to take responsibility) for anything at all — ever.
lan astaslem on November 2, 2007 at 9:46 AM
The Dems are so despicable. God help us.
CP on November 2, 2007 at 9:46 AM
She won’t answer that question. she respectfully would say for you to vote for her to find out.
apostle53 on November 2, 2007 at 9:48 AM
This is interesting. The shift away from Iraq to Iran is the only play the dems have right now. And interestingly enough, Bush opened the doors for them to walk in. I smell another Rovian trap set for the predictable dems to fall into.
Last year I predicted that Bush would eventually win in Iraq and it would be in the summer of 08, just in time for the election. Considering I am right 99.85% of the time, I figured I expose myself as being wrong so as to mitigate the anger of the cs deven haters. (Hey, they need a break from having to deal with me always being right). The surge is working and it looks like we are going to have success in Iraq, but I was wrong about the time. I apologize for misleading everyone. My bad.
Now, WHY is Bush going after Iran, opening the door for the dems to segue into another situation that keeps the anti-”defend the US with force” crowd in the national spotlight without having to take their lumps on being so totally wrong on the Iraq war?
A couple of scenarios:
1) He is inept
2) The plan is to get the dems back out on the “America is at fault” limb so he can saw it off and thusly exposing them as having a disturbing pattern of going against the best interests of this country for their quest for power.
3) We know Iran is a serious threat, and Bush is going to get serious about this and 8itch-slap aloonyboonyjob back into the obscurity he belongs in.
csdeven on November 2, 2007 at 9:52 AM
Go, Hillary, go! (off the edge of a cliff, that is–and take all your “progressive” little socialist lemmings with you)
aero on November 2, 2007 at 9:56 AM
Buy Danish on November 2, 2007 at 9:40 AM
Nicely done. Bryan, is it too late for the “10 Questions” circle jerk?
Jaibones on November 2, 2007 at 9:58 AM
Without the Wars Power Act no president, regardless of party, would be able to deploy military forces to answer threats to national security. While we might have been able to get congress to issue a resolution of war on 9/12/2001 I doubt it would have been possible by the 15th of the month. The current state of politics in this country virtually guarantees that our congress could not muster the needed votes to authorize a war much less say bombing an aspirin factory in the Sudan.
LakeRuins on November 2, 2007 at 10:02 AM
Mr. Russert?
subbottomfeeder on November 2, 2007 at 10:08 AM
Hillary: Yes, illegal aliens should have driver’s licenses.
Kowboy on November 2, 2007 at 10:29 AM
So the sHillery says they are a terrorist organization, but we are never to defend ourselves against them?
What kind of asinine position is that for a presidential hopeful?
She must be stopped from ever becoming president. VOTE!
leanright on November 2, 2007 at 10:31 AM
Well, this signature is now fodder for the Russerts of the press. How would Hillary respond to this letter if it was sent to her? Does she approve the concept she implies here that the War Powers Act is null and void? Would she honor that in her administration?
Come on Press, ask them! You say we have the right to know. We want to know.
Dusty on November 2, 2007 at 10:51 AM
Way to go Hillary! That’s showin’ ‘em who’s boss!
countywolf on November 2, 2007 at 11:32 AM
To most of us folks, war is a serious undertaking. To the donks it is only a political tool, to be used as a means of achieving majority status through lies and deception.
If they gain ALL of the seats in the house and the senate, what will they have really gained when our enemies are lighting up nukes from coast to coast?
fogw on November 2, 2007 at 11:41 AM
I signed a letter to Ms. Clinton warning her that she has no right to enter the White House even if she is elected president.
See? Anyone can write a letter.
Kevin M on November 2, 2007 at 2:31 PM
“Without the Wars Power Act no president, regardless of party, would be able to deploy military forces to answer threats to national security.”
Not true.
It wasn’t necessary for the first years of 184 years of this country’s existance. Article II of the Constitution gives wide authority to the President to wage war irrespective of Congress.
Significantly, EVERY president since enactment has publicly disagreed with the premise that the Executive cannot act without Congressional approval to deploy and use military force.
The War Powers Act was intended, post-Vietnam, to tie the President’s hands until and unless BOTH houses of Congress affirmatively approved any use of military force. However, the US Supreme Court in INS v. Chadha (1983) ruled that such “legislative vetoes” are unconstitutional, and that Congress only has the power to pass joint resolutions (i.e., a “public law”) that must be presented to the President for signature or veto.
The War Powers Act affirms the provisions in Article II of the Constitution that the President has independent authority to use military force, though it attempts to spell these out as specific instances.
While the Act attempts to impose time limits on both consultations and war-fighting without Congressional approval, the Supreme Court has not ruled these provisions to be Constitutional, and they appear to me to be “legislative vetoes.” I believe that with respect to military combat, Congress is limited only to cutting off the funds by passing a public law with the President’s signature or by overriding the President’s veto.
Clearly, Presidents Ford, Carter, Reagan, George H. W. Bush, and Clinton agreed, because that is how they behaved. Though each President notified Congress “consistent with the War Powers Resolution,” (the term of art they utilized), Congress was not consulted BEFORE the deployment of military forces, a requirment of the Act.
Some members of Congress even say that the War Powers Act effectivly died on 4 August 1993, when US forced engaged in combat in Somalia starting on June 5, and Congress “looked the other way” when the statutory 60 day deadline passed and our troops remained in combat without Congressional approval.
georgej on November 2, 2007 at 3:34 PM
I think President Andrew Jackson had the best answer to the US Supreme Court, and it can apply to Congress,” You passed the law, you enforce it.” As he sent troops into FL. Better to ask forgiveness than permission when national security is at stake, because ultimately it is a lose/lose situation, given the current state of politics.
Claimsratt on November 2, 2007 at 6:13 PM
I don’t want her to self destruct until the general. Let us get her, not the Dhems. She’s too perfect a target for November.
Mojave Mark on November 2, 2007 at 7:49 PM