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
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
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.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
Nightly News: 10 minutes of Dem gloating, 16 seconds of the President’s response.
I hope and pray that the backbone in the administration has been found. Until I see a bloody nose somewhere I am not going to count on it. Time to slap leather Mr. President. Jawing ain’t gonna win this battle.
Limerick on March 23, 2007 at 3:14 PM
OK… Pet food… E Coli update… Talking about O’reileys spring break thing… Cutey Polar Bear… 15 minutes in…
Still nothing about the War vote, or Brit Sailors…
Romeo13 on March 23, 2007 at 3:16 PM
Laughing my ass off, sorry, LMAO
dingoatemebaby on March 23, 2007 at 3:16 PM
I don’t know, even with the Dems in charge it will take the Islamo fascists longer then that to kill all of us. America is a big country.
LakeRuins on March 23, 2007 at 3:21 PM
I believe that this bill will not become law. It will either die in the Senate via filibuster (most likely), or it will be vetoed. Bush has no choice to veto this, in reality.
If the bill does not become law, then the Democrat leadership has to option of doing nothing and simply defunding the entire war by default. Of course, Gingrich tried this with Clinton when the Republicans shut down the government — and we know how well that worked out.
Politically, the President has the bully pulpit and will prevail by calling Pelosi’s bluff.
Bush said:
The President has wide descretion once war has been approved by Congress. As I have noted before, Congress has the power to DECLARE war — which they did in Public Law 107-243. There is no provision in the Constitution to UNDECLARE war.
Bush can reallocate other DOD funds, if the Treason Party sits on its hands and refuses to pass any additional funding. He can claim “necessity” and justify it under his “war powers,” given that (1) a war resolution was passed, and (2) the troops are engaged in combat in two countries. I’ll predict that the Democrats will lose any court actions concerning this.
The Democrats can attempt to impeach and remove him — but they don’t have the votes to get away with it, and it will only promote Cheney to President (and no, there is no Constitutional way for the Treason Party to do a “two-fer” here).
So the Democrats are trapped between the rock and the hard place. If they do nothing, Bush starts making televised speaches to the American public blaming them for undercutting the war and America’s national security, as he announces the necessity of diverting funds to support the troops while they are engaged in combat. Further, Bush will have set the Democrats up for a major whipping in 2008 as well.
In other words, the politics are going to get very ugly for the Democrats if they refuse to approve the funds under the President’s terms. So that is what they will do. Any delay in doing so will cost them dearly as the President will start calling them out and laying the blame for any future casualties directly on Pelosi and her crew, and they know it.
The anti-war left has just been kneecapped by their party’s leadership. BTW, did anybody notice that the Capital Police arrested 4 Code Pinkers outside of Pelosi’s office last night.
I’ve just called my Congresswoman’s office — a so-called “moderate” democrat — and blistered the ear of her staff over her vote to sabotage the war. This is how we can put additional pressure on Congress — let them know that we are pissed off at the Democrats partisan attack on the troops with this bill.
Now. GET BUSY, ladies and gentlemen.
georgej on March 23, 2007 at 3:22 PM
I don’t think the key would be to ONLY cover this story. There’s more than enough time to cover this one, the pet food story, the Brit Story, and more. I just think, no one was surprised by this. Democrats passed it, Bush will veto.
amerpundit on March 23, 2007 at 3:23 PM
What Congress would that be, Jaherer22, the one that wants to hand victory to the Islamofacists? The one that doesn’t even believe we are at war? The one that wants to investigate non-crimes? The one that just gave Al Gore oral sex for his “fake” Global Warming arguement? The one controlled by MoveOn.Org? Yeah, that Congress…….
PinkyBigglesworth on March 23, 2007 at 3:24 PM
Troll Jaherer22 write: “Better get used to it fast, you only have 2 years left.”
You mean YOU have only 2 years left.
Because after that, we’re gonna be hunting Democrats with dogs after your traitor butts are kicked out of power in 2008.
georgej on March 23, 2007 at 3:25 PM
Jaherer22, by “real Congress”, you’re referring to the one that can’t make a damn decision, right?
amerpundit on March 23, 2007 at 3:25 PM
The anti-war kooks controlling Pelosi.
Enoxo on March 23, 2007 at 3:26 PM
Just for once wouldn’t it be nice if the Dems would root for the home team?
