May 02 2007
Earth To Dems: You Are Not Commander-in-Chief
The Democrats have had their little hissy fit and once again (ad naseum) made it clear they want to surrender to al Qaeda. But the Surrendercrats have to realize something – the troops need their funding so they can get the protective gear and vehicles they need. They need to wake up and stop denying the reality: they don’t have a majority in the Senate (in the mathematical sense) and their House majority is razor thin. They need to grow up and pass the funds:
The party’s most liberal members, especially in the House, say they will vote against money for continuing the war if there’s no binding language on troop drawdowns. Bush and almost all congressional Republicans continue to insist on a spending bill with no strings attached on troop movements.
…
Some Democrats believe the GOP solidarity will crack over time, noting that polls show heavy public support for a withdrawal plan.
Actually there is NO pressure from the public to change the Constitution and make Congress Command-in-Chief. The Dems have been drifting along in a power-mad fantasy and now they are getting a big nudge to come back to realiy. If they want to pass benchmarks pass them seperately, they are non-binding anyway.
The situation frustrates Democrats, who won control of the House and Senate in an election that largely focused on Iraq.
Democrats never once during the election said they would surrender to Bin Laden’s forces in Iraq. What frustrates them is they are not nearly as clever as they thought they were and the polls (the honest ones) show that while everyone wishes the war is over, that does not equate to wanting to lose the war. The Liberal Surrendercrats are the ONLY ones willing to go that far and the votes prove it. They cannot muster the votes to just cut the funds and force an outright surrender, what makes them think Americans are so stupid they would be confused with a slow surrender?
Reid and Pelosi, get on with it. You passed the funds twice now so do it again – even if it means relying on Reps to get the Bills passed. Stop fantasizing. It’s embarrassing to watch and hurting our men and women on the front lines of this war.
I am just so glad that the outcome of last November elections still did not give the Liberal Democrats enough votes to override vetoes but enough to 10 weaken them. 2) reveal the real side of the Democrats to the American public. and 3) Wake up the sleeping “Silent Majority” into action.
Nobody believed the “cut and run” strategy before last year’s elections. Now they do.
Unfortunately, the Democrats remain unconvinced that they don’t have the mandate to cut and run.
This from John at powerline.com regarding the State Dept’s terrorism report:
“JOHN adds: The numbers are also consistent with the fact that al Qaeda has proclaimed Iraq the central front in its war against civilization. It is reasonable to surmise that this focus has contributed to the decline in terrorist incidents in other parts of the world. Likewise, if al Qaeda were no longer tied down in Iraq, it is reasonable to expect that terrorism in other parts of the world would increase. “
You made it very clear that the Democrats are the ones at fault for holding the funds from the US troops. Not Bush.
John Cornyn (Tx-R) reported yesterday that the reason the bill took so long to get to the President is because Nancy Pelosi said she wanted to read it. WTF? She voted on a bill to fund the troops without reading it and now that she has voted on it decides, after the fact, that she would like to know what is in it?
This one fact should make all Americans realize that this bill was just the Democrats battering ram using our troops to bash the President. Nothing more, nothing less.
With Pelosi promising a new “honesty” in Washington (which we have seen no signs of) perhaps the Dhimmicrats would be honest enough to change their name to the Democratic Socialist Party of America.
But alas, that is just too much to expect. So well will see more of the same, more Bush bashing, more useless hearings, more corruption ala Jefferson, Murtha, Feinstein and others. All the while the Dhimmicrats tell us that the voter has spoken giving them a mandate.
What a crock.
AJ, in the video where Biden states the Dem’s are going to shove the bill down Bush’s throat, Biden also states{my rough transcription}:
From our Constitution, Article II, [The Presidency]; Section V, [Impeachment]
It certainly doesn’t stretch the imagination to determine the course the Dem’s have chosen – impeachment. As such, I rather suspect they’ll charge the veto constitutes negligence and dereliction of Presidential responsibilities by recklessly endangering the lives and safety of our forces in Iraq – at the very minimum. That the Dem’s have placed completely frivolous, irresponsible and extremely dangerous hurdles as part of the Bill – during a time of War – is completely immaterial; it is these same elected officials who wrote and passed the resolution who will in-turn be bring about the charges, trial and verdict.
Link to Biden on Iraq bill: “We’re going to shove it down his throat.”
And this from newsmax.com:
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2007/5/1/135906.shtml?s=al&promo_code=334B-1
Dick Cheney’s Real Role
Ronald Kessler
Wednesday, May 2, 2007
“In his new book “At the Center of the Storm: My Years at the CIA,” George Tenet seems to suggest that when it came to Iraq, Vice President Dick Cheney and others were on a “runaway freight train,” determined at all costs to invade Iraq.
