Senate Votes to Pull Out
The Senators who voted for this bill are encroaching on the power of the executive branch.
The Democratic-controlled Senate narrowly signaled support Tuesday for the withdrawal of U.S. combat troops from Iraq by next March, triggering an instant veto threat from the White House in a deepening dispute between Congress and commander in chief.
Republican attempts to scuttle the nonbinding timeline failed, 50-48, largely along party lines.
Oh, and they are signaling to our allies and the Iraqis that we are going to abandon them regardless of the conditions on the ground. Oh, and it just ignores the national security implications. Oh, and… never mind.
I’d be happy to support anything with, ya know, a goal involved.
During an interview on “The Situation Room” this afternoon, John McCain told Wolf that he needs to “get up to speed” and stop reporting three-month-old news from Iraq. According to McCain, the surge is working! and the streets of Baghdad are safe for Americans to go strolling down. The only problem? Michael Ware with CNN, who is, ya know, in Baghdad, says McCain hasn’t a clue.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 27, 2007 at 2118 hrs
They must have cut off funding for birth control pills.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 27, 2007 at 2218 hrs
If the surge is working, we should be able to withdraw within the next year.
If the surge does not work, we should recognize that our occupation is preventing the situation from improving and withdraw
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 27, 2007 at 2221 hrs
They hold the power of the purse, that is the only power they wield. This does encroach on the Executive Branch. The commander in chief has the power to make this call not them. If they want it so bad pull the funds. Get the onions and defund the troops in harms way. If not shut the hell up and watch the veto pen unsheathed for the first time.
Pathetic, the lot of them.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 27, 2007 at 2233 hrs
Actually, his first veto was the refusal to lift the funding restrictions on stem cell research.
And if the Congress does manage to withhold funding and Bush leaves the troops “in harms way” anyway, instead of following the will of the people and withdrawing them, the blood will be on his hands.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 27, 2007 at 2324 hrs
The will of what people? The 53% that elected the commander in chief?
Those are the people. Not your wannabe 18-23% who voted in the mid-term elections. Don’t even come here with these stupid poll numbers either. I’m not one of your lefty kool-aid drinking yoga partners. My memory is longer then a mosquitoes.
If this congress was so sure that it was a winning proposition to defund troops in harms way why did they add 20 billion dollars in pork to the bill?
And if congress does “manage” to with hold spending. What the hell is wrong with you.
Manage to withhold spending?
Why are you carrying the water for the Mullahs and the islamofascists?
Do you want to win this war? Or do you just want to undermine this administration?
It seems to me to be the latter.
Do you care what a negative outcome would mean in South-east Asia, or have you even given that thought any time to roll around in your brain pan?
Explain to me please what you think will happen if your way is adopted by this country.
I really, really want to know what the thought process is of any leftard who thinks this world will be a better place if we cut and run in Iraq right now.
How would the world look in five years?
How would 25 million Iraqui’s lives be affected by that?
Enlighten me, you who worships at the altar of the Goreacle.Simple question, How will the world look in five years if we cut and run? Answer it.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 28, 2007 at 0002 hrs
Once again Displaced ched head comes to the battle of wits unarmed. Don’t be alarmed, the twinkle in his eye is simply the sun shining thru his ear.
Why should I lower myself to debate a screaming wingnut like you?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 28, 2007 at 0052 hrs
If we “cut and run” in five years we might have more money to not only handle ourselves militarily around the world but we will also have more money to fight cancer, improve education, improve our infrastructure, pay down our federal debt, do something about healthcare and many more.
By the way, I don’t think we are affecting “25 million Iraqui live.” About two million of them have fled to other countries.
Your Bush love have screwed up the lives of those families that have lost loved ones in Iraq, the lives of those serving who wil come back with severe mental problems that will not be covered because tax cuts for bloated pigs come first and the lives of the 25, no make that 23 million Iraquis who live without electricity and with lots of fear, just for your selfishness.