LakeRuins on March 23, 2007 at 3:27 PM
Call SanFranNan’s office and tell her that you don’t think she’s patriotic. Apparantly that cheeses her off and it happens to be true.
foxforce91 on March 23, 2007 at 3:27 PM
Jaherer22, btw, have you checked the Democratic Congress’s poll numbers recently? Check out John Hawkins.
amerpundit on March 23, 2007 at 3:28 PM
jaherer22, How did you arrive at your position of stupidity? Was it hippie parents, or leftists professors, or excess drugs and alcohol. I sincerely want to know how liberals like you get to this point of unequivocal idiocy.
liberty on March 23, 2007 at 3:30 PM
This is the Bush I voted for in ‘00 and ‘04.
amerpundit on March 23, 2007 at 3:31 PM
I’m beginning to think that Bush needs to pull a “Bismarck” on this Congress. If you’ll remember, Bismarck managed to fund two wars through the use of some rather creative funding in spite of the fact that the liberal Prussian parliament rejected funding for the military; and in the process rendered the Prussian parliament totally irrelevant.
Either that or do a Cromwell and pull a 21st century version of “Pride’s Purge”: “You are no Parliament, I say you are no Parliament…”
If Bush were the evil dictator that the left portrays him as being either one of the two above scenarios would most assuredly have happened. But thankfully he’s not. We’re still a representative republic. But in this instance, the House of Representatives has cravenly decided to play the game of pork barrel politics in order to continue its vendetta against this president. It is playing games with the lives of troops on the ground–if I were the GOP, I’d have the commercials ready to go with the central theme being portrayal of the Democratic Party as the betrayers of the national trust.
Finally, I have to wonder if there well might be some 21st century equivalent of Oliver Cromwell or Bismarck or Napoleon waiting in the wings for his chance to take the scene because of the harm being caused by this poor excuse for a legislature. The most frequent way tyrants come to power is through legislatures failing to address the national good: Rome, France, Germany, Russia…the list is a long one and what is the one thing they all have in common? Their legislative bodies cared more for their own political well being than for the lives of their countries as a whole.
Will some future historian add the US Congress to that list?
Matt Helm on March 23, 2007 at 3:33 PM
Jaherer22 doesn’t realize that his party is really good at hanging themselves. In fact, I have to remind myself that we would have a much slimmer chance of winning the ‘08 presidential election – the one we’re going to win – if the Dems hadn’t won the majority in ‘06. We needed to remind everyone what screw-up America haters the Dems are. Now we have the votes on record to demonstrate that and the bonus is that they can’t cry about voter fraud or Diebold machines EVER AGAIN with any credibility since they were dead silent after the ‘06 election. Lordy they’ve screwed themselves and they’re too stupid to even know it. Yeah, they get a whopping 2 years while we still have the Veto. What idjits.
foxforce91 on March 23, 2007 at 3:33 PM
Speaking of polls, Rasmussen had Bush at 41% approval a few days ago and Gallup had Congress at 28%. So Bush is nearly 50% more popular than the Democrat-controlled Congress. Surprised?
You won’t find that contrast in the MSM.
liberty on March 23, 2007 at 3:34 PM
My parents are Conservative Christians and my professors might have been a bit leftist, but they didn’t really have too much influence on my political views, so I’m gonna have to go with the excessive drug and alcohol use.
JaHerer22 on March 23, 2007 at 3:36 PM
It was issued with his brownshirt.
georgej on March 23, 2007 at 3:37 PM
Ya hear that that’s the sound of NOBODY arguing with you.
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on March 23, 2007 at 3:38 PM
Your parents did a lot of acid, didn’t they.
thirteen28 on March 23, 2007 at 3:38 PM
Anyone remember how the Dems argued how Iraq was just like Vietnam? Seems to me they just made it that way with this vote. Someday we may wake up to the view on TV of Iranian tanks smashing their way into the Green Zone as our helicopters take off with the bodies of friendly Iraqis dropping off.
And all that hootin’ and hollerin’ when the “Squeaker” announced the vote! Damn I’m disgusted!
