BUSH DOESN'T NEED THE SENATE FOR TREATIES?
The Bush Regime-- I should say "the nefarious and politically illegitimate Bush Regime," but you already know that-- has long since usurped one of the most critical powers the Founding Fathers assigned to Congress. That would be the power to declare war, which they very specifically denied the president, knowing in their hearts that one day someone like George W. Bush would somehow stumble into the White House. Now apparently the Regime is also trying to leave the Senate out of the treaty process, although they call their new treaty with Iraq "a deal" rather than a treaty.
I wonder if, after the Iraqi Parliament accepts (or, more likely, rejects) it, the U.S. Senate gets to debate it. Some two-bit general with several chins who Bush dragged into his dying regime to "handle" Iraq and Afghanistan-- and what a fabulous job he's doing on each-- has decreed that Bush doesn't need no lousy Senate ratification. They get away with this kind of outrageousness becaus eof Nancy Pelosi's announcement that you know what is off the table.
The treaty Bush and Maliki agreed to-- and signed-- yesterday (at a "secure videoconference") is a framework for a long-term U.S. presence, the establishment of permanent bases, as well as for Bush-related companies to be able to exploit Iraqi oil and for Bush-related mercenaries to terrorize Iraqi civilians with no accountability.
Although the Regime and it's media shills are insisting all day every day that violence is down, all independent assessments show that violence is still rampant and horrific-- and even the U.S. military reports that in some areas violent incidents "have risen to their highest levels in months."
UPDATE: THE NEXT PRESIDNET TELLS BUSH "NO PERMANENT BASES"
Hillary wrote a letter to Bush and his cronies and her campaign posted it at DailyKos. It's very polite but let's them know she has some major concerns about yesterday's bogus treaty.
I am particularly concerned that this document did not contain any explicit reference or language that indicates that the United States will not seek and will not maintain permanent military bases in Iraq. Moreover, the document's failure to note any intent to begin the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq is a missed opportunity to pressure Iraq's leaders to make the compromises necessary to achieve political reconciliation in Iraq... To be clear, attempts to establish permanent bases in Iraq would damage U.S. interests in Iraq and the broader region, and I will continue to strongly oppose such efforts.