[T]he superstition that the budget must be balanced at all times, once it is debunked, takes away one of the bulwarks that every society must have against expenditure out of control. . . . [O]ne of the functions of old-fashioned religion was to scare people by sometimes what might be regarded as myths into behaving in a way that long-run civilized life requires.
Thursday, March 29, 2007
The Iraq war supplemental
I'll be talking about the bill later today.
1 comment:
Please pick a handle or moniker for your comment. It's much easier to address someone by a name or pseudonym than simply "hey you". I have the option of requiring a "hard" identity, but I don't want to turn that on... yet.
With few exceptions, I will not respond or reply to anonymous comments, and I may delete them. I keep a copy of all comments; if you want the text of your comment to repost with something vaguely resembling an identity, email me.
No spam, pr0n, commercial advertising, insanity, lies, repetition or off-topic comments. Creationists, Global Warming deniers, anti-vaxers, Randians, and Libertarians are automatically presumed to be idiots; Christians and Muslims might get the benefit of the doubt, if I'm in a good mood.
See the Debate Flowchart for some basic rules.
Sourced factual corrections are always published and acknowledged.
I will respond or not respond to comments as the mood takes me. See my latest comment policy for details. I am not a pseudonomous-American: my real name is Larry.
Comments may be moderated from time to time. When I do moderate comments, anonymous comments are far more likely to be rejected.
I've already answered some typical comments.
I have jqMath enabled for the blog. If you have a dollar sign (\$) in your comment, put a \\ in front of it: \\\$, unless you want to include a formula in your comment.
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.
Section 1901 is what's known as "The Murtha Amendment." It's actually a pretty effective way of tying the President's hands and isn't open to "you don't support the troops" canards.
ReplyDeleteI can't see the President actually abiding by it. Sections 1902 and 1903 are deviations from classic deployment doctrine. Fortunately, it's pretty easy to convincingly argue that we are not in the same kind of deployment situation as we were in any other conflict. In all other wars, even if the units were deployed for years, they could be rotated back from the front lines for weeks of recuperation. You can't do that when there are no lines at all. Sections 1902 and 1903 address that.
Section 1904 is actually sneakily important. It seems to indicate that as a part of the appropriation, the President would have to abide by the reporting standards delineated by the War Powers Act. Now THAT would be interesting...