At least the President gave me some hope. Of course if I had the floor, my language would have been a
littlelot more colorful.JohnnyD on March 23, 2007 at 3:41 PM
People always hate Congress no matter what party is in charge…I’ve never seen them poll over 40%, 35% is a good day. And I thought you guys didn’t believe in polls? At least that’s what you were saying last week…
And despite you’re traitorous-pro-jihad-surrender-monkey- anti-American-troop-hater spin, the Democrats gave Bush every dollar he asked for plus millions more to clean up the whole Walter Reed mess. The money is there; the troops are supported. All Bush needs to do is meet some benchmarks, make sure the troops are properly trained, and begin withdrawing by next March. Sounds fair to me. Bush is acting like a spoiled child who wants his allowance but doesn’t want to do his chores.
JaHerer22 on March 23, 2007 at 3:52 PM
Correct the Slublog is “begun the flame war has”
dingoatemebaby on March 23, 2007 at 3:57 PM
Just once, I’d appreciate the honesty if Liberals just came right out and said that they don’t support the troops and they want as many of them dead as possible so the evil United States will never wage any war again ever and the world can live in unending peace. It’s their darkest orgasmic fantasy but they know it’s suicide to speak it aloud.
It’s the same up here. The other day in Parliament, Prime Minister Harper actually told the liberals he understands their passion for the Taliban POWs but wishes they had the same passion for our troops.
And my favourite pork:
Canadian Infidel on March 23, 2007 at 3:58 PM
Those ‘benchmarks’ are impossible and the Dems know it. You vets out there….how many of your units were at full TOE and 100% quailfied? When, where, what war?
It is a POISON PILL…plain, pure, simple.
Limerick on March 23, 2007 at 3:59 PM
Aww poor Pelosi. Only has less than two years left of a democratic majority. Enjoy it while you can
William Amos on March 23, 2007 at 4:09 PM
None and None. Have to agree with you on this one. (even if you see me as a “tick” ;) )
Bradky on March 23, 2007 at 4:10 PM
Regardless of what’s happening in Iraq?
Slublog on March 23, 2007 at 4:10 PM
Tis cool Bradky…..
Limerick on March 23, 2007 at 4:11 PM
Every American, regardless of which side of the aisle they stand with, should be outraged at the passage of this bill.
- It contains billions in pork at a time of war.
- It sends a message to our enemies that America does not have the resolve to defend itself from those that would do us harm.
- It sends a message to our troops that America does not stand behind them and believe that they have failed.
- It send a message to the American people that partisan politics is more important than the safety of its citizens.
If your representative voted “yea” on this bill, you should be on the phone/fax/email telling them in no uncertain terms that this type of behavior is absolutely unacceptable, especially at a time of war, and that they had better never let this great country down like this again.
db on March 23, 2007 at 4:16 PM
This is like watching a parent that keeps threatening to finally punish rotten children. The President has tried to work with these pinheads since he was elected. Let’s take off the gloves, get on prime time, get political with these traitors, get it done.
Hening on March 23, 2007 at 4:19 PM
I disagree with your assessment on who voted “no” among Dems though. Waters and Wolsey yes, but some of those others (Like Marshall, Michaud, Davis) aren’t liberals. Looks like an even split to me on Dems voting no.
E5infantry on March 23, 2007 at 4:19 PM
Michaud is kind of liberal. But he did the right thing here.
Slublog on March 23, 2007 at 4:20 PM
Isn’t the magical surge of victory supposed to be over by this summer? By March I’m sure we’ll be greeted as liberators, Sunni and Shia will be dancing together in the streets, and the Iraqi’s will be naming provinces after Bush and Rumsfeld. Be optimistic guys, the neocons have everything under control, it’s not like they’ve ever been wrong or anything…
JaHerer22 on March 23, 2007 at 4:28 PM
So you’re not going to be serious?
Good day, then.
Slublog on March 23, 2007 at 4:32 PM
McCrery is our rep and voted against it. Yea! Already sent email to him, Landrieux and Vitter. They need to demand that Katrina related issues be separate from this. Why? (a) nothing should be used to hamstring the troop support (b) once all the smoke clears, the large majority of the reps and sens will let Katrina related issues sink farther below the horizon as well as the chance of smartly funded solutions.
Bradky on March 23, 2007 at 4:35 PM
Millions for Walter Reed?…And then some. How about $969,000,000 for an avian flu program? Will Walter Reed be the HQ for that?