If so, the freight train must have been delayed en route. The United States did not invade Iraq until a year and a half after 9/11. Having declared itself an enemy of the United States, Iraq was then trying to shoot down U.S. airplanes in the no-fly zone. Saddam was in violation of U.N. resolutions concerning WMD. ”
snip/”Having declared itself an enemy of the United States, Iraq was then shooting down U.S. airplanes in the no-fly zone. Saddam was in violation of U.N. resolutions concerning WMD.
He had used chemical weapons in the past, and he had invaded Kuwait. While Tenet doesn’t mention this, later interrogations revealed that Saddam was planning to try to develop a nuclear weapon once U.N. sanctions were lifted.”
And I remember all those people who were doing Saddam’s bidding about the sanctions…women pleading for the “children”…Can someone find news clips of all those people who wanted the sanctions lifted? (Rush are you reading this? 🙂
I would love to see exactly who they were….
And it is because the sorosites (among MANY other reasons)
don’t get it about Saddam that they must never have the reins of power. But on second thought, I think they get what this administration is doing exactly…and brilliantly. Consequently, they must go against Bush to make themselves relevant ie a party that can “do defence”…NOT!
Smoke and mirros as usual.
Earl G, how is this any different from FDR, Truman, Ike, Kennedy, and Nixon with their own wars?
If these elected officials bring about the charges, trial, and verdict, they don’t have the votes in the Senate to completely impeach Bush. The House does have the votes but not the Senate.
While it’s a huge waste of taxpayer money, time, and effort, we may want them to get tied up in the impeachment process and make sure it last til the end of the Bush term.
The dems are now trying to play the old schoolyard game of “Teacher he hit me, just because I kicked him”
It takes 2/3 of the Senate to convict under impeachment. It will never happen. You don’t impeach because you don’t LIKE someone. It isn’t a recall.
I still think DoD would start cutting funds first in Democratic districts.
What I think the Democrats are going to do is very evil and very cynical. They are just going to keep sending bills up to the White House that the president can not sign. That way they can’t take the blame for directly “withholding funds” even though the effect is exactly that. It will take the people about 15 minutes to see through that and it will seriously backfire on the dems but they aren’t going to “get it” until the 08 elections. In the meantime they are all busy reading Kos and HuffPo thinking thats how America thinks.
The jackass is now their symbol for a completely different reason.
GW’s official response to the House of Reps –
May 1, 2007
TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES:
I am returning herewith without my approval H.R. 1591, the “U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans’ Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act, 2007.â€
This legislation is objectionable because it would set an arbitrary date for beginning the withdrawal of American troops without regard to conditions on the ground; it would micromanage the commanders in the field by restricting their ability to direct the fight in Iraq; and it contains billions of dollars of spending and other provisions completely unrelated to the war.
Precipitous withdrawal from Iraq is not a plan to bring peace to the region or to make our people safer here at home. The mandated withdrawal in this bill could embolden our enemies — and confirm their belief that America will not stand behind its commitments. It could lead to a safe haven in Iraq for terrorism that could be used to attack America and freedom-loving people around the world, and is likely to unleash chaos in Iraq that could spread across the region. Ultimately, a precipitous withdrawal could increase the probability that American troops would have to one day return to Iraq — to confront an even more dangerous enemy.
The micromanagement in this legislation is unacceptable because it would create a series of requirements that do not provide the flexibility needed to conduct the war. It would constrict how and where our Armed Forces could engage the enemy and defend the national interest, and would provide confusing guidance on which of our enemies the military could engage. The result would be a marked advantage for our enemies and greater danger for our troops, as well as an unprecedented interference with the judgments of those who are charged with commanding the military.
Beyond its direction of the operation of the war, the legislation is also unacceptable for including billions of dollars in spending and other provisions that are unrelated to the war, are not an emergency, or are not justified. The Congress should not use an emergency war supplemental to add billions in spending to avoid its own rules for budget discipline and the normal budget process. War supplemental funding bills should remain focused on the war and the needs of our men and women in uniform who are risking their lives to defend our freedoms and preserve our Nation’s security.
Finally, this legislation is unconstitutional because it purports to direct the conduct of the operations of the war in a way that infringes upon the powers vested in the Presidency by the Constitution, including as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces. For these reasons, I must veto this bill.
GEORGE W. BUSH
THE WHITE HOUSE,
May 1, 2007.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070502-1.html
They can not impeach because Bush rejects a bill. They can always just fund the war and avoid the situation. As for Biden, the man is what he always was, an asshole.
And you know what? The Democrat who won in my district was one of those socalled Blue Dogs who swore he would not let people like Pelosi back him into the corner he has obviously been backed into. He was always sending all kinds of promilitary crap to me in the mail. Swearing the troops would have everything they needed if he won blah blah blah. What a joke he turned out to be.
Terrye, who is your Blue Dog Democrat? Something Elliott?
BTW, I just started to read “The Thirteen Tales”.