Its interesting that Sec of Defense Gates described the Congressional debate about funding and timelines to be helpful, not shameful.:
Quote:
First, at a time when Bush was hammering away at Democrat-sponsored spending bills that would set a withdrawal deadline, Gates suggested on a trip to Jordan last week that the debate on Capitol Hill over an Iraq-withdrawal deadline was "helpful in demonstrating to the Iraqis that American patience is limited." Then, during a stop in Iraq a few days later, Gates said "the clock is ticking" and that U.S. troops would not be patrolling Iraqi streets "open-endedly."
http://www.talk.newsweek.com/default.asp?item=578856
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
I will go slow to keep focused, assuming that you really don't get it.
Why does a member of Congress need authority to talk about the bill?
|
There is no need to be condescending with the "i dont get it" comment.
I get it...the Dems were talking about possible changes in the final bill that were still under consideration.....not about the bill as it currently stands. You dont seem to see the difference. It is perfectly reasonable for members of a caucus in Congress to have private discussions on possible amendments to determine possible support prior to proposing such amendments. Does that make sense?