And will we also store all those peanuts at Walter Reed?
How about the fishermen, they got millions, too. Is there a dock at Walter Reed?
And those poor Katrina victims–it seems their troubles never end. At least not according to Congress.
You know, JaHerer, you should run for office (as a Dhimmicrat, of course!) with those cool lies like saying all these gabillion dollars in pork are for “Walter Reed!”
It’s really pretty funny, hilarious really, in its lack of cunning and venality!
Jen the Neocon on March 23, 2007 at 4:43 PM
Guess that congressional oversight about pork and pet projects went right out the window.
quax1 on March 23, 2007 at 4:49 PM
I emailed Jindal to thank him for proving he can’t be bought, and told him I just volunteered for his campaign. :-) Landreiu’s worthless, but I’ll still send her a letter along with Vitter.
Laura on March 23, 2007 at 4:56 PM
Wait a second. How about the fact that the Dems wouldn’t pass the emergency spending bill for our troops, unless they got the earmarks for their own projects, with it? You want to talk about chores and responsibilities? The Democrats wouldn’t live up to their responsibility of defending this nation, until there was something in it for them. Whatever you’re smoking, it must be potent.
amerpundit on March 23, 2007 at 5:07 PM
So corruption and treason win out over the troops and national defense. In other words, just another day for the national disgrace that is the Democratic Party.
ReubenJCogburn on March 23, 2007 at 5:44 PM
Aero, it’s not the number of spinach farmers, it’s the donations.
Seel, they give a Congressman say, $50,000 cash for “re-election campaining” (some of which goes to employeed relatives working on their campaign)… oh, sorry, give the Congressman’s PAC $50,000 for the congressman’s re-election campaign. The first way will get you in trouble, the second won’t (although they’re functionally equivalent).
Then, Congress takes 2 million of your money to give to Spinach farmers.
I may have the numbers off a bit, but probably not much. And this assumes they’re doing it “legally” and not involving the icebox full o’ cash methodology.
gekkobear on March 23, 2007 at 6:29 PM
On the ad: Great concept, poor execution. It plods, is nonsensical in parts, and is poorly voiced.
TallDave on March 23, 2007 at 6:51 PM
Well they haven’t named entire provinces after them yet but there are quite a few streets, police precint buildings and a few statues. But of course you wouldn’t know that since you get your news from “The Daily Show”.
LakeRuins on March 23, 2007 at 7:04 PM
Who’s that hottie in the background? Love her smile.
packsoldier on March 23, 2007 at 7:17 PM
I’D like to call those Rat parasites whores, but I’ll bet there are a lot of whores who have more shame tha they do and would jump at the chance to do something else for a living if given it!
DEATH TO THE DNC!
Teddy on March 23, 2007 at 7:25 PM
Its coming, Ive been saying it for about two years now… Its coming..
Viper1 on March 23, 2007 at 7:41 PM
Carnahan that ******-******* bassmole!!
I wish I still lived in Wellers’ district!
*stomps foot and pouts*
annoyinglittletwerp on March 23, 2007 at 8:02 PM
Get MAD, REAL MAD.
And a backbone. PLEASE!
Kini on March 23, 2007 at 8:07 PM
jaherr is a troll with no clue at all about the real world. That happens when a person spends all their time staring at their colon.
I would advise people to ignore him. I don’t think he has ever said anything that made sense.
As to the dems bill, it is this simple. We are at war. We either win or loose it. The dems want to loose it. TYhey beleive that this will grant them the presidency and more power. But if we loose this war we won’t be a democracy. Not for long at least. 20-30 years this country will die. It will not be Bush’s fault. it will be the Democrats. So if you liek the idea of your daughters having their genatalia mutilated, of them having no rights at all and to be relegated as nothing more then a peice of property then support the dems. if you want your sons to be a proud martyr willing to kill the “infidel” then vote democrat. if you want your grandchildren and their grandchildren to be slaves then vote Dem. As for me, I’ll never submit.
And I’ll vote republican.
Wyrd on March 23, 2007 at 8:18 PM
I expected this to happen, and I further expect for this bill to go no where. This is nothing more than a show put on for the benefit of those who support the removal of forces from Iraq. The Senate and appropriate commities will remove the restrictions on the president’s authority in the command and control of the US Military in Iraq, but all the pork will remain.
