Posted as I head out the door

I don't have much time to comment, but I wanted direct a few eyeballs to a piece written for HuffPo by my friend from high school Tommy Sowers, who's running for Congress in my hometown district back in Missouri.

Money quote:
A debate in Congress on objectives in Afghanistan would be open, perhaps ugly, with compromises and politics at play. Yet the definition of objectives, especially when they involve questions of war and peace, is not a question of style or convenience but one of duty so that our voice, through Congress, could be heard loud and clear.
Tommy thinks we should be debating Afghanistan policy in Congress. From a strictly constitutional point of view, this is probably correct. From a pragmatic POV, considering what a clown college Congress has become, I'm not so sure. And, for good or ill, military intervention has been moving more and more away from the legislative branch to the executive for the past several decades.

Anyhow, I thought I'd do an old friend a solid. Feel free to share thoughts in comments.


  1. Someone needs to define our objectives in Afghanistan. The Oval Office currently has its head in an anatomically unlikely position, so Clown College it is.

  2. I've always been a small executive branch kind of person, but I would rather the current administration have a chance to undo the horrors previous Presidents have done and thus know that the final decision should rest in the Oval Office. That said, let the Clowns debate when they're done with everything else. They helped get us into this mess, so they should get a few others things done first while the new guy takes a swing at making things right.

  3. Three words, "Charlie Wilson's War" If you have not had a chance to read this book I suggest you do so. Not the movie but the book.