As much as you accuse us liberals of what ever the hell it is, you are doing what you do just for petty party politics.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 28, 2007 at 0608 hrs
Ummm I would of sworn we already won this war? Didn’t I see a big sign somewhere… hmmm “Mission Accomplished”?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 28, 2007 at 0942 hrs
“You know, this war is so fucking illegal.”—SPC Pat Tillman—http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/09/25/MNGD7ETMNM1.DTL&type=printable
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 28, 2007 at 1040 hrs
To kr, djheru and daver,
Do this for me. Name anything the Democrats have done in say the last 3 years that have given our troops a positive message. What did they do to say we support you and we know you can complete your message?
Name something they have done that sends a message to the ememy that we will win this war and we support you.
Give me examples other than cut and run they have come up with to win. Can you?
If we must leave as you, the Democrats and of course the enemy then what? If we leave as you would like, and the enemy comes to America hunting for Americans to kill are you willing to place your family out there to be the first to be killed? Now answer the question! Are you?
I know the answer. You think that we will pull out of Iraq and all will be great, the enemy will just go away. You think that President Bush is the enemy, you think Republicans are the enemy, you think Christians are the enemy and you think the American soldiers are America’s enemy.
If we are forced to leave before the job is done will that mean that you and your fellow anti-war friends will have the blood of the many that will be killed in Iraq on your hands? For some reason I think you not care. After all you consider President Bush the enemy and everything President Bush does is somehow bad for the world.
I never hear your kind say a word about the enemy blowing up their own childern just to take out a few more soldiers or police. You really make me sick!
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 28, 2007 at 1046 hrs
kr,
Owen should remove you from this blog because you have no class at all. Using foul langauge on this blog doesn’t make you look any smarter either. I’m sure your parents are proud.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 28, 2007 at 1054 hrs
The senate is free to vote as it wishes, and the president is free to veto as he wishes. The congress right now is extraordinarily weak. If Bush were something more than useless he could beat them over the head politically and actually accomplish something these next two years.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 28, 2007 at 1059 hrs
Absolutely correct BV.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 28, 2007 at 1107 hrs
What did they do to say we support you Actions speak louder than words. While Bushites have been shouting their support for the troops from the rooftops and the bumpers of their suv’s, what have their actions shown? Ask the soldiers on their third tour in 4 years in Iraq.
Ask the soldiers that were forced to drive around in unarmored Humvees.
Ask the soldiers that had to ask their families stateside to send them bulletproof vests while Haliburton was receiving no bid contracts to supply spoiled food and quarters with raw sewage dripping from the ceiling.
Ask the wounded soldiers who had to lie on urine soaked mattresses while cockroaches feasted on their soiled bandages, or better yet, ask the wounded soldiers that were reclassified as fit for combat in order to support Bush’s “surge”.If you really support the troops, you are opposed to keeping them in Iraq, acting as referees in what the pentagon and the intelligence community have both described as a civil war.
Your side has lost all claim on “supporting the troops”.
HypocritesDespite your desperate rhetoric, the problem in Iraq is really a sectarian conflict between Sunni and Shia. Redeploying our troops would free up our resources to address problems that actually impact OUR national security, rather than Iraq’s.
What it boils down to is this: We have to leave sometime. Our presence is not making the situation better. We are not acheiving any national security goals by staying.
The resources that we are using to secure Iraq could be better used to secure America.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 28, 2007 at 1157 hrs
diheru,
Couldn’t think of even one thing you have done to support the troops could you? An old lib trick, don’t answer the question just ask a new one? You are a joke!