RedinBlueCounty on March 23, 2007 at 8:38 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
And now we have Hannity & Colmes.. ‘discussing’ the topic
And reminding us why you shouldn’t have 6-person talking head segments..
Reaps on March 23, 2007 at 9:12 PM
The Democrats, aletring our enemies that we will withdraw on a particular date.
Yeh. That’s how victorious nations win wars. That’s the sarc. This is how victorious nations lose wars: giving away your strategic plans to the enemy. The old days, they used to have to waylay the courier carrying the wax-sealed documents, now our internal appeasers broadcast over worldwide communications systems, so comprehensively that even the tribal elders in Paupau New Guinea know.
The Left wants another Vietnam – the original self-centered tantrum of the coddled elites – how to show you’re relevant by tearing down your own house. Why should we be surprised? It’s the very same people, only older, and they haven’t aged gracefully.
naliaka on March 23, 2007 at 9:38 PM
“The Left wants another Vietnam – the original self-centered tantrum of the coddled elites – how to show you’re relevant by tearing down your own house.”
Very well put Naliaka
dingoatemebaby on March 23, 2007 at 10:08 PM
“Real congress”?
The only people with lower confidence ratings than the President are these congressional clowns you’re supporting.
The republicans exhibited failure in leadership when they had the majority. The dems are demonstrably dangerous as they wield their razor slim majority like it was the sword Excelsior.
Get used to it Jack. Your rabidly defeatist dem leaders are even more incompetent and small-minded than the republicans.
techno_barbarian on March 23, 2007 at 10:35 PM
No. Summer is just when we’re supposed to have a better idea whether it’s got a real chance to be a success or not. So far so good, wouldn’t you have to admit? But you go ahead and hope for that defeat your side seems to think we need.
America wants to win. Even if you don’t.
techno_barbarian on March 23, 2007 at 10:59 PM
How far we have fallen.
Limerick on March 23, 2007 at 11:13 PM
Limerick
First the founding fathers warned against intangling alliances. Look what Pelosi did was wrong in soo many ways, but congress does have the right to disagree with the executive branch. It is doing their duty.
I agreed with the war for several years but now as it deteriorates into a faction ridden civil war the world community needs to step in. We’ve done enough, time to make an exit, let the blue helmets of europe secure their own damn oil reserves lets be honest – thats what this is about.
The military is not a police force, not a nation building force of bureaucrats, despite the very intense bravery of our men and women, the issue is in doubt because those who were given freedom refuse to recognise that sacrifice is what truely makes you free.
Time to go, we cannot reverse 800 years of factional hatred in 800 weeks
EricPWJohnson on March 23, 2007 at 11:37 PM
Nice try EricPWJohnson….I’ll leave you with another quote
‘There is not in all America a more dangerous trait than the deification of mere smartness unaccompanied by any sense of moral responsibility.”-Theodore Roosevelt
Abilene, KS, May 2, 1903
Does that apply to you or me? Coin toss.
Limerick on March 23, 2007 at 11:44 PM
Thanks, gekkobear. That hadn’t occurred to me. It makes sense in a sick, twisted, political way. Basically, the congressmen are making donations to themselves (via the spinach farmers) using taxpayers’ money, and the spinach farmers are essentially being bribed to launder the taxpayers’ money.
aero on March 23, 2007 at 11:57 PM
Eric, “no entangling alliances” is a shibboleth that America First-ers drag out when they’re too cowardly or lazy to fight a war…,one that we didn’t start, I might add.
We were attacked and now we’re using the Bush doctrine of pre-emption to stop rogue states that sponsor terrorism, mainly IslamoFascist terrorism, which is not the product of “800 years of factional hatred,” but more the product of 30 years of Saudi Waahab militarization and radicalization.
The only ones who say that Iraq is in a “civil war” are the Enemedia…and some Democrats.
Our troops are not there to be the police force–Iraq’s got their own now–or a “nation building force of bureaucrats” and charity workers: they are there to kill the bad guys, i.e. Al Queda and other assorted takfiri jihadi killers that have assembled in Iraq and Afghanistan to fight us (and some that have snuck over from Iran for the same purpose).
