Breaking: House passes Iraq timetable; Update: Bush rips Dems over bill; Update: Video added

posted at 1:08 pm on March 23, 2007 by Allahpundit

Pelosi got it done.

To help get reluctant lawmakers on board, Democrats added “sweeteners” to the $124 billion emergency supplemental spending bill.

The legislation includes some $21 billion to pay for items not in Bush’s original request to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, including $25 million to bail out spinach growers in California hurt by last year’s E. coli outbreak…

Defense Secretary Robert Gates called for Congress to pass the bill quickly, or the military would be forced to take severe stopgap measures because of a lack of funding.

No one’s enthusiastic about the bill and it’ll die in the Senate or on Bush’s desk, but at least she succeeded in asserting her authority. That’s the only thing that was accomplished here, not counting the fingerpointing that’ll start once the bill fails and both parties blame each other for not funding the troops.

While we wait for the roll, here’s an attack ad produced by the office of GOP Deputy Whip Eric Cantor that’s making the rounds. Eh.

Update: Here’s the roll. At a glance, I count only two Republicans — Wayne Gilchrest and Walter Jones — in the majority. Most of the Democrats who voted no, most notably Maxine Waters and Lynn Woolsey, did so because they’re stridently anti-war, not Blue Dogs.

Update: Ah, here we go. Gateway Pundit lists all the legislative bribes that had to be made to get a majority to vote Pelosi’s way.

Update: Bush is laying into the Dems at a press conference as I write this and, I might add, doing a hell of a job at it. We’ll have video shortly.

Update (Ian): I can’t remember the last time Bush said something that got me excited (and Allah too!):

Update (Ian): Video: Rep. Sam Johnson (R-TX) lectures Murtha on what it means to be a marine.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Ah yes . . . Pelosi is a wonderful person and she should certainly be proud of herself. After all, selling out our soldiers and emboldening our enemies for spinach and peanuts is a stroke of genius. The woman is despicable and even if her sick plan is passed by the senate it will be vetoed by the president. This country is indeed engaged in two wars; one in Iraq and one with itself.

rplat on March 24, 2007 at 9:50 AM

You know, now Congress is screwing with the lives of my son and his men in Iraq now. They are placing Americans’ lives in danger, and they are sending a very clear message to the terrorists where their support lies.

Spain turned after terror attacks. America is to be next? Come on you damned liberal bastards in Congress, you’re showing that you’re not liberals, that you’re hateful of your own country. Wake the hell up Congress and vote FOR an American VICTORY, not a sissy-tail-between-our-legs retreat.

I can’t believe the audacity of some Americans… er Congress-critters to think that they can do this to our fighting men, and their own country.

Rick Donaldson on March 24, 2007 at 10:23 AM

Reuben

First, I am not a liberal, just not a flame throwing neocon. Yes, I get confused as I was in a hurry, but you got the point. There are 100’s of millions of Arabs and Muslims, and most are peaceful and religious – it is ridiculous to make claims and overheated rhetoric as jen does – seeing that you are tacticly endorsing her comments you must be another who thinks that truth and justice and democracy at the end of a gun will stop factional fighting half a world away.

EricPWJohnson on March 24, 2007 at 12:14 PM

ReubenJCogburn and Jen the Neocon, don’t you mean Liszt’s Liebestraum? Note the spelling of Liebestraum too…

Entelechy on March 24, 2007 at 2:04 PM

Reuben

First, I am not a liberal, just not a flame throwing neocon. Yes, I get confused as I was in a hurry, but you got the point. There are 100’s of millions of Arabs and Muslims, and most are peaceful and religious – it is ridiculous to make claims and overheated rhetoric as jen does – seeing that you are tacticly endorsing her comments you must be another who thinks that truth and justice and democracy at the end of a gun will stop factional fighting half a world away.

EricPWJohnson on March 24, 2007 at 12:14 PM

Ah, I see–you’re not a liberal. Because so many people who aren’t liberals use terms like “flame throwing neocon” as an epithet. Right. Well, if you aren’t a liberal, you manage to sound just like one. Especially when you call people names like that and then accuse jen of using “overheated rhetoric”–that adds an element of hypocrisy without which no liberal rant would be complete. Bravo.

As for me “tacticly” endorsing her comments–while I am capable of supporting her tactically, I’m going to assume that you meant “tacitly”. But if it’ll make you
feel better for me to be explicit about my position, yes, I do indeed embrace the goal of victory in Iraq rather than defeat. You’d be amazed what can be accomplished by the most powerful military and the best-trained personnel in the history of the world–assuming, of course, that the civilians sitting safe on their butts back at home will actually support and fund them. That’s the problem with the Democrats’ “Defeat, Surrender, and Pork” bill–it expresses liberals’ commitment to defeat at all costs in Iraq, regardless of the consequences, not to mention playing political games with the lives of the troops in the field. Any of which should be unthinkable to any decent American.

As for “truth and justice and democracy at the end of a gun”–wait, don’t those U.N. “peacekeepers” you’re such a big fan of carry guns? Yesterday that was your magical solution to Iraq, having the Useless Nations take over in our place. So how is it different if they pacify Iraq with soldiers than if we pacify Iraq with soldiers? Well, other than the fact that the U.N. is a joke, and will cut and run at the first sign of opposition. No wonder Democrats admire them so much.

ReubenJCogburn on March 24, 2007 at 2:31 PM

ReubenJCogburn and Jen the Neocon, don’t you mean Liszt’s Liebestraum? Note the spelling of Liebestraum too…

Entelechy on March 24, 2007 at 2:04 PM

No doubt you are correct, Entelechy–I was working the Lebensraum angle, and have no expertise as far as Chopin or Liszt. (Which will surprise no one, I’m sure. Heh.) Thank you for the correction. So the edited version would be:

All I have to say is, if we can’t mention Liszt’s piano works at rallies, then the terrorists have won.

ReubenJCogburn on March 24, 2007 at 2:50 PM

Its coming, Ive been saying it for about two years now… Its coming..

Viper1 on March 23, 2007 at 7:41 PM
If it IS coming, when it arrives it’ll be shortlived. We’re the ones who are armed.

Laura on March 23, 2007 at 8:47 PM

Don’t be ridiculous. There’s not going to be a civil war in America. All the latent civil aggression in America is channelled into political discourse. It won’t translate into violence. Are any of you here seriously saying you’re going to kill your fellow Americans over a political disagreement? Considering that the moonbats are unarmed (as Laura said) this is doubly ridiculous. Some of you are suffering from war fever, go and lie down a while.

aengus on March 25, 2007 at 11:58 AM

Wow. That was great

One Angry Christian on March 25, 2007 at 12:12 PM

It wasn’t that long ago that the Democrats were up in arms because their “clean” minimum wage bill got all mucked up by the Republicans. They were quick to accuse Republicans of not wanting to help the poor people in America. But it is acceptable for them to ruin a bill that helps the military. Hypocrisy at its finest.

ctmom on March 25, 2007 at 4:31 PM