Now try again to answer the questions I asked above. Again I know the answer but I’ll let you try.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 28, 2007 at 1216 hrs
What I’ve done to support the troops:
1. Worked to end the occupation of Iraq.
2. Wrote mortgages for 7 soldiers without making a dime
3. Wrote letters to two friends in the Army
4. Helped throw parties for the same two friends when they returned home
5. Stood as a groomsman at one of their weddings.What have you done to support the troops. When I say support the troops, I don’t mean support George Bush, I know you probably get the two confused a lot.
p.s. Bumper stickers don’t count
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 28, 2007 at 1303 hrs
diheru,
Is it just me or did you not answer all the questions?
You’ve worked to end the occupation of Iraq, that really helps the troops! Oh, I forgot you are talking about the ememy troops. You’re right you did help the enemy, I meant the US troops.
Where are the ideas of how to win the war? How about your family? Are you willing to have your family be the first ones killed by these terrorist when they come to our homeland or not?Will you accept the blood of our friends left behind in Iraw who are killed by the terriorist?
As far as what I have done:
1) I walk up to and thank all soldiers from this war and past wars for their service. Do you?
2) I have defended them in the media from the likes of you who have not supported their mission from the get go and who thinks our military can not win this small war. Where would we have been in WWII with this kind of thinking? Or were we the bad guys then too?3) I work to make sure the people who fight for our freedoms get to vote in elections, unlike the Dems who fight to get their votes thrown out in every election.
4) I send them with messages from my computer to wish them well and support their mission.
5) I don’t as the Dems have for about four years now tell them they are not good enough to complete their mission.
6) I don’t listen to all the nuts say our troops are worst than the terrorist.
7) And yes, I support their Commander George W. Bush as all good Americans should.
The things you listed above are great but I still did not see you say you supported their mission. Did you at anytime support their mission?
And the big question, “will you answer these simple question?”
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 28, 2007 at 1503 hrs
Once again I have fallen into the trap of debating a raving wingnut. Alas.
I will try to explain this as simply as possible, so that perhaps a few drops of wisdom will seep in through the wall of propaganda, empty rhetoric and empty platitudes that you have erected in your little mind.
We are not at war in Iraq. We already won the war very easily, as everyone predicted we would, with us having the greatest military ever to exist.
We are now an occupying force trying to stop an insurgency that is primarily fueled by our presence. It is akin to fighting a fire with gasoline.
The experts, that is, people who, unlike you, actually know what they are talking about, have admitted many times that our actions in Iraq have made the threat of terrorism worse. Even an idiot knows that when you are stuck in a hole, the first step is to stop digging.
The problems in Iraq are not the fault of the troops, even though you keep saying that. It is the fault of the commander in chief. He is the one responsible for implementing and adjusting a post-war policy. He was and is incompetent in this area.
Supporting an incompetent president like George Bush is, to use the words of Theodore Roosevelt, base and servile. In fact, he said “He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree
which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the nation as a whole.”Regarding people JUST LIKE YOU, he said: “ To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the
American public.”JDK=Unpatriotic, servile, morally treasonable. Sounds about right
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 28, 2007 at 1524 hrs
diheru,
I tried to give you a chance to respond to all the question but you couldn’t do it. Patroitic means you support your country not the enemy as you do. You tire me with your foolish talk.
I’m not the one who says it’s the troops fault. I believe they are doing a great job and I believe we are winning. The worst thing for you libs is that this surge works and it is working, and you will be exposed as the un-patroitic Americans you are. Now I am done with “the likes of you”.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 28, 2007 at 1548 hrs
Another base and servile wingnut vanquished - Huzzah!
Props on evading every single point I raised though. Most raving wingnuts aren’t that clever.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 28, 2007 at 1551 hrs
Begone djheru with your foolish talk and traitorous intentions. Begone I say.
I am done with the likes of you and your libertine ilk, foresooth.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 28, 2007 at 1650 hrs
Total Entries: 19656
Total Comments: 129831
Most Recent Entry: 02/11/2012 09:52 pm
Most Recent Comment on: 02/11/2012 04:55 pm
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 107
Total anonymous users: 1
Most Recent Visitor on: 02/11/2012 11:24 pm
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).