We are there to drain the IslamoFascist swamp and it’s going to take a long time, probably decades or longer, if the Islamonutters think that they can work the war in their favor every time there’s an American election or a vote on a big war bill.
If we leave, they will not only come over here, but like an appendix that is swollen with infection, they will burst out all over the world to kill “infidels” and to subdue the planet to the will of Allah.
In Iraq, the USA and her allies are making the stand for all of Humanity and for Western Civilization itself….unless you’d rather see the globe look like Aghanistan under the Taliban and you’re ready to bow down 5 times a day and pay for the privilege as a dhimmi.
And that’s if they let you live!
Jen the Neocon on March 23, 2007 at 11:58 PM
Folks, I’ve just emailed the White House, and I suggest you do the same, to let the President know that this is how he should talk regularly. He pulls out a speech like this once every couple years, and then goes back and bends over and takes it like Barney Frank day in and day out. He never hits back. I maintain that his approval numbers would be at least in the mid 40s if he had fought back all along. If he’d stopped this culture of phony weekly scandal by laying waste to these evil SOB Democrats by holding speeches before the cameras everytime they try to pull something, and revealing them as the disgusting human beings they are. I wish everytime a Democrat calls him a liar that he’d call a press conference and read 13 years of quotes by Democrats on Saddam’s WMDs, including Clinton’s speech on the eve of his own attack on Iraq.
Please folks, write the White House and say you’re glad he finally grew a pair, but don’t let him just get neutered again. We wouldn’t even be in the situation we’re in with these Democrats if he’d shown balls all along. They know they can get away with anything and they do, because the White House never hits back. They obviously think somehow that they’re the bigger people by staying above the fray, but with the leftis media, all the White House appears to be is a bunch pussies who have something to hide.
RightWinged on March 24, 2007 at 12:02 AM
I haven’t felt like this since the Sadie Hawkins dance.
Well done Jen.
Limerick on March 24, 2007 at 12:03 AM
They are stuck on 1950. From the staffers to GW himself, it is the Office of the President of the United States. They can’t seem to understand that it is 2007 and the other side has NO RULES. The AG needs to be used for what the hell he is for: Putting the enemies of the United States of America out of business. They (dems) aren’t the opposition party, they are the enemy. It is war and somebody in the Rep party better wake the hell up or we are all sold down the drain.
I wrote RW…also my two senators, the congressman, and the RNC. I get all those damned form letters every friggin week.
Something better happen to the party or there isn’t going to
be a party.
Limerick on March 24, 2007 at 12:17 AM
Now that’s a spicy meatball!
Y’all have a good weekend, I’m going to Bristol.
SouthernDem on March 24, 2007 at 12:18 AM
I saw Jindals name on the nays side.I would be looking to Jefferson,Billy Chandler or Jefferson-Bullock on that list.I live 300 miles from N.O. and do not know that bunch down there.
spazzmomma on March 24, 2007 at 12:19 AM
Jen,
I live in the Middle East have for the last 2 years
You do NOT know even remotely what you are talking about. If 200,000 troops were on active inflitration patrol daily the death toll of insurgents would be reaching the hundreds of thousands level
Hardly, they are guarding contractors, rebuilding schools, guarding petroleum infrastructure and standing guard over souks, vital intersections, important government officials, etc.
Yes some are out on patrol or responding to insurgent attacks but then they fade back into the wood work blending back into society and no one says a thing.
And don’t characterize my comments as anti military or anti conservative – I just can call it like I actually see it
Civil wars are confusing, violent and unstoppable ie Spain, Russia (Twice) Cuba, Israel, Egypt, India, Vietnam, Korea etc.
Also, overheated rhetoric like draining the Islamo Facist right wing swamp is racist and bigoted, we are occupiers to some factions and heros to others – in a role we are being labeled against our will.
These people have been fighting for 800 years on and off just two decades ago killed over 1.5 million in a vicious civil war as Iran and Iraq have overlapping borders
We can’t fix that but we can get the hell out and let them really experience war
Let europe secure their own oil supplies
EricPWJohnson on March 24, 2007 at 12:26 AM
Jen,
Also spare me your self righteous driviling western civilization nonsense…..
