Rosie and 9/11

I have never been much of a fan of either Roseanne Barr or Rosie O’Donnell, until I heard some quotes they each made recently…

Roseanne Barr: "I am going to support a green party, a third party, and for once vote for what I believe, not what I hate least…get with me on this, America! No more phony right extremes masquerading as middle. Support change!"

Rosie O’Donnell: "I do believe that it defies physics for the World Trade Center Building 7, which collapsed in on itself, it is impossible for a building to fall the way it fell without explosives being involved - World Trade Center 7. One and two got hit by planes, 7 miraculously the first time in history, steel was melted by fire - it is physically impossible."

I don’t care what Donald Trump says, I think this is why Rosie is leaving "The View" which airs on ABC.

Power of the Purse

Today’s bill in Congress to end the occupation is totally unnecessary. They don’t need to PASS something. All they need to do is NOT PASS something! They have the power of the purse. If they quit funding the occupation, what’s the worst Bush can do? Starve the troops? Then they could impeach him, which they should do anyway.

All this talk in the corporate media about not being able to override a presidential veto is beside the point. It’s an insult to our intelligence. This is not rocket science. If the Democrats don’t stand up to the president on this, and if they get away with it, they’ll be hoodwinking the peace movement in a major way. Don’t fund the occupation, don’t fund the troop spurt, don’t fund anything, except enough to get the troops home safely!

What happens next?

Ok, now that the Dems have passed funding for the war in Iraq, what happens next? Republicans and Greens oppose it, but for different reasons. Republicans oppose the benchmarks and deadlines for troop withdrawal. Greens oppose any funding that allows the war to continue.

It appears there are four main possible outcomes:
1. The president vetoes it and Congress does not pass any funding to replace it.
2. The president signs it.
3. The president vetoes it and Congress works out a compromise with the president.
4. The president vetoes it and Congress gives in on the benchmarks and deadlines.

Now in more detail:

1. The president vetoes it and Congress does not pass any funding to replace it.
This is the best possible outcome. Democrats would come off looking pretty good, because they tried to work with the president. Greens would be disarmed because Dems ended up doing the right thing, albeit late. We wouldn't get any credit, but it would be cause for celebration. Unless funding is pulled from domestic programs or the president chooses to starve the troops or something.

2. The president signs it.
This is not likely, the president does not intend to sign it. If he did, he could claim that it was the best he could expect, and the Dems could claim victory that the war has a deadline. IF there are no complications and surprise extensions along the way. Or if the bill is really non-binding, they could make excuses to drag out the war. Greens could complain as long as the war continued. Democrats could claim victory when the war finally does end and their delay will go down the memory hole (it will be forgotten by the public.)

3. The president vetoes it and Congress works out a compromise with the president.
If this happens, Greens should continue to criticize, especially if the compromise is worse than what Congress has already passed.

4. The president vetoes it and Congress gives in on the benchmarks and deadlines.
In this scenario, Greens would raise hell and might actually increase their numbers.

Whatever the outcome, I'm hoping it will provide some clues as to what extent the Republicans and Democrats are in collusion with each other, and to what extent this war is about oil as a strategic resource in geopolitical jockeying with the Russians and the Chinese.

I'm not sure which of the four outcomes is most likely, perhaps there is some other unforeseen surprise possibility. If I had to guess I would say #3, with surprise extensions along the way. Maybe they will find a way to end the war while still retaining control of the oil flow. If they do, that would lend more credence to the idea that there is a force more powerful than the Dems and Repubs that controls them both. If the Dems succeed in getting us completely out of Iraq, that may indicate that they have a will of their own, but it may result in higher oil prices, unless they can manage to establish good diplomatic relations with whoever prevails in the civil war.

What happens next? What is your prediction?