General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMcConnell, Boehner, and the post-policy approach to Iraq
Posted with permission.
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/mcconnell-boehner-and-the-post-policy-approach-iraq
McConnell, Boehner, and the post-policy approach to Iraq
06/18/14 11:44 AM
By Steve Benen
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) declared his dissatisfaction yesterday with the Obama administrations policy in Iraq, and urged the White House to act quickly. Act how?
Hmm. Well, on the other side of Capitol Hill, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) is also dissatisfied and insisted President Obama get engaged in Iraq. Engaged how?
I dont know enough of the details about the airstrikes to comment, the speaker answered. All he could propose was that we should provide the equipment and the technical assistance that the Iraqis have been asking for.
The Obama administration is providing equipment and technical assistance to Iraq. Why the war-time Speaker of the House doesnt know that is unclear.
What were left with is the latest example of the Republicans post-policy problem. They know they disagree with the White House, but theyre not sure why and they have no idea what alternative policy theyd prefer.
Their approach to foreign policy is far more basic. What are they against? Whatever Obamas for. What policy do they support? Something other than the policy Obama supports.
At least with John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and their allies, there is an underlying policy recommendation. Its wrong and it doesnt work, but at least they bring something to the table: a vision in which U.S. troops should be deployed, pretty much everywhere, in response to just about every international challenge that arises.
But the top Republicans in the House and Senate arent willing to be nearly as clear. Despite their leadership posts, Boehners and McConnells foreign policy is not Obamas foreign policy.
In terms of the broader significance, lets recall the first time we started talking about the post-policy thesis, back in March 2013, when Rachel asked Ezra Klein about the ongoing fiscal fight at the time. Does that mean that {Republican policymakers are} post-policy? she asked, adding, Its pure politics, just positioning themselves vis-a-vis the president, and theyre not actually invested in any particular outcome?
Think about how broadly applicable that question is. It certainly seems to apply to U.S. policy in Iraq more than a year later.
Whats more, the fact that Boehner and McConnell dont have any kind of policy recommendations in this area, other than do something different, reinforces the belief that at this point, there really isnt a clear Republican Party foreign policy. To be sure, there are GOP officials with their own individual set of beliefs, but for the first time in generations, there is no real clarity about what the party itself believes on an institutional level about how the United States should exercise its role in the world.
And thats unlikely to change anytime soon. Looking ahead to some of the partys possible leaders in 2016 and beyond, we see a variety of ambitious conservatives Cruz, Paul, Ryan, Rubio, Christie none of whom are on the exact same page when it comes to foreign policy.
Finally, I can only hope McConnell and Boehner saw this portion from last nights A block:
It is not the Congress place just to go in front of TV cameras and to tweet and to send grandstanding open letters. Article 1 Section 8 of Constitution gives Congress the job of making the actual decisions about real bombs, instead of just throwing rhetorical bombs without consequence.
Im afraid I dont know enough of the details about the airstrikes to comment isnt an especially compelling response.
liberal N proud
(60,352 posts)The last dozen or so military actions have been by executive order.
Bandit
(21,475 posts)Why is everyone upset with Hillary and Kerry and most other Democratic Senators when they voted to give Bush*/Cheney permission to attack?
wandy
(3,539 posts)Sure, it's OK for them to have their 'Project American Spring' and wander around D.C looking for porta-potties. We can all sit back and laugh at them.
The middle east is the type of situation where the GOP becomes about as large a threat a nation can come up against.
Poor leadership, NO leadership, motivated only by political gain and a desire to enrich their owners.
This behavior is not helpful in difficult times and I dread to think how the GOP would react in a real crises.
How would this fine Teapublican "leadership" react to something as severe as the Cuban missile crises.
AlinPA
(15,071 posts)I would not be surprised if the GOP "leaders" in their efforts to make the President look bad would share the classified material from the meeting with those who would harm the U.S. The political environment in this country is dangerous now.
global1
(25,294 posts)Let this be debated in the House and Senate. Get these guys on record. Put it to a vote. He shouldn't let himself be sucked into it by their idiot and inane comments and criticisms. He knows better. He knows that whatever he does they will take the opposite viewpoint. So - put it to them to get on record. Let them make the decision.
We don't need another war. The American People are war weary. They gave up enough of their treasures and blood.
Let's let Congress get on record on this and then hold them accountable in November.