What to Make of "Underclassmen" Foreign Policy

Speaker Nancy Pelosi's visit to Syria seems to have started a chain of non-State Department officials directly engaging in foreign policy. Gov. Bill Richardson (D) has just gone to North Korea to claim the remains of American soliders from the Korean War (backed by the Bush administration unlike Pelosi's visit). Newt Gingrinch (R), former Speaker of the House, calls Pelosi's and Richardson's visit to these foreign nations dangerous. Breaking with tradition of letting the President's administration handle the foreign diplomacy, he says these leaders have begun to create their own foreign policy agenda for personal gain. While nothing bars them from engaging in talks with other nations, it certainly can demonstrate a divided US government, a sign of weakness to other foreign nations.

Do you think President Bush has lost control (perhaps credibility) in foreign matters? Who should be in charge of foreign diplomacy?

(Photo: zaiusnation.blogspot.com)

Political Cartoons

Political Cartoon

Here is a link to my original post on the No Child Left Behind Act. What do you think?

Blog The Vote-Giuliani and Forbes

Ryan Sager has the whole story here. The Giuliani Campaign has been quiet for some time now. This deal with Forbes will help Giuliani a lot in the long run.

The connections that Steve Forbes has will help the campaign in the long run. He is fully integrated within the business world and this will help Giuliani achieve fundraising goals.

This is a significant endorsement that will help the Giuliani campaign

Spring Break: Congress goes to Cancun!

Just kidding, but that would be funny to see Chuck Hagel and Nancy Pelosi on MTV's Spring Break. The war spending bill that the President has vowed to veto is going to have to wait till Congress returns from Spring Break (Passover and Easter).

Congress will reconvene April 16, however the funds the President has asked for are desperately needed. As well Congress is no longer debating those funds they are debating the pork that was laid on thick.

The Politco says:

The White House doesn't intend to accept the IOU quietly, accusing the Democratic-controlled Congress of skipping town before its work is done.

"They should stick around until they send him a bill," White House spokesman Tony Fratto said. "You can be sure that we won't be shy about talking about that."

And I would agree Democrats realize that the money is needed with or without a withdrawal date. They need to stop delaying things, it is only crushing the American image more so than it already is.

Democrats: Would you like some spinach with your MK47?

I found this picture here. This is in reference to the war appropriations bill that is laden with pork. All I am saying is I understand why its done but this is a little ridiculous.The bill in the House is entitled the U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Health, and Iraq Accountability Act, a very patriotic title at that but the bill is nothing but.

Yes, all the bleeding heart liberals and anti-war people are excited cause it sets a date for withdrawal from Iraq. However, it makes a mockery of American politics.

The bill is for $124 billion dollars. $96 billion is going to the troops fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, but the question on my mind is where is the other $28 billion going.

I will tell you, the other $28 billion was things added on to the bill in order for House Democrats to get enough votes to pass the bill, by the slimmest majority ever.

The Politico created a Top-10 List of add-ons, read the entire bill if you would like.
--$165,200 to the widow of Rep. Charles Norwood (R-Ga.), a promoter of patients’ rights legislation who died of cancer and lung disease in February, three months after he was reelected.

--$4 million for the Office of Women's Health at the Food and Drug Administration.

--$5 million for tropical fish breeders and transporters for losses from a virus last year.

--$25 million for spinach that growers and handlers were unable to market, up to 75 percent of their losses.

--$50 million “for asbestos abatement and other improvements” to the Capitol Power Plant.

--$60.4 million for the National Marine Fisheries Service, “to be distributed among fishing communities, Indian tribes, individuals, small businesses, including fishermen, fish processors, and related businesses, and other persons for assistance to mitigate the economic and other social effects caused by” a commercial fishery failure.

--$74 million “for the payment of storage, handling, and other associated costs for the 2007 crop of peanuts to ensure proper storage of peanuts for which a loan is made.”

--$120 million for the shrimp and menhaden fishing industries to cover consequences of Hurricane Katrina.

--$283 million for the Milk Income Loss Contract Program.

--$400 million for “wildland fire suppression.”

To me all the add-ons are ridiculous, the President has said he will veto the bill because of the withdrawal date. All the Democrats are doing is delaying funds to our troops. The fact is the bill should have been passed without a withdrawal date, you may not like President Bush but he is right when he says if you set a date for withdrawal all the terrorist will hide in their caves till we leave and then come out and take over. You may say that is not our problem, but it is.

What do you think?

Iran Hostage Situation

The Iranian Foreign Minister said that the 1 female British soldier could be release as early as today or early Thursday.

Earlier British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett announced that the UK would freeze all bilateral business with Tehran until the all sailors and marines are released.

