Alan Grayson: attacking Syria is the "wrong decision," Obama "boxed himself in" w/the "redline"

[nashville_brook]

Some here have been making a case for attacking Syria based on the notion that progressive leaders such as Alan Grayson are supporting it...based on nothing more than their silence in the media.

That's no longer a legitimate argument as heard in this interview with Sirius' The Agenda with Ari Rabin-Havt.

https://soundcloud.com/jlowthersxm1/rep-alan-grayson-with-ari/s-I0hoa

Important points in this interview:

-- chemical weapons allegations are unproven and "genuinely ambiguous"
-- there's no benefit to the Syrian government for killing these 200 citizens
-- conventional munitions also have the effect of suffocating victims
-- if CW were used, the victims would be dangerous to the rescuers; no report of rescuers effected by CWs
-- if they were going to use CWs they would be using them everyday and gloating about it
-- "dead people are dead people" - that chemical warfare presents an arbitrary "redline"
-- the US has the largest stockpile of chemical weapons in the world -- dubious moral high ground
-- evidence must be UNEQUIVOCAL that the Syrian military used CWs and that there's a vital US interest
-- let's finish the wars we're already in
-- puzzling and disturbing the Obama administration is only putting out unsupported information RE the use of CWs
-- no desire in his district to be world's policeman (subject of my recent post here)
-- fwiw the manufacturer of the missiles we'd use against Syria, Raytheon, has seen a dramatic bump in stock value over last few days
-- nobody wants this except for the military industrial complex - the president should recognize and rise above the interests of the military industrial complex in this matter.


https://soundcloud.com/jlowthersxm1/rep-alan-grayson-with-ari/s-I0hoa

[neverforget]

1. he sure did box himself in with the redline comment.

Dumb move.

[nashville_brook]

2. that move, i think, could only come from pressure from very big interests

you don't cut your options off at that level without feeling the heat

[DirkGently]

5. He doesn't need to be. If the U.N. found evidence

Assad used chemical weapons, it would be a basis to go back and demand serious sanctions from the U.N.

But for some reason, we now want the U.N. to stop looking so we can get on with the warfare. Which is exactly what Bush did pre-Iraq.

U.S. rejects Syrian request that U.N. inspectors stay longer, possibly delaying military strike

The Obama administration appeared Wednesday to be forging ahead with preparations to attack Syria. It dismissed a Syrian request to extend chemical weapons inspections there as a delaying tactic and said it saw little point in further discussion of the issue at the United Nations.

President Obama said that “there need to be international consequences” for the Aug. 21 chemical strikes he said he has concluded were carried out by the Syrian government.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/syria-wants-un-weapons-inspectors-to-stay-longer-move-could-forestall-us-military-strike/2013/08/28/69855348-1008-11e3-85b6-d27422650fd5_story.html

This box is not a real box. This is an excuse box full of recycled fail that we thought we had taken out with the trash in 2008.

[avaistheone1]

7. You are right.

Too many similarities to the rush to war into Iraq, and the end run around the United Nations.

[nashville_brook]

99. it's almost as if it's not for the good of the country, but rather for the good of a balance sheet.

[Civilization2]

115. Because it is the same PNAC crew that is currently pushing for this war,. same as Iraq.

Obama seems to have little sway or wiggle room over the directives delivered to him from the Corporate-Military, or he simply is on board with them. Either way, the direction is decided by corporate-banksters not the congress or the american people.

[nashville_brook]

17. and as Grayson points out, the evidence is actually pointing to conventional weapons

i've been floored by the coverage of this in the international press -- the level of skepticism is something i've never seen in the run-up to war, or "military campaign." whatever euphemism we're using today.

[DirkGently]

30. Congress & America are tired of the conceit of the Unitary Executive

But with the botched intelligence about Iraq still casting a long shadow over decisions about waging war in the Middle East, the White House faces an American public deeply skeptical about being drawn into the Syrian conflict and a growing chorus of lawmakers from both parties angry about the prospect of an American president once again going to war without Congressional consultation or approval.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/29/world/middleeast/us-facing-test-on-data-to-back-action-on-syria.html?_r=0

Love the reference to "botched intelligence" in Iraq. As though it were an accident. As though anyone thinks Cheney, Miller, et al. were acting in good faith. We know this game. How easy it is to connect the dots into any pattern desired, as long as it spells out "war."

