Quote:
Quote by: brien  If it doesn't mean foreign policy, then what exactly does it mean. Are you saying that Congress hass the authority to negotiate FP? |
No, Congress members can hold discussions. They can't negotiate treaties or other agreements in the name of the US. The Republicans (and Pelosi) didn't.
By the way, Bush may have known about Pelosi's visit all along, and didn't object:
Think Progress » Rahall: Pelosi Personally Told Bush Of Syria Trip And He Did Not Object Quote:
Quote by: brien All transcripts here? Don't have one and it is not meaningful here. I already showed you the dangers in encouraging members of Congress to pretend to conduct FP. |
You referred to an Israeli "clarification." The clarification didn't quote Pelosi. I was wondering if you knew what Pelosi (and the delegation) had actually told President Assad or if you knew what Pelosi had said--in exact words--during her press conference after the meeting--the press conference that prompted the Israeli "clarification." I've been trying to locate an exact transcript of the her comments but have yet to find one. So I'm not sure what the Israelis objected to, and therefore the substance of your own objection; unless you accept the word of Prime Minister Olmert on faith. But I didn't think "non-partisans" did such things; only us "partisans."
Quote:
Quote by: brien Obviously you don't agree and think it is just fine to confuse foreign nations about whom to deal with in matters of FP. It encourages foreign nations to back door the Department of State. Fine. Reap what you sow because it will result in FP chaos. |
Your criticism is disingenuous. Instead of lecturing Pelosi and Democrats on "reap what you sow," you should remind Republicans of Dennis Hastert and Newt Gingrich. Isn't it fair to say that Bush and his supporters "reap" the benefits of past congressional delegations to the Middle East? At least show some fairness...you are, after all, "non-partisan." The Republicans (and Pelosi) didn't set a dangerous precedent. You could argue that they are continuing a Republican practice and say "a pox on both their houses." I would still disagree, but at least you would have the appearance of impartiality. Right now, you're comments are carbon copies of rants being posted throughout the conservative blogosphere.
Quote:
Quote by: brien The more it is done, the more encouraging it will be for foreign nations to think they can ignore the protocol of the State Department. This, my friend, is dangerous to both the Constitution and the Nation. |
Well let's put your theory to the test. Newt Gingrich visited Taiwan in 1997 and was blasted by China for sending "mixed messages" about US foreign policy. Since 1997, can you point to a single example of US-China relations suffering from Gingrich's decision to visit Taiwan? Can you cite one foreign policy article in a conservative or a liberal magazine/website that traces any US-China policy difficulty to the Gingrich meetings in Taiwan? Did the Clinton State Department even suggest that Gingrich had broken any laws or breached the US Constitution?
Or can you even cite a Republican/Pelosi-style delegation since 1998 to back up your contention that "dangerous precedents" will lead to 535 independent congressional foreign policies? If you can show the slippery slope at work since 1998 you may have the beginnings of an argument.
BocaGuy: Newt Gingrich's 1997 trip to China
Or, more recently, can you show any evidence that the Republican (and Pelosi) visit to Damascus has worsened US-Israeli relations, US-Lebanese relations, US-Iraqi relations, or US-Syrian relations?
You've constructed some really scary slippery-slope arguments against "unauthorized" congressional trips overseas, but you've got precious little in the way of evidence backing you up. Except, perhaps, for the Israeli "clarification" about Nancy Pelosi's post-meeting comments that neither you nor I have actually read in their entirety.
Quote:
Quote by: brien Here is the Chronology of events of the Jubilee for the entire year.
No where in this chronology can I find a meeting between the PM and Gingrich. I can locate many meetings with Clinton, Gore, Albright and Special Envoy Ross, amoung others, but no meeting with Newt.
This is the only mention of that delegation: |
You're correct. The link only cited the Jerusalem Post article from 25 May 1998, which contained a fuller description of Gingrich's trip. Gingrich met with PM Benjamin Netanyahu, a close personal friend of his, and a man who despised Clinton. The idea that Gingrich would visit Israel without meeting his friend is unthinkable. Here's an excerpt from the original article:
The Jerusalem Post, 25 May 1998
Cabinet mulls new US proposal
By HERB KEINON and Jerusalem Post Staff
JERUSALEM (May 25) --
....Yesterday, at a meeting with some 25 US legislators here on a visit to mark the country's jubilee, Netanyahu said: "I said here in the hotel on Friday that the peace process was in dire straits in the first two years of Oslo. I repeat that statement...."
CIDI : Nieuws - 1998 Overzicht
During Gingrich's 1998 visit to Israel, he also addressed the Knesset (Israel's Parliament) and met PLO Chairman Yasir Arafat for private discussions.
Yes, THAT Yasir Arafat.
CNN - Palestinians: Arafat-Gingrich talks go well - May 27, 1998
Gingrich also met the Premier of China and the President of Taiwan during a 1997 visit.
http://bocaguy.blogspot.com/2007/04/...-to-china.html