Britain says Iran's detention of the eight Royal Navy sailors and seven Royal Marines, who were conducting a routine inspection of a merchant vessel at the northern end of the Persian Gulf, is illegal and is demanding their release. Iran insists the group was inside its territorial waters. Read more here.

I think that the British are doing to little to deal with the situation, in all seriousness if these would have been American troops, we would probably be working harder diplomatically then the British are. I also feel that President Bush may have decided to use some force to pressure Iran to give them up. What ever the case if this issue is not resolved shortly, we could see World War III in our generation. Why do I say this, Iranian President Amadinejad has declared he wants to destroy the western world, the United States and Israel in particular. If war broke out between Britain, Americas closest ally and Iran, we will see a third front ofthe "War on Terror."

What do you think?

Political Cartoons on Slate.com

Blog The Vote-Vilsack Endorses Hillary

“There is no candidate for president who will do a better job of creating a stronger and better America for your children than Hillary Clinton,” Vilsack said at Clinton’s side in Des Moines.

As predicted over the weekend Tom Vilsack, former Presidential candidate has endorsed Sen. Hillary Clinton as well he will serve as her campaigns co-chairman.

I think Vilsack may become Clinton Vice President.

What do you think?

Update: Interested in other endorsments, click here.

U.N. New Sanctions on Iran

Over the week the U.N. Security Council, decided unanimously to impose new stricter sanctions on Iran. The resolution would freeze the assets of 28 additional individuals and organizations involved in Iran's nuclear and missile programs. About a third of those are linked to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, an elite military corps.

The resolution also calls for a voluntary travel embargo on Iranian officials and Revolutionary Guard commanders.

President Ahmadinejad, responded to the new sanctions over the weekend. Ahmadinejad, in an interview with France's Channel 2 TV network, warned nations "seeking to impose sanctions against Iran will suffer a greater damage themselves," IRNA reported.

I agree with the new U.N. Sanctions, the international community needs to use a strong hand when dealing with Iran. They are a threat to international security, that must be dealt with accordingly. I believe we should not use military force for as long as possible, however that may become necessary. It will only work though, if it is a multi-lateral force, and not just an American force.

Blog The Vote- Monday Vilsack to announce...

Tom Vilsack, dropped out of the Presidential race in February however he still holds some power in the Presidential campaign. Who will he endorse?

On Monday Vilsack is expected to make an announcement. Earlier this week the Associated Press reported that Vilsack is likely to endorse Sen. Hillary Clinton.

What will his endorsement mean?

KCCI political analyst Dennis Goldford said it's possible that it will."The 300,000 people who said they'd caucus for him in 2008 may well take that into consideration as they decide where else to go," said Goldford.

I have to agree any former Presidential candidate will hold a lot of clout in the race. Vilsack garnered some significant support early in the campaign season and still holds all those supporters in his back-pocket.

Republicans keep Control

I love reading other bloggers and I just read this great article, about why the Republican minority is still able to control the floor of the House.

I think it shows how strong of a party they were and still continue to be dispite the low approval ratings of the President. They were in control for over a decade and now once placed on the opposite side of the table, they are still trying to stay on top.

Read the article and tell me what you think?

House passes Iraq Bill

The Hill reports that by slim victory (218-212) the House passed a bill that forces the President to bring the troos home by August 2008 or earlier.

The wording was worked into a $124 billion appropriations bill that would fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

This is the Democrats strongest stand against the presidents Iraq policy.

The White House has already said it will veto the legislation.

I would agree with the veto, setting a specific date is asking for trouble. I have said in an earlier post that if we set a date for withdrawal, we will see an end of violence until we leave. Once we leave an all-out civil war would break out.

Update 2:17 pm: President Bush responded to the House vote a short while ago. "A narrow majority in the House of Representatives abdicated its responsibility by passing a war spending bill that has no chance of becoming law and brings us no closer to getting the troops the resoures they need to do their job," the president said. I agree with the President the show the democrats continue to put on is hurting the soldiers and not helping to bring an end to the war.

What do you think?

Anti-war protesters arrested at Pelosi’s office

From TheHill.com:
Four members of the anti-war group Code Pink were arrested outside the office of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) Thursday afternoon, following an announcement that they would seek to take over the office.

The group’s members had planned to hold a symbolic “Pin the war on the Donkey” demonstration at Pelosi’s office to show their frustration with the Democratic leadership’s inaction on ending the war in Iraq.

However, Capitol Police prevented the taping of a drawn donkey to the wall.

Code Pink members were crying outside Pelosi’s office. When asked why, Rae Abileah, 24, said she was crying out of “outrage that this is all we can get from the Democrats,” referring to the Iraq supplemental funding bill, scheduled for a vote Friday.