We need to reel in all the post-9/11 law and theory enabling the Executive to plunge us into war based on its own recognizance. There is a reason war is supposed to require Congressional approval. It sounds like we are once again going to be told that others know things that make them right, and we should all just thank them and let it happen.

And yet it appears that the public presentation of the Syria evidence will be limited. Instead of the theater of Mr. Powell’s 2003 speech — which included satellite photographs, scratchy recordings of conversations between Iraqi officials and a vial of white powder meant to symbolize anthrax — American officials said the intelligence assessment they are preparing to make public will be similar to a modest news release that the White House issued in June to announce that the Assad government had used chemical weapons “on a small scale against the opposition multiple times in the last year.”

(Id.)

[nashville_brook]

39. i don't think Congress wants to have to have this power.

Grayson pivoted from that question, which makes me think that a bad decision would be reached in Congress regardless of the political winds in district.

[DirkGently]

41. Good. Indecision on this "issue" is better than a decisive

mistake. And back we go to the core failings of PNAC and Bush-era policy. Bad decisions made with an air of certainty and righteousness are NOT better than no decision at all.

[nashville_brook]

44. yes, i think that's the overriding feeling here.

that there's a decisive mistake that's more probable than an error of indecision.

[Little Star]

56. And that's the problem (we now want the U.N. to stop looking) in a nut shell.

[nashville_brook]

58. lack of transparency is becoming quite a theme in this administration.

ironic, i think.

[Little Star]

62. True and it's really sad. There was so much hope. sigh

[lark]

66. Hope and change have died.

They've been replaced with business as usual in America. We have to be attacking someone, creating opportunities for major wars all the time or the military industrial complex gets antsy and starts inventing things, like they are doing here. Obama has been co-opted, co-erced or was just a trojan horse to begin with, not sure which of these is actually true, but the result is the same regardless of the cause.

[Little Star]

67. Sad but it sure does look that way. I hope I'm wrong. I'd be happy to be wrong.

[lark]

68. I keep hoping I'm wrong as well.

Unfortunately, events keep proving otherwise.

[nashville_brook]

75. i don't believe that he was aware of the pressure that would come from his campaign funders,

and from the existent MIC power structure. i think he campaigned in good faith.

that leaves the other.

[Supersedeas]

95. is it that noticeable?

[grahamhgreen]

33. He's not boxed in. Any more than he was boxed in when he said,

"If a (health insurance) mandate was the solution, we could solve homelessness by forcing people to buy a house"

So, whatever. It's just more words that came out of his mouth.

[nashville_brook]

49. good point -- he'll back out of a position when the big dogs howl loudly enough

[doc03]

76. Ah is that another of those 3 D chess moves? n/t

[neverforget]

77. I just heard an interview with an ambassador on MSNBC

that we need to follow through otherwise we look weak. He also said that Assad has possibly used chemical weapons dozens of times. I wish I had gotten that war mongers name. This was on The Cycle today.

[Veilex]

107. Actually, he didn't box himself in as much as republicans would like you to believe.

Take a look at what he actually said: “We have been very clear to the Assad regime, but also to other players on the ground, that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized, that would change my calculus. That would change my equation.”

That doesn't look like he's boxed in... in fact it looks like another republican interpretive dance, as usual.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

3. Obama has to protect his "Red Line" credibility...by killing people.

Foreign policy by bluster.

[nashville_brook]

4. clearly it's the sensible thing to do.

yargle. bargle.

[bullwinkle428]

6. Bravo, Congressman Grayson! K&R.

Bonus points for tying in Raytheon's stock price!

[nashville_brook]

10. nice to a hear real discussion of the interests involved

[leftstreet]

8. DURec

[Fantastic Anarchist]

9. K&R!

Same old, same old.

I bet there's a "smoking gun" and a "mushroom cloud," too.

[Autumn]

11. Recommended. But you know that's not a real box and it's easy

for him to walk out of, all he has to do is take a step. There are options other than a military attack.

[nashville_brook]

12. indeed -- that's the job of the Commander in Chief, not Raytheon

[Faryn Balyncd]

14. Options like delivering Cheney to the Hague, if he cares about war crimes.

[nashville_brook]

20. i think this might be the source of progressive pushback, if he cared about warcrimes

there's plenty of work that's been left undone since 2009.

