You may only read this site if you've purchased Our Kampf from Amazon or Powell's or me
• • •
"Mike and Jon, Jon and Mike—I've known them both for years, and, clearly, one of them is very funny. As for the other: truly one of the great hangers-on of our time."—Steve Bodow, head writer, The Daily Show

"Who can really judge what's funny? If humor is a subjective medium, then can there be something that is really and truly hilarious? Me. This book."—Daniel Handler, author, Adverbs, and personal representative of Lemony Snicket

"The good news: I thought Our Kampf was consistently hilarious. The bad news: I’m the guy who wrote Monkeybone."—Sam Hamm, screenwriter, Batman, Batman Returns, and Homecoming

November 01, 2007

30 Senators Sign Webb Letter On Iran

James Webb sent his Iran letter to the White House today, with 30 senators total signing on. None were Republicans. Charles Davis has the full text and the list of signatories, noting:

...neither Senator Joe Biden (D-DE) nor Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) signed on, despite their criticism of Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY) for voting for the provocative Kyl-Lieberman resolution calling for Iran's Revolutionary Guard to be listed as a "terrorist organization." In contrast to both Biden and Obama, and in a sign that she has felt the heat over her vote on the Kyl-Lieberman resolution, Clinton signed on to the letter.

Yesterday I took a look at the significance of the letter, here.

Posted at November 1, 2007 05:44 PM | TrackBack

Jon: As a commenter points out, neither Feingold nor Kennedy are signatories. Why Clinton and not Obama? Can you explain the politics behind the letter? (Maybe you did it earlier and, if I missed it, sorry.)

Posted by: Bernard Chazelle at November 1, 2007 06:51 PM

I can't honesty say I understand what's going on. The absence of Feingold and Kennedy suggests to me that not much can be read into people not signing -- beyond that this may have been badly organized and at the last minute.

Posted by: Jonathan Schwarz at November 1, 2007 08:11 PM

More like "none was a Republican." Let's not lose sight of subject-verb agreement or all is lost. The terrorists may already have won.

Posted by: Grottman at November 1, 2007 08:24 PM

The terrorists may already have won.

Didn't you get the email? It happened this morning, which is why I felt free to disregard the rules of grammar.

Posted by: Jonathan Schwarz at November 1, 2007 08:48 PM

Disregard the rules of English? That's unpossible!

Posted by: Grottman at November 1, 2007 10:30 PM

Grottman: I'll try not to take it personally, but WHY, WHY did you overlook my grammatical mistake "neither/nor... are" ? Must the terrorists always win?

Posted by: Bernard Chazelle at November 2, 2007 12:44 AM

The letter states: "We wish to emphasize that no congressional authority exists for unilateral military action against Iran."

Actually, that's not true.

The War Powers Resolution of Nov 7, 1973 states:
The President in every possible instance shall consult with Congress before introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities . . .and after every such introduction shall consult regularly with the Congress.

Sure it's unconstitutional but so what. The Supremes have refused to touch it.

I imagine that someone in VP Cheney's office has already created a reason why prior consultation with Congress is not possible in this case. Having something to do with Israel, no doubt.

Posted by: Don Bacon at November 2, 2007 01:36 AM

biden n obama n hrc: maybe it's all a con: they take turns half-assedly supporting aggression n half-assedly opposing it: then when the bombs start to fall they'll give passionate stump speeches denouncing dubya but their actual voting will continue to reflect democratic bending-over to please. or they may skip the speeches.

close your eyes, and picture:

take one: generic ambitious senator x/y/z, holding up a shiny bauble, as the peons ooh and ah. in take two, senator x/y/z is still holding up the shiny bauble, but no oohs and ahs. trouble in river city! an aide appears from off-screen, whispers something in senator x/y/z's ear, and senator x/y/z shifts the bauble slightly, revealing a different side to this audience, who now ooh and ah accordingly.

(I joke, but I've been looking at some of my old posts from 4-5 years ago and I realize there was a (relatively recent)time when I didn't look at things like this, not even remotely.)

Posted by: jonathan versen at November 2, 2007 04:58 AM

Bernard, I only have the resources to fight on one front at a time. Having committed them all to the subject-verb disagreement in the post, I couldn't open another front on your comment. Additionally, I didn't have authorization to do so. I'm left to sit here scratching my head, wondering why I hate America.

Posted by: Grottman at November 2, 2007 10:18 AM

Grottman: Do you hate America or only it's government? {:-)

Posted by: Don Bacon at November 2, 2007 10:55 AM

One thing that changes dramatically is that a new president finds him/herself in command of a vast secret military/intelligence apparatus which can be ordered to do anything the president wants done, anywhere in the world, with complete operational and financial secrecy.

Posted by: Don Bacon at November 2, 2007 11:57 AM

One thing that doesn't change in the tiniest slightest itsy-bitsyest little bit is the continual bombing and looting of other countries to benefit US multi-national corporations.

But don't let that stop you vote for Hillary next year.

Posted by: AlanSmithee at November 2, 2007 01:45 PM

I'm not going to vote for Clinton, and I don't think many other people would either....

Posted by: StO at November 3, 2007 11:34 AM