WRONG.
I am talking about our own incompetent, incapable do nothing congress.
The Seattle Times reports that Rep. Norm Dicks (D-WA)said: "But I felt kinda embarrassed telling the Iraqis they had to get their act together and pass legislation when we can't do it back here".
Let that sink in for a moment.
Dicks is a Democratic politician admitting how hypocritical our congress is by insisting that the Iraqi's progress politically when we, with many, many more decades of experience cannot do that very same thing.
Gallup reports that the progress since the surge and the new counterinsurgency tactics have been implemented has shown a month by month rise in support for the "surge" from the American public:
Four in 10 Americans now say the U.S. troop surge in Iraq that began earlier this year is making the situation there better. This is up from 34% four weeks ago and from 22% when Gallup first measured it in July.
Since August, more Americans have tended to say the surge is making the situation in Iraq better rather than worse, but today's ratio -- 40% vs. 20% -- is the most positive yet recorded. Thirty-nine percent of Americans currently say the surge is not making any difference; this is down from 43% in September and 51% in July.
Michael O'Hanlon tells the Democrats that perhaps they should plot a new course, for themselves, but I hope he is not holding his breath waiting for them to realize they could have turned this whole thing into a political win for themselves, but they blew it.
In the meantime, Jules Crittenden, Boston Herald city editor and columnist, points to the Iraqi's and the political progress they have made but is ignored and also isn't matched by progress in our own congress!
Kirkuk:
Sunni Arabs ended a yearlong political boycott Tuesday in Kirkuk — the hub of Iraq’s northern oil fields — under a cooperation pact that marked a bold attempt at unity before a planned referendum on control of the strategic region.
Baghdad:
Lt. Gen. Ray Odierno said the accord was reached Sunday in high-level talks addressing one of the key issues facing the American and Iraqi governments as President Bush begins to reduce U.S. troops levels: how to maintain the recent trend of declining violence while promoting Iraqi reconciliation.
Does that seem like small steps instead of large ones? Well compare it to our own congress and they are leaps ahead of us already.
Jules recommends tying any withdrawal funding to progress in Congress.
I say take it further, Congress shouldn't be paid at all until they can start doing their jobs.
After all they recently just gave themselves a pay raise...for doing what?
Thursday, June 28, 2007; Page A23, Washington Post:
Democrats have for weeks been privately wringing their hands over whether to accept an automatic 2.5 percent pay increase, fretting that the raise may appear inconsistent with their campaign promises.
But last night, the House made its peace with it, rejecting a bid to block the automatic cost-of-living raise of about $4,400 on a 244 to 181 vote.
In the meantime because of the incompetence and lack of political progress, in our congress, millions of taxpayers may not get their refunds on time:
Silena Davis had counted on an early tax refund to pay for getting her teeth fixed. Now, because Congress has dawdled all year on a tax bill, she and millions of other early filers could have to wait extra weeks for refunds that last year averaged $2,291.
More incompetence:
Despite having the request in congress for months, they still haven't supplied the funds for our troops which reports show will cause a hundred thousand workers will have to be laid off, all because of the our congress and their lack of political progress.
All this leaves the department only with undesirable options to continue operations in the absence of a bridge fund. The path we believe is least undesirable fiscally and militarily would involve the following. The military would cease operations at all Army bases by mid-February next year. This would result in the furloughing of about 100,000 government employees and a like number of contractor employees at Army bases.If funding continues to be delayed, it could affect as many as 200,000 civilian employees and contractors, DoD officials reported earlier.
As of October 30, Congress had not been able to send a single annual appropriations bill to the president's desk, and that's the worst record for a Congress in 20 years.
The house passes them and they get stuck in the Senate as the house knows they will, but it is their little pretend game to con the public into believing they are trying to get something done.
The problem with the House passing bills they know will not make it through the Senate and certainly cannot override a veto, is the house is only making it appear like they are doing their jobs.
Legislate, by definition, means to "enact laws"... that means passing the house, the senate and having the President sign it.
Period.
Anything less is a lack of political progress and the Democrats newest slow bleed strategy shows them for the hypocrites they are by trying to insist that funds are tied to "political progress" for the Iraqi's... what about their own lack of political progress?
Perhaps they should not be paid until they start showing political progress.
Facing increasing evidence of military progress in Iraq, some Democratic congressional leaders are eyeing a shift in legislative strategy that would abandon a link between $50 billion in additional war funding sought by President Bush to a timetable for withdrawal of U.S. troops. Instead, they would tie the measure to political advances by the Iraqi government.
Pot...meet....kettle.
If Congress cannot move forward with political progress, then they should not receive any more paychecks.
NO MONEY FOR CONGRESS.
They have not earned it.
.