[Doctor_J]

13. We need a "Dispatches From Under The Bus" Forum

to Grayson

[nashville_brook]

16. my sense of Grayson is that he's one of the most intelligent House members we've seen in ages

he's demanding and precise. he doesn't go out with ill-conceived statements, and he has some of the best staff in DC in terms of brain power.

he's a true blue leader and we're extremely lucky to have him.

[Laelth]

55. Agreed. n/t

-Laelth

[Little Star]

70. +1 Trazillion

[HooptieWagon]

18. Excellent idea!!!!

[nashville_brook]

24. a dungeon for bus-tossers. LOVE!

[bvar22]

15. Thank You (again), Congressman Grayson.

You hit all the highlights of my personal opposition to the Rush to War (again).



You will know them by their [font size=3]WORKS.[/font]

[nashville_brook]

98. the smart ones aren't dazzled by PR games

Grayson is a smart one.

[HereSince1628]

19. The dumbest yet possibly most human reasons a politician would go to war is

to not be embarrassed by s changing political position.

I can understand why an opponent to military intervention in Syria might say that...dressing an opponent in a very weak position is a typical part of political rhetoric.

But, I'd say, at this time I haven't seen much evidence that Obama is basing his decision on saving his pride.

[nashville_brook]

22. it's definitely worth hoping that Obama understands this

i don't think anyone thinks the president is "stupid" with regard to strategic issues. i think the problem lies in who has his ear.

where is he feeling the most pressure...which, actually makes me tired b/c while he's not "stupid," he does seem to be reacting rather than governing. who isn't tired of seeing American presidents do the bidding of giant interests?

my hope is that he'd avoid even the appearance of such.

[HereSince1628]

27. I agree, the advocacy of people he turned to for advice

played a role in Obama's decisions on this.

[upi402]

21. BBC: USA will look inept and weak if they don't bomb...

...especially after Obama stated the US position.

Irony much?

Grayson has been right, all the way along. Watch the attacks on him pick up here...
yawn

[nashville_brook]

23. the Beeb has been out in front on this...remarkable coverage and analysis.

[moonlady0623]

57. I'd rather look inept and weak

instead of dead and all puffed up with testosterone

[nashville_brook]

74. ewww! "dead...pumped up with testosterone"

all kinds of bad images!

[moonlady0623]

86. Many more bad images set to be reality

if we don't stop this crap

[Scuba]

25. Thank you Alan Grayson!

[truebluegreen]

26. Rookie mistake, or an excuse?

Don't think he's a rookie...by seriously, where is the upside in an attack on Syria, especially one that is just big enough not to be a joke?

[polichick]

28. Yes, possibly just an excuse for the mic to do what it wants...

As usual.

[leveymg]

29. Add this point: the evidence points to an unauthorized launch by a local unit commander.

If we start a war over some Syrian Gen. Ripper's insane act, it will be the "Dr. Strangelove" scenario come to life. Please, see, http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023553369

[nashville_brook]

36. yes! the BBC was reporting on this yesterday. holy cow.

[davidpdx]

111. I think there is a strong possibility it was a rogue commander

But I am pretty convinced, unlike others, that chemical weapons were used. While I admire Grayson he is wrong about their not being proof. Even Al-jazeera was airing footage of it.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

31. the reThugs are hoping he does attack Syria...so they can Impeach him

[nashville_brook]

37. maybe not impeach formally, but definitely politically.

[leveymg]

52. Even if the GOP doesn't Impeach, it will divide the Dems going into '14. Like '68.

LBJ was, all things considered, an excellent President had it not been for his miscalculations and mistaken assumptions about Vietnam and the need to show American "resolve" in the face of "communist aggression."

I certainly hope Obama has studied LBJ as much as he has Reagan.

[nashville_brook]

54. eggsactly.

that's exactly where I'm going in this thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023553799


you said it better.

[leveymg]

61. Thnx. ;-)

[ElsewheresDaughter]

63. Let's hope so

[ElsewheresDaughter]

32. grounds for Impeachment...Cantor and crybaby are waiting

[nashville_brook]

38. not disagreeing...just for information purpose...

has Cantor been beating this drum? that's important if he has.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

43. heard it on msnbc or faux this morning.....Rollcall has article.....

