« Watch Today's Live Webcast of Gov. Richardson's State of the State Address | Main | JOIN IN: Help PSN, Moveon & Kennedy Launch the 50-State Response to Bush's Iraq Escalation Plan »
Tuesday, January 16, 2007
Gov. Richardson Supports Cutting Funds for Iraq Escalation
Let's hope Gov. Richardson's views prevail with the Dems. As reported by digby from a CNN transcript:
BLITZER: Are you in favor of using the power of the purse that Congress has to try to stop this war?
GOV. BILL RICHARDSON (D), NEW MEXICO: Yes. I believe because the president has not listened to the Congress, he hasn't listened to the bipartisan Iraq Study Group and to the American people, that overwhelmingly want a change of course, I believe that's the function of the Congress, to deal with the appropriations process, find ways to at least this surge, to deny the funds to make it happen, because this is going to add to sectarian violence.
I would support a phased withdrawal, tie it to a political solution. There is no military solution. I would also organize a regional conference to get other states to help with the security and civil administration. I would talk to Iran and Syria to try to get the situation to at least a stable level.
I just believe that this is an ultimate decision by the Congress. But since the president doesn't listen, he's off in, I think, his own bubble. Unfortunately, that's the course I believe the Congress needs to take.
And digby also says:
Richardson is not given to shrillness. He's probably running for president and he's running as a national security specialist, which he is. This is no joke. If he's saying this then Bush is in for trouble in the congress.
However, he goes on to explain why Cheney would almost certainly just ignore any effort by Congress to stop the useless "surge" or impose any limitations whatsoever on presidential war powers, citing his views about the Iran-Contra scandal back in 1987 as just one example of his disdain for the rule of law.
January 16, 2007 at 10:38 AM in Iraq War | Permalink
Comments
Another view:
This message is primarily directed to all “peoples of the earth” who are preparing to arm themselves with weapons of mass destruction, so they can supposedly make everyone worship God exactly as they do.
Through the Hebrew Prophet, Isaiah, the Almighty Lord God warned the world: “…behold, darkness shall cover the earth and gross darkness the peoples…(Isa. 60:2).
Much later, Jesus spoke of a time when: “…the sun will be darkened and the moon will not give its light…” (Matt. 24:29). And “...unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved.” But he immediately promised, “…those days will be shortened” (Matt. 24:22).
Today, we can strongly suspect that those prophesied days of “gross darkness” could be the aftermath of a full-scale nuclear war, when mushrooming smoke would deprive the earth of sunlight and moonlight, and a “nuclear winter” would envelop the world.
Yet, the Hebrew Scriptures also tell us that we do not have to endure “those days.” According to the Prophet Malachi, the Lord God has promised: “Behold I will send you Elijah the Prophet before the coming of the great and terrible day of the Lord. And he will turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers; lest I come and smite the land with utter destruction” (Mal. 3:24/4:6).
The “fathers” of monotheism were the Hebrews and their descendants, the Jews. The “children” of monotheism are the Christians and Muslims. Moreover, we’re told that all human beings, regardless of their religious beliefs or unbelief, are the “children” of the Lord God revealed by the Prophets. And unless something happens that will “turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers,” nuclear armed Muslims could soon act to fulfill the worst of all prophecies. Or, as the leader of Iran recently described their intentions: they will “wipe Israel (the land of the fathers) off the map.” And, ultimately, “darkness shall cover the earth.”
To be sure, the “something” that could “happen,” to spare us a nuclear winter, would be Elijah’s arrival. But, in this worldwide age of religious cynicism and “know it all intellectualism,” too many people might easily fail to recognize him and heed his teachings. So, it could immeasurably help us, if we prepare to better understand Elijah by enlarging our knowledge of the Prophets’ teachings.
To enlarge our knowledge, we only need to listen to the COMBINED teachings of ALL the Prophets, from Abraham through Muhammad. TOGETHER, they revealed the Lord God and the Messiah He promised to send us, without once contradicting each other! But that means, we must listen to the PROPHETS instead of the CLERGIES of Judaism, Christianity and Islam, who have never ceased contradicting each other, in their arrogant crusade to declare their own understanding “right” and all others “false or obsolete!”
Posted by: | Jan 16, 2007 11:52:38 AM
Well personally Jane I don't trust any "wisdom" that comes down from sexist male ancestors, especially not white ones.
We have brains to use for problem solving. We don't need ancient, silly, mythical, superstitions to guide us. Get a life.
Posted by: Roadrunner | Jan 16, 2007 12:00:10 PM
Dear Roadrunn,
It seems absolutely incredible to me that anyone would glibly dismiss such descriptive prophecies by discussing the sex of the Prophets! If you represent many females in today's society, you and your buddies are hurtling us toward the darkness that always accompanies ignorance.
Posted by: | Jan 16, 2007 12:22:17 PM
Ha, ha, ha. If anything represents ignorance it's your superstitious magical thinking that no reasonable person would support or endorse. Prophets are in fairy tales, not real life. If anything is hurtling us toward a damaging future it's childish, illogical thinking like yours.
Posted by: Roadrunner | Jan 16, 2007 12:33:33 PM
I see there's a crazy loose in here. I wonder if she's related to Bush or Pat Robertson...
Posted by: Old Dem | Jan 16, 2007 12:36:25 PM
Sounds like Jane may have been hitting the Mary Jane a little too much!
Posted by: VP | Jan 16, 2007 4:35:37 PM
If it is "illogical" to recognize past descriptions as amazingly similar to current events, then I'm not familiar with that definition of "logic." As for me being a "crazie," I can appear that way--but don't think that I think I'll succeed in awakening us to the teachings of all the Prophets. I don't. But I'll keep trying as long as I have the strength because the clergies of each religion have interpreted those teachings in ways that will end up setting the world on fire--I'm just hoping we can get smarter and avoid it--as we were told we could. That "hope" might be far-fetched, but sitting silent and watching it happen does not appeal to me. And I am always hopeful that some people will be willing to consider a new way to look at our circumstances, and I find it hard to believe that anyone can think that "illogical!"
Posted by: | Jan 18, 2007 11:25:51 AM