You sound exactly like a guy who mentioned lieberstraum at a rally
EricPWJohnson on March 24, 2007 at 12:31 AM
I just wanted to clarify that I don’t think they have something to hide (because that part you quoted out of my comment seems to imply that without the context, though I know that wasn’t your intention). My complaint is that their policy of bending over for the Democrats and never fighting back makes it look like their wrong or otherwise have something to hide. Bush needs to speak like this regularly.
Anyway, again, I’d like to see the White House’s mail box flooded with people sharing similar sentiments, because any individual email is going to get lost… But if enough people send emails, it increases the likelyhood of some knucklehead at the White House actually reading it, and considering what their policy of laying down and taking it like a bitch has lead to, and how a policy of fighting back with truth can go a long way. Allowing the Democrats to trot out in front of cameras unaswered everyday provides the MSM with all the ammo they need to lie to the public. But if Bush trots out once or twice a week and strikes back, whether the media likes it or not they will have to cover it, and that simple fact will force people to actually think about things for once, instead of just having Katie Couric and friends tell them how to think.
RightWinged on March 24, 2007 at 12:32 AM
Well bucko……my son has ‘lived’ in the Middle East for two of the last three years. Actually he has fought in the Middle East for two of the last three years. Soon he will be there for his third year ‘living’ experience. What he doesn’t do is build schools, guard souks, and sweep the friggin streets. HE PUTS HOLES WHERE HOLES BELONG. That is my ‘expert’ living in the Middle East.
Limerick on March 24, 2007 at 12:32 AM
Hey, I agree–”no entangling alliances”. Let’s pull out of the Useless Nations tomorrow! Woohooo!
Keep in mind that one car bomb scared them out of Iraq the last time, so waving the U.N. at a problem like a magic wand is going to get you exactly two things: jack and sh*t. Just ask Darfur how effective they are at stepping in to solve sectarian violence. The “insurgents” would eat the Blue Helmets for breakfast, assuming the U.N. could ever manage to get its act together long enough to actually deploy an effective force.
And Limerick, God bless your son and all of our servicemembers in harm’s way.
ReubenJCogburn on March 24, 2007 at 12:43 AM
The whole concept of ‘Hey asswipe, you want somma this?’ is completely lost on these ‘anti-war’ yellow-stained apologists. We aren’t there for the oil, we aren’t there for the pride, we aren’t there because some Texan got his nose tweaked. We are there because some people need to die and we are willing to oblige them up close and personal.
Limerick on March 24, 2007 at 12:51 AM
]
How is it racist? Siince when were IslamoNazi radicals “a race?”
Will, schmill. We’re over there to defend and secure our own safety, security and liberty–it doesn’t get more up close and personal than that!
Since we’ve been fighting back, beginning with Operation Enduring Freedom, we haven’t had to watch our fellow citizens jumping 100 stories to their deaths again.
Works for me!
This isn’t about oil, you nimrod–it’s about much more than that and if you can’t see that, you’re living in a pre-9/11 Kumbaya dreamworld!
If IslamoFacism is no threat, why would Iran capture 15 British sailors and Marines–an act of war by anyone’s reckoning– on the very eve of Ahmadinnerjacket’s coming to the U.N. to face the music over Iran’s nuclear program?
I am delighted that we yanked his visa in sympathy with our British allies and I wish we hadn’t let him come over the first time!
Iran is going to be trouble…and they’re not going away…and they’re in bed with the Russians… and maybe the NorKs, too.
And if Iran gets nukes (the Muslim Shi’a bomb) then the other 22 Sunni Muslim countries will have to have nukes just to “save face.”
Have you forgotten the WMDs that Kaddafi coughed up when we invaded Iraq “for oil?”
A pretty scary arsenal—and Libya’s a minor player.
Be afraid. Be very afriad.
And the fact that you Leftist lunatics are more afraid of Bush and the neocons and American exceptionalism itself than you are of IslamoFacist takfiri murderers is almost unbelievable.
I’m still numb from trying to grasp that I’m really seeing what I’ve seen today from “fellow Americans.”
Jen the Neocon on March 24, 2007 at 12:55 AM
Today, in transit at the airport in Dallas, I was fortunate enough to speak with a group of Soldiers returning from Iraq for a two-week break. We all had to endure the never-ending ranting about this bill by Wolf Blitzer. That voice really grated on me and I said a few about it. The Soldiers can’t give their opinion so they only smiled.
