OK, I'm going to start this diary with an apology, as it is arguably a repetitive diary. But, the gravity of the issue raised by the previous diary which MJ Rosenberg crossposted from TPMCafe is such that I think it needs to be elevated to the recommended list.
Specifically, this relates to an item in Thursday's Congressional Quarterly which mentioned that AIPAC is pushing behind the scenes to undermine the efforts by Nancy Pelosi and John Murtha on the House side, in tandem with Jim Webb's effort on the Senate side (video here), to restrict President Bush's ability to use appropriated funds for a military strike on Iran, absent an immediate threat.
Iran Language Draws Opposition as Democrats Near Agreement on Supplemental
CQ TODAY -- March 8, 2007
By Jonathan Allen, CQ Staff
Hawkish pro-Israel lawmakers are pushing to strike a provision slated for the war spending bill that would, with some exceptions, require the president to seek congressional approval before using military force in Iran.
The influential American Israel Public Affairs Committee also is working to keep the language out, said an aide to a pro- Israel lawmaker.
The language is likely to spark an internal battle among House Democrats, some of whom fear an expansion of the Iraq War into Iran and others who are wary of sending a signal to Tehran that Congress wants to take the use of force off the table.
Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel of Illinois predicted that the language would ultimately not be included in the supplemental on the House side, although it is favored by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.; John P. Murtha, D-Pa., chairman of the Appropriations Defense Subcommittee; and some Jewish lawmakers.
Emanuel said opposition could extend beyond pro-Israel lawmakers. "‘Keep this all about Iraq’ is the view," he said.
But a Democratic leadership aide said there are no plans to remove the provision.
"There’s heat," the leadership aide acknowledged. "We’ve heard their concerns, but we think it’s likely to remain on the bill."
It is absolutely critical that we get this story out there into the MSM, hopefully as press coverage of the AIPAC annual conference revvs up. It starts tomorrow, and is being billed by some as "The First Primary" of the 2008 presidential election season.
It may be difficult for Democrats to agree on using the power of the purse to force an end to the war in Iraq, but it appears to be much easier to get congressional Democrats to coalesce around the idea of reining in Bush's legal authority to take us into additional wars, particularly in Iran. AIPAC cronies like Rahm Emmanuel are trying behind the scenes to undermine this, something he has a lot of power to do, with the implicit threat of withholding funds from the DCCC and AIPAC-friendly donors. (Before someone points it out, Rahm Emmanuel is no longer heading the DCCC, but he is Chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, and still wields a lot of influence over party funding.)
Much of the importance of the blogosphere is its ability to take obscure but important issues and wave them in the face of the MSM, which eventually gets those issues a wider audience. We need to do that here. AIPAC's ability to twist arms on Capitol Hill and stay under the rader while doing it has hurt US interests in many ways, and here, it may undermine the ability of the Congress to do what voters demanded in the last election -- to rein in President Bush's warmongering ability during the last two years of his presidency. We're close to being able to do that, with the leadership of people like Nancy Pelosi, John Murtha, and Jim Webb. Don't let this one slip by under the radar. Blog about it. Talk about it. Call your Congresscritters and let them know you're aware of it. Do what it takes.
With AIPAC's annual conference starting tomorrow, we have an opening to shine some sunlight on what they're doing to grease the skids for war with Iran, rather than being able to keep their activities under the radar they way they and their allies did for the war with Iraq.