Boehner sent notice to President Obama that he needs to get Congress permission to attack Syria.

[nashville_brook]

53. that makes perfect sense. this would create a record of who will be vulnerable on the position

Dems don't want this vote. They don't want to be forced into siding against the president, and they don't want to approve something that's going to be a giant failure.

this is smashmouth football right here.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

59. I concur n/t

[moonlady0623]

60. what's the problem

with "siding against the president" when what he's doing is WRONG?

I'm tired of rose colored glasses and preteen idol worship.

[stevenleser]

72. It's members of congress. It has nothing to do with 'preteen idol worship' or 'rose colored glasses'

[moonlady0623]

87. Really?

Congress sucks don't get me wrong but they're on vacation and have not been consulted in the PROPER way in regards to Syria.

[stevenleser]

91. Yes, really. Did you not understand the post to which you were responding? It's about congress. nt

[moonlady0623]

93. Oh I understand

but my point is that bypassing congress seems to be the white house plan:

"White House spokesman Josh Earnest suggested before the British vote that the United States might be willing to act on its own.

"When the president reaches a determination about the appropriate response ... and a legal justification is required to substantiate or to back up that decision, we'll produce one on our own," Earnest said."

http://in.reuters.com/article/2013/08/29/syria-crisis-idINDEE97S0CM20130829 this kinda shit really pisses me off

[fredamae]

34. All I can think of

over this is the image of Cheney going to DC a few months ago to meet with congress....

and now this with Syria---their conflict has been ongoing--so why Now?

There is now credible doubt over reports of chemical weapons being used.

It's not like we haven't been lied to before over war---over and over and over.

Does anyone "out here" know who to believe?
I don't trust anymore. Do you?

[nashville_brook]

35. i think this is the worst part of the whole thing: that it undermines our trust.

you're right -- there's no sense of who to believe. that's why i'm so grateful for having found this interview with Grayson.

I trust Grayson.

[fredamae]

42. I believe in Grayson also

Enough so that I supported his campaign as much as I could from the West Coast....

And, yes--perhaps the worst thing Is the lost trust between the governed and the "governors".

I don't recall the Lack of trust in those we've elected ever being as widespread as it is now.

[nashville_brook]

47. and that's by design -- the Tea Party/Drown Government crowd wants us to have no faith in ourselves

to govern.

this would be walking into a trap on that accord.

[Little Star]

69. I also trust Grayson. He gives me hope for change when most others don't....

He's one smart, honest man I just love him!

[railsback]

40. Send money

[nashville_brook]

45. send money to who?

[railsback]

48. Doh!

The guy tapping into the outrage and prying open your pocket books.

[nashville_brook]

50. ^^ so you think Grayson is going out on a limb with this...(wait for it)...to FUNDRAISE?

[railsback]

81. Well, duh, yeah - check out his fundraising

Grayson has an image to uphold as the anti-establishment representative, so that means no big corporate monies. Grayson will always be a target of the Right, so he needs a big war chest to fight them off. He learned that lesson his first stint, much like Clinton learned his first term that he wasn't going to be the uber liberal president he wanted to be when faced with Congressional realities. Grayson can't raise enough money off his constituents, so he uses national fundraising sites. And what better way to raise funds than to come to a place like this and tap into the anger? Note he shows up at sites after a few days of the priority 'scandal', and parrots everyone's fears.

He tried to lead the charge against the anti-ACA crowd and paid for it. Now he sits back and lets the meme be written first. Tell me you wouldn't do the same thing?

Don't get me wrong, I like Grayson. I just realize that he's being smarter about keeping himself in office.

[Sunlei]

118. He can get donations from corporations. They're aren't many corps who are Ds and actually support...

"the people". but there are a few left

[Egalitarian Thug]

46. For such a reputedly intelligent man, the President seems to have a real learning disability

in this area. He just keeps doing it over and over and over...

[felix_numinous]

51. K&R Thank you.

The MIC projecting its own guilt and punishing others instead of taking responsibility for their own first has to stop.

[WHEN CRABS ROAR]

64. We need to make a loud noise against war with Syria NOW!

Here's how you do it.
Make a large sign that states,
HONK
NO WAR
IN SYRIA
and stand at a busy corner in your town or city, if this was done right now all over the country, the message would be heard loud and clear.
It would be reported because the sound would be deafening.

[idwiyo]

65. K&R

[DontTreadOnMe]

71. I usually agree with most of what Grayson states, but...

he said: "chemical weapons allegations are unproven and "genuinely ambiguous" "

If the U.N. comes back with direct evidence of where the chemical weapons came from, his entire argument gets blown out of the water. The U.N. inspectors are already on the ground and collecting data. If the U.N. comes back with the proof, there will be a coalition, with France and UK included.

[nashville_brook]

73. that jumped out at me as particularly ballsy.

listen to the clip, though -- there's a lot more than a simple refutation of the accepted narrative.

[DirkGently]

80. But the WH doesn't want to wait for U.N. inspections.

Sounds way too much like Bush's attitude about Iraq. We don't need no stinkin' U.N. inspections.

U.S. rejects Syrian request that U.N. inspectors stay longer, possibly delaying military strike

The Obama administration appeared Wednesday to be forging ahead with preparations to attack Syria. It dismissed a Syrian request to extend chemical weapons inspections there as a delaying tactic and said it saw little point in further discussion of the issue at the United Nations.

President Obama said that “there need to be international consequences” for the Aug. 21 chemical strikes he said he has concluded were carried out by the Syrian government.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/syria-wants-un-weapons-inspectors-to-stay-longer-move-could-forestall-us-military-strike/2013/08/28/69855348-1008-11e3-85b6-d27422650fd5_story.html

Letting the U.N. inspections proceed would at least be a sign of good faith. If we're going to again charge in on our own judgment, it will bring disturbing echoes of the fabricated rationale for Iraq.

[DontTreadOnMe]

83. "request to extend"... not dismiss them from happening

I think what has happened is they already have the evidence. Every chemical weapon has a DNA sequence that is traceable. They probably already know exactly when and where the chemical weapon was produced, let alone that is was actually used.

And I think the recourse the U.S. Military is going to take is to take out the "deployment" vehicles that are used to launch the chemical weapons. They are like SCUD missile launchers or tanks - mobile trucks that are less than 100 in quantity. I bet our satellites have pinpointed every single one - they can be all taken out in about one hour.

There are NOT going to attack the actual chemical weapons... just the launchers. This is not going to be "shock and awe", you only need a small charge to take out a truck. And they don't want collateral damage.

France and UK are probably already on board... the public is being misled as if there is going to be more discussion.

[Cleita]

78. He can unbox himself by convening Congress and

allowing them to debate this. He needs to have people outside his bubble of advisors to bring some different perspectives. Besides, this is what Congress is supposed to do according to the Constitution. They are supposed to determine when we go to war. Then and only then is the commander in chief supposed to take over.

[DirkGently]

101. Well said. n/t

[AzDar]

79. K & R

[Initech]

82. "Nobody wants this except for the military industrial complex - ding ding ding ding ding!!!!!!!

[DontTreadOnMe]

84. yeah man.... fight the good fight.... pass the bong!

Capitalist pigs , man!

grow up.

[Initech]

85. Seriously? I was quoting what was in the OP.

[DontTreadOnMe]

88. yes, I know. I wasn't directing it at you, but that statement...

I would rather spend money on renewable energy or food, or highways -- but we on the Left need to stop blaming the "military industrial complex".

Again, I am usually in agreement with where Grayson stands, but he sounds like a loon barking at the moon on this one.

btw, I used to work at Initech, so I KNOW!

[Initech]

90. We are in agreement there!

The last thing we need is another pointless war.

[DirkGently]

92. Whatever we call it -- MIC, PNAC, there are large

well-funded power structures in the U.S. and elsewhere that favor wars America does not need.

We can blame those structures and entities, we can blame ourselves, and we can blame our leadership, but we're not imagining things.

The last war fabricated for selfish purposes, that killed and maimed our troops, drained the Treasury, undermined our claimed authority as a world leader, and accomplished nothing for the people of this country, is still smoking as we speak.

No "bong" required to observe that, I think. Nor is it likely Eisenhower was a stoner or imagining things when he coined "Military Industrial Complex."

[indepat]

89. Suspect the interests of the MIC will win out over the public interest

every time.

[nashville_brook]

100. could be, but we aren't going to roll over and shut up.

folks here are going to have to live with it.

[Spirochete]

94. How is he boxed in?

He's been backtracking on things he said since the day he took office. One more time won't make much difference.

[nashville_brook]

97. Obviously that wouldn't be a Grayson message

But I think it's a perfectly valid assessment

[BillyRibs]

96. To the HON. Mr Grayson,

Mr. Obama Boxed himself in with a red line for a reason, So that when (not if but When, this was obviously part of a false flag operation.) the "Attack Occurred" This would give impetuous for the US Military to enter this civil war on the side of right. What a joke. This is Richard Nixon's, 12th term. Because Nothing has changed since the introduction of the Petro Dollar. in 71.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

102. I HATE our politics....

The biggest crime in Washington is to change your fucking mind.

Doesn't matter WHAT the situation is. The attitude is you are to take a stand and prove that you are a stubborn ASSHOLE that refuses to budge and if you aren't that stubborn asshole then you can't be trusted on ANYTHING.

[treestar]

103. Seriously, he is saying the chemical weapons were not used?

what a bunch of excuses.

[nashville_brook]

113. listen to the clip -- he's saying the evidence is ambiguous

and offers examples of how the evidence we have could point to other explanations. he's specifically asking for evidence that people have become sick from caring for a victim, which is what you would expect from a nerve agent. he's not been shown evidence of that at this point.

[RiverStone]

104. Fuck the Red Line

This is not a matter of pride, but potentially starting a new American war that a huge majority oppose is far worse.

[yoloisalie]

105. Grayson FTW

This is what a progressive looks like but then again, this was how Obama talked like before he became the POTUS. Power definitely corrupts

[4bucksagallon]

106. Sniping is easy, making decisions is the hard part....n/t

[nashville_brook]

112. you're suggesting Grayson is "sniping" -- is that what you're calling it?

[Sunlei]

108. good advice. I don't think the red line comment was intended to 'guarantee war' .

We've been trying for a longtime to get Assad to step down.

What has it been a couple years of the Presidents mandate Americans are not allowed to do business with Syria..and the call for Assad to step-down??

the red line was the use of banned methods chemical weapons, pesticides on humans! The entire civilized world can't stand by and allow NOTHING to happen.

why? because doing nothing will see the rise of thousands of chemical weapon stockpiles. And thousands of pesticide 'attacks' that will kill thousands of innocents.

we have to stamp this kind of BANNED attack out, but not make the 'red line' a guarantee of knee-jerk all out trillion dollar war. (again)

A hell of a ship to steer and I think Obama is aware of this.

[nashville_brook]

114. you know, of course, that the US has the largest stockpile of chemical weapons in the world

and, that if we wanted to stamp them out we could set a good examples ourselves by eliminating our cache of them.

[Sunlei]

116. I don't know about stockpiles and yes, I know the US gov has a longgggg history of extermination.

There is clear policy that pesticide use on HUMANS is banned. Once we have the evidence. They did listen to phone calls, have access to bank records, purchase orders, forensic evidence, satellite pictures- war criminals, the Leadership need to be brought to Justice.

And that includes the gunrunners who sold them these pesticides. Even if they were old American stockpiles contractors/our military lost control of or sold on the black market.

We did it only once in our world history with the Nuremberg trials. Computers and much better evidence, "International Military Tribunal" should be much easier today.

[blkmusclmachine]

109. .

.

[The Wizard]

110. Republican leadership (oxymoron)

has been demanding an attack on Syria and calling Obama weak. Now that he's floated the idea of attacking Syria the Repubes are demanding a hearing in Congress. The president is making them put their cards on the table.
the polls indicate Americans are skeptical of a strike on Syria, especially after the war predicated on lies in Iraq.
Repubes always want things both ways. If Obama is for it they're against it. Time and again he's proposed employing Republican ideas only to have the Repubes come out against their own ideas, thus underlining their cognitive dissonance, a mental disorder.
Perhaps the public may be catching on that Repubes are really one step from being heavily medicated and put in restraints.

[Sunlei]

119. good points!I think the republicans elected are used to lobbyists,corp boards,political 'charities',

handler teams, carry their water for them, write their bills and do all their work. They can't function in a political position without them.

Republicans, as the president mentioned last week, are afraid to make other meaner republicans angry at them.

[rhett o rick]

117. The Powers To Be now are the same as they were under Bush. They transcend presidents.

In many ways the President is just a figurehead.