What exemplary people they are. Got a few dirty looks from the other side, not that it ruffled my feathers any. The Soldiers had to leave for their flight, we shook hands and as they left I said “try not to watch the news”. They said “all we’re looking forward to is to eat, sleep and shower in the same place”.
Unrelated, here’s what one Veteran says “screw what the Liberals have to say“
Entelechy on March 24, 2007 at 1:28 AM
Clarification – the dirty looks came from liberal passengers milling around.
Entelechy on March 24, 2007 at 1:34 AM
This is hilarious! What are you talking about here? “Lieberstraum” is an etude of Chopin’s…I guess we are fighting to preserve the wonderful piano music of Chopin, too.
Did you possibly intend a Nazi reference here? I think the song name you’re looking for is “Horst Wessel,” the beer hall putscht anthem of the Sturm Abteilung, because….(wait for it) “Bush is Hitler, ya wohl?”
Jen the Neocon on March 24, 2007 at 1:36 AM
I’ll be paying a personal visit to McCrery’s office in the morning.A hand delivered thank-you not.
By the way Laura,Landrieu doenst give a crap.Never has,never will.
spazzmomma on March 24, 2007 at 1:36 AM
Yeah, I think he meant Lebensraum. But you know how annoyed liberals get when you present them with facts. All I have to say is, if we can’t mention Chopin etudes at rallies, then the terrorists have won.
ReubenJCogburn on March 24, 2007 at 2:27 AM
The problem, it seems to me, that if gridlock ensues, ultimately the Sheila Jackson-Lee’s and Murtha’s win. If the troops don’t receive what they need to operate, it would irresponsible of the President to leave them in harm’s way, and I say that as someone who backs victory in the GWoT and Iraq 100%.
Now, Congress (with a small number of exceptions) is basically filled with cowards, so the best chance is that Pelosi et al will choose “the better part of valor”. But that will be an enormous political defeat for them – by staging this political “victory”, they have raised the political costs of doing the right thing (funding the troops without ludicrous conditions and operational deadlines).
So, I wish I could be as optimistic as some here that this is going to work out. The fact is, now the Democrats in House will have to find a way to climb down, and if the two sides can never agree in Washington, the bad guys are going to win in Iraq.
The other problem I see is that the Dems have staked out an advantageous negotiating position. They have put everything they want into the bill, and they can take out plenty of things in the name of “bipartisanship” while still leaving fundamentally unacceptable restrictions. If they remove 90% of the nonsense, Bush still has to veto the bill because the remainder would establish a precedent for these kinds of provisions that no President can accept in wartime. If the Democrats make lots of concessions but don’t pass a clean bill, the Leftmedia will obviously spin it so Bush is the one to blame for the escalating crisis.
All I’m saying is, don’t assume that this is going to work out in the end…if the new security operations continue to succeed, the Democrats will be increasingly desperate. They may decide that the political fallout from defeat is easier to manage (since they can blame Bush) than the political fallout (for them) from victory.
LagunaDave on March 24, 2007 at 2:27 AM
Reuben, LOL-what a hoot!
Thanks for giving me my first laugh after a very long, terrible day!
Jen the Neocon on March 24, 2007 at 2:28 AM
We won’t hunt you down, SouthernDem–you support the troops and our country. If traditional Democrats like you still controlled your party, the U.S. would be united against the jihadis, and we’d be redeploying our victorious troops home by now. Unfortunately the terrorist-enabling America-hating liberals are calling the shots in Congress these days, and have been undermining the war effort ever since they authorized it. But have a good time at Bristol anyway.
And you’re welcome, Jen–it’s all part of the service. I do try to maintain the ability to laugh in the face of adversity. Because adversity hates that.
ReubenJCogburn on March 24, 2007 at 3:06 AM
The Dems standing on the floor celebrating this event will go down in history as the beginning of the end, we have to fight these people tooth and nail to get the whole damn room cleared out, both sides of the aisle before if not it’s already too late.
chicagoray on March 24, 2007 at 4:09 AM
Our newly elected “moderate” dhimmicrat, Jason Altmire, voted for surrender. Henceforth, all my communications to him from now until he leaves office (in ‘08) will use the salutation “General” Altmire. What a fool.
Zorro on March 24, 2007 at 8:35 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »