It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
(visit the link for the full news article)
“It is time to reverse the failed policies of President Bush and to end this war as soon as possible,” Mrs. Clinton said as she joined Senator Robert C. Byrd, Democrat of West Virginia, in calling for a vote to end the authority as of Oct. 11, the fifth anniversary of the original vote.
Her stance emerged just as Congressional leaders and the White House opened delicate negotiations over a new war-financing measure to replace the one that Mr. Bush vetoed Tuesday.
Even if Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Byrd succeed in their effort, it is not clear whether President Bush would have to withdraw troops, or if he could resist by claiming that Congress cannot withdraw its earlier authorization but instead has to deny money for the war to achieve that result.
The question could prompt a constitutional debate over war powers that only the federal courts could resolve.
Mostly, Mrs. Clinton appeared to be trying to claim a new leadership position among the Democratic presidential candidates against the war in Iraq.
Originally posted by Britguy
It's all talk and political posturing and will very likely come to nothing.
Originally posted by Britguy
Don't forget nearly all the Dems were 100% behind their Republican counterparts in cheering on the war in the first place.
Originally posted by missed_gear
In the Senate 29 Democrats were for the resolution and 21 were against. (Senate vote: 77-23); Sen. Robert Byrd wanted to filibuster against the bill and was very active in attempting to defeat the bill from day one.
And Hillary…well we all know what she is after.
Originally posted by Mr. Fantasy
Byrd would filibuster a pay raise for himself, if it was proposed by the White House.
I do not want history to remember my country as being on the side of evil.
--[snip]—
I want more time. I want more evidence. I want to know that I am right, that our Nation is right, and not just powerful…
--[snip]—
Let us stop, look and listen. Let us not give this president or any president unchecked power. Remember the Constitution”
Sen. Robert Byrd, Speech b/f resolution
Originally posted by missed_gear
Originally posted by Mr. Fantasy
Byrd would filibuster a pay raise for himself, if it was proposed by the White House.
My apologies, I wasn’t clear…at the time the Iraq War resolution was up for vote in 2002 he threatened filibuster just prior to the Senate vote. He was shut down 75-25.
I agree he with your comment, however he was very, very vocal against the resolution (but few were listening)...hindsight being 20/20 and all that:
I do not want history to remember my country as being on the side of evil.
--[snip]—
I want more time. I want more evidence. I want to know that I am right, that our Nation is right, and not just powerful…
--[snip]—
Let us stop, look and listen. Let us not give this president or any president unchecked power. Remember the Constitution”
Sen. Robert Byrd, Speech b/f resolution
etc. etc. etc.
mg
Originally posted by forestlady
I don't know if it would be constitutional to vote on it? Aren't war powers, the ability to declare war given to Congress only? I don't know, does anyone else know for sure?
At any rate, Hillary, IMHO, will do anything to get votes. That's one of the big reasons I don't like her. But, it IS a smart political ploy. I live in what was once a very red section of NE Tennessee in a small town that is very patriotic and loyal. But even here, they're getting tired of the war and realizing that we were all scammed and lied to, in order for this war to happen.
She has up until very recently, been for the war. It's confusing.
Originally posted by grover
Of course they can repeal it... it was done over Vietnam. After the so-called and now known to be bogus Gulf of Tonkin incident the Congress authorized he president, then Johnson to persue the fight with North Vietnam and it wasn't until congress revoked that authorization under Nixxon were serious negotions begun to end the fighting, or at leaast Americas involvement in it.
Originally posted by FlyersFan
Now, it's just an opportunistic political staging event for the cameras.
Someone should tell Hillary that you can't put the genie back in the bottle after it gets out.
Sens. Clinton, D-N.Y., and Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., announced they would introduce legislation that would require the president to seek a reauthorization from Congress to extend the military effort in Iraq beyond October 11, 2007.
...
The two senators have not decided how they will seek to force a vote on the measure - whether through an amendment, a stand-alone bill, or a spending bill.
Source
Originally posted by djohnsto77
It makes no sense and would be unconstitutional. Congress can authorize war, and they can stop funding a war, but they can't deauthorize a war. Even if this passed, it would be vetoed anyway.