<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <title>The Fighting 29th</title>
  <subtitle>All about New York's 29th Congressional District</subtitle>
  <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.fighting29th.com/2007/12/meaningless-votes.html"/>
  <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.fighting29th.com/node/4610/atom/feed"/>
  <id>http://www.fighting29th.com/node/4610/atom/feed</id>
  <updated>2007-12-28T21:29:59-05:00</updated>
  <entry>
    <title>Do The Right Thing</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.fighting29th.com/2007/12/meaningless-votes.html" />
    <id>http://www.fighting29th.com/2007/12/meaningless-votes.html</id>
    <published>2007-12-28T21:29:59-05:00</published>
    <updated>2007-12-28T21:29:59-05:00</updated>
    <author>
      <name>Rottenchester</name>
    </author>
    <category term="Analysis" />
    <category term="Votes" />
    <summary type="html"><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/28/AR2007122801992.html?hpid=topnews">Today's news</a> that President Bush will veto the Defense Appropriation Bill is a surprise, but the illogical rhetoric accompanying it is all too familiar.&nbsp; The administration objects to a provision in the bill that would allow courts to freeze Iraqi assets as part of lawsuits against Iraq.&nbsp; The Iraqi government opposes this measure because it would expose them to asset freezes related to litigation over Saddam Hussein's bad acts.<br /><br />Despite being one of those who supported the bill, the most senior Republican on the Armed Services Committee, John Warner, said:<br /><br /><blockquote>The president is doing the right thing [...] It's in our
national security interests, and it's the right thing to try to
preserve what I perceive as a strengthening of the relationship between
our government and the Iraqi government.<br /></blockquote>If it was the "right thing" to do this, why didn't Warner do the "right thing" and oppose the bill in committee?&nbsp; If the President is doing the "right thing", why did Randy Kuhl <a href="http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll1151.xml">vote for</a> the bill two weeks ago? <br />    ]]></summary>
    <content type="html"><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/28/AR2007122801992.html?hpid=topnews">Today's news</a> that President Bush will veto the Defense Appropriation Bill is a surprise, but the illogical rhetoric accompanying it is all too familiar.&nbsp; The administration objects to a provision in the bill that would allow courts to freeze Iraqi assets as part of lawsuits against Iraq.&nbsp; The Iraqi government opposes this measure because it would expose them to asset freezes related to litigation over Saddam Hussein's bad acts.<br /><br />Despite being one of those who supported the bill, the most senior Republican on the Armed Services Committee, John Warner, said:<br /><br /><blockquote>The president is doing the right thing [...] It's in our
national security interests, and it's the right thing to try to
preserve what I perceive as a strengthening of the relationship between
our government and the Iraqi government.<br /></blockquote>If it was the "right thing" to do this, why didn't Warner do the "right thing" and oppose the bill in committee?&nbsp; If the President is doing the "right thing", why did Randy Kuhl <a href="http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll1151.xml">vote for</a> the bill two weeks ago? <br />    ]]></content>
  </entry>
</feed>