“We’re just heartbroken that Nancy Pelosi has decided to keep funding George Bush’s war, and now the war belongs to the Democrats as well as the Republicans,” said Code Pink co-founder Medea Benjamin. “We thought we were going to get a change when they came into power.”

I have been saying this since the blog opened its doors following the 2006 mid-term elections. Anybody who thinks or thought, that once the Democrats took control of congress we would see an automatic withdrawal from Iraq, is crazy. Furthermore any one who says money is the answer to end this war is also crazy. The only answer to this war is success, and that may take longer than anybody expects however we must achieve it and I applaud the democratic leadership for standing strong against those in their party who would like to use the power of the purse to get the troops home, that would make America look more divided then ever.

What do you think?

Blog The Vote-TheHill.com: Clinton: 'It's just not fare'

TheHill.com, reports today about a conference call former President Bill Clinton had with several of his wife supporters.

Sen. Hillary Clinton is trying to combat Sen. Barack Obama, that "anti-war candidate."

Former President Bill Clinton yesterday complained that “it’s just not fair” the way his wife is being depicted for her controversial Iraq war vote. Read more here.

I do not believe that either candidate should be considered anti-war. Sen. Obama has taken a strong stance against the war in Iraq however he has not said he is against war all together. Putting my personal political beliefs aside I feel that putting either them up against either of the two Republican front runners and Democrats wont see a victory in 2008. The Democrats won in 2006 because the found central moderate candidate. Sen. Obama is to far to the left and Sen. Clinton is considered by many to be a hawk, both of which are extremes within the party.

What do you think?

Gates wanted to close Gitmo

According to a story by the NY Times, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates argued to close the Guantanamo Bay detention facility.

He has argued that an legal proceedings held at the facility would look illegitimate. He told President Bush and others that it should be shut down as quickly as possible.

Mr. Gates’s appeal was an effort to turn Mr. Bush’s publicly stated desire to close Guantánamo into a specific plan for action, the officials said. In particular, Mr. Gates urged that trials of terrorism suspects be moved to the United States, both to make them more credible and because Guantánamo’s continued existence hampered the broader war effort, administration officials said.

The article sites that both U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez and Vice President Cheney both opposed the plan.

Personally I think it would be helpful for the U.S. to close Gitmo. It has created a tainted view of the way America treats prisoners of war. Trying those held at the facility in the United States, would probably stream line the process. It has taken years to accomplish the trials in Cuba and now we may be able to complete the trials or at least start it.

What do you think?

Gonzalez: You're fired!

House may pass Iraq Funding bill

The House of Representatives looks set to pass a bill that would establish "readiness standards for the deployment of combat forces and an Aug. 31, 2008, deadline for their removal from Iraq," writes the Washington Post. The breakthrough came last night when leaders of the antiwar Out of Iraq Caucus pledged not to block the Nancy Pelosi-led measure. But CNN says that, despite the pledge, the House leadership may still be a few votes short of the 218 needed.

I am very skeptical of this bill as it outlines a deadline for withdrawal. I think the President is correct when he says if we announce an official deadline, terrorists are smart enough to let things subside until that deadline approaches. Then once it hits and the U.S. is gone, they can pick up their activities with no struggle at all.

The other reason I do not like the plan is because it is happening 3 months before the president election and I think their is some sort of democrat ulterior motive.

What do you think?

Blog The Vote- John Edwards Continues the Campaign

Despite the return of his wifes illness, John Edwards has announced that he plans to stays on the campaign. "The campaign goes on. The campaign goes on strongly," Edwards told reporters, his wife by his side.

It will be interesting to see, how is wifes progressing cancer play out along the campaign trail. I believe, depending on how fast it progresses, it could become an issue for the campaign. Edwards will want to be by his wife side, and we could potentially see him dropping out of the race in the next several months.

What do you think?

Partisan Fishing Expedition

As Karl Rove and other top administration officials are being subpoenaed, I tend to look at the political motives of the Democrats in office.

I feel as if I agree with the congress as they assert their power over the President. The 2006 mid-term election did give them the power to do so. However I think that they are trying to look for things to complain about.

I think President Bush's offer, to allow administration officials to be interviewed behind closed doors and not on tape was a satisfactory offer.

The Associated Press says, Bush had sought to avoid the "media spectacle" that would result from public hearings with Rove and others at the witness table.

I happen to agree with the President that the Democrats in some ways are trying to make the Republican party look worse then they already do.

"The question they've got to ask themselves is, are you more interested in a political spectacle than getting the truth?" Tony Snow said Tuesday, I agree with the position the White House has taken on this issue.

I also agree that the U.S. Congress has the right to do its job by performing oversight over the administration, however they are going about it in the wrong way.

What do you think?