That our electorate is so stupid is even more so.

Pelosi: The president knows that because the troops are in harm’s way, that we won’t cut off the resources. That’s why he’s moving so quickly to put them in harm’s way.

If so, she is unbeleivable!

Why was this announcement an ABC/Diane Sawyer exclusive? Was she afraid to announce this among her peers?
Exclusive: Pelosi Won’t Block Funding to Stop Iraq Troop Surge, Even Though Situation Is a ‘Tragedy’
Nancy Pelosi Tells ABC New…

They don’t want to support it or else they’ll antagonize the nuts,

Pelosi and many of the other astute Dems don’t worry too much about the KO’s crowd. They’re used to the whining and bitching from that bunch; geez, you couldn’t find a more juvenile, me, me, me group outside of a kindergarden class. The Dem leadership knows that when it comes to nut-cuttin’ time, the nutroots will always pull the lever with the “D” on it. Even nutroots are smart enough to understand that they stand absolutly zero chance to get their agenda enacted into law under any other party.

We, on the other hand, eat our own. Instead of applying the same logic as the nutroots on election day, some “protest” by staying home. Later those same folks cry worse than any KO’er about the lack of conservative legislation making it through congress.

When will we learn that even diamonds have flaws?

Their followers are the DU-ers, who are drooling retards who have overdone the ligature masturbation thing and are suffering permanent hypoxia-caused brain damage.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you the modern Democratic Party!

“Carte blanche from the Democrat Congreass”, I replied.

“F–k them”, Markos Moulitsas was overheard.

“She’s a chicken”, Arianna Huffpoo said.

“They’re wussies, I knew it”, the president said.

“We want to be for the Soldiers, but against the war”, Rahm was mumbling to anyone he could get a hold of. “It worked in 2006, it’ll work again in 2008, and that’s the ultimate goal”.

Sending you two kegs, a case of ‘rinds’, and offering up my wife for a table dance.

The party of George McClellan lives! Copperheads….all of em.

There’s no political downside. If the surge fails, the left can say they showed faith in the troops by funding their mission and giving them a last chance to win. If it succeeds, they get credit for having underwritten victory. Everybody’s happy, just so long as you don’t think too hard about them willingly funding a war which they hate, which they deeply believe is harming America and getting U.S. soldiers killed needlessly, for the sake of their own political expedience.

What happened to “the people have spoken” in the November ‘06 elections and, therefore, things need to change with regard to the President’s Iraq policy – and that they would in the first 100 hours?

While at the gym today, the television there shows CNN and ESPN in the locker room. I happened to be there while Wolfie’s show, The Situation Room was on. He was interviewing Rangel, and asked him why the Dems weren’t doing anything about Iraq in their first 100 hours (especially since they ran on that issue prior to the elections). Rangel, of course, turned into his usual spin doctor self, and responded that there needed to be more questions asked and answered before they did anything on Iraq.

In other words, the Dems don’t have a plan for Iraq. They are hoping for complete utter failure so that they can continue to pound on Bush. This, they are hoping, will carry over to the ‘08 election, and they can get one of their own in the White House (and keep both houses).

DEM plan = hope and wish for complete disaster in Iraq. They don’t want anything to do with Iraq, they just wanted to be in power.

There’s no political downside. If the surge fails, the left can say they showed faith in the troops by funding their mission and giving them a last chance to win. If it succeeds, they get credit for having underwritten victory. Everybody’s happy, just so long as you don’t think too hard about them willingly funding a war which they hate, which they deeply believe is harming America and getting U.S. soldiers killed needlessly, for the sake of their own political expedience.

In the short term that’s probably true, but in the longer term it might not be so. On one hand, if the surge fails, the moonbat left (read: their base) will give them at least some of the blame for not taking action to stop the war when they had the chance. On the other hand, if the surge actually succeeds, they will be apoplectic and thus really, really angry at Pelosi and co. for failing to do anything to stop the war.

With this action (or inaction if you prefer), they have officially assumed part of the responsibility for what happens from this point forward, and thus the political consequences.

All that being said,

The Apologist on January 18, 2007 at 6:53 PM

gets it right in the first comment of this thread.

Now, somebody please. . . convince tht disgusting Hagel to become a Democrat, or an independent, or anything other than a Republican. i can’t beleive that the good people of Nebraska are keeping this bum in the senate.

rplat on January 18, 2007 at 7:40 PM

He was reelected in 2002 so he’ll have to prove to Nebraska if he’s red enough for this State which is Big Red in more ways than one.

To my knowledge, on most issues except the Iraq War and immigration he’s mostly conservative but immigration and the Iraq War are two very huge issues to me and I’ll definately be keeping an eye out for a more conservative candidate in ‘08.

Answering Janos Hunyadi’s question: habitual lying. Living in the dark gives you those bulgy eyes, but you’re still blind.

Drugs? Insanity? Decades of Accumulated Rage?

All of the above?

Hopefully the American public can tell that.

ABC News: There may be a growing battle between Congress and the president over the Iraq War strategy, but new House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said she won’t block funding for additional troops. Pelosi’s position, revealed in an exclusive inter…

Pelosi: Democrats will never cut off funding for our troops when they are in harm’s way.