Mar 23 2007
House Supports Iraq Surge
Votes have consequences. And while the media can try and lie to America about the just finished House vote, the core controlling language – without any ambiguity – is the House just funded the Iraq War and the Surge. Therefore the House clearly supports the efforts that will be going forward the remainder of this year. And in the NON-BINDING language is the idea of a troop withdrawal in August 2008. Well the House nor Congress can order the troops anywhere. They can only fund. And the funding for next year will be voted on NEXT YEAR! There is nothing binding on the benchmarks or withdrawal date language. So if the liberal media and Dems want to lie to themselves – BFD. The House just supported the war effort, including the surge, by doing the only thing they have authority to do – they funded these activities FULLY! Dems lose.
Update: Bush now has the upper hand, despite the media. Check this out:
“This bill has too much pork, too many conditions and an artificial timetable for withdrawal. As I’ve made clear for weeks I will veto it if it comes to my desk,” Bush said.
All he needs to add is “Since the House supported the efforts for this year, including the surge, I suggest they stick with supporting our troops and their constitutional role and quickly pass a Bill with only the military funds for Iraq and Afghanistan”. How can the Dems say no? The passed the money once now.
Update: Dems running for the Hills after disasterous vote to support the surge and this year’s war efforts.
AJ: Please explain; according to what I’m reading on CNN (I know, I know, the Source…); the funding is good, but the troops HAVE to be withdrawn, it’s binding, firm, etc.!
Please explain…
Dale,
Come on man! The funding is only for a period certain. This is GY07 and the Bill probably only covers through FY07 and MAYBE into 2nd quarter 08. No Bill written now will hold water compared to the final GFY08 budget which will be voted on from now to Sept.
So without funding as the leverage, nothing else is binding. There is no way for Congress to direct troops – they have no constitutional power.
DinA – Only the president conducts foreign policy and is the CiC of the military. Congress has only one function and that is to spend our money. They fulfilled that obligation by appropriating funds to continue the war. Everything else is window dressing no matter what any of the media say about it.
Since every single member of congress knows that conducting a war is clearly outside their area of responsibility, I wonder what kind of arm twisting the speaker used to cause them to make fools of themselves voting yes on this resolution.
Over at JOM this observation was made as to what can happen if the bill goes to conference.
The rhetoric for pull-out deadlines won’t appear in the Senate version. Someone in the Senate will object to the amendment as “legislation on an appropriations bill.” It takes a supermajority to overcome the objection.
Posted by: cboldt | March 23, 2007 at 02:01 PM
Over 20 billion in pork for a 6 vote margin.
Man that’s some expensive votes.
It doesn’t matter. This bill will never pass through the Senate in its current form. I doubt any of the posturing and bribes that Pelosi got into this bill will survive the Senate.
Hmm, maybe THATs how they propose to cut off funding for the war … make appropriations bills that are so bad that Congress never passes them. That way they can cut off funding and not be held responsible for cutting off funding. Passive aggressive … liberalism really IS a collective mental disorder.
Now THIS is the type of leadership I expect from the President. Bush was on point, stood his ground, pulled no punches. Here here!
He looked good. He looked mad as hell too. Keep it up dimwits. Bush has given you plenty of room to hang yourselves.
AJ & ERP: okay, obviously, I understand those things; but from reading the damn CNN website, it makes it sound as if they somehow got something thru, that ties his hands, cuts off funding, and withdraws the troops all by ’08!
AJ, I wasn’t questioning your write-up or conclusion, I just wanted to understand, what I didn’t understand!
Does that make sense….??
I wondered about that too. After all there is another budget to vote on between now and Sep 08. I am glad that Bush said he would veto it.
The Democrats can’t afford the US to win in Iraq. They see the surge being successful and the Dems own defeat so they did what they could to stab our troops in the back and embolden our enemies. They used pork to buy votes. This is so disgraceful there are not words to properly describe what they did – although they pretty much put a fire under GW – this may have been their biggest mistake.
I remember when Gingrich and the Reps used a tactic to shut down the goverment and pushed Clinton against the wall. When it was over, the Clinton owned the day. We could see the same thing happen here -as Bush states:
“A narrow majority in the House of Representatives abdicated its responsibility by passing a war spending bill that has no chance of becoming law and brings us no closer to getting the troops the resoures they need to do their job,” the president said. “These Democrats believe that the longer they can delay funding for our troops, the more likely they are to force me to accept restrictions on our commanders, an artificial timetable for withdrawal and their pet spending projects. This is not going to happen.”
The Dems keep this up, and, assuming the GOP puts up a credible candidate in ’08, we’re looking at a massacre of McGovernesque proportions.
I’m beginning to think that the loss last fall was not such a bad thing after all. It’s good to remind the people every so often just what a bunch of dangerous and irrational idiots the Libs really are.
Ahhh…that ‘ol Texas “rope”…being let out just far enough and then….whap!
Cowardly House Dems Pass Micro-managing War Bill…..
Rick Moran sums up today’s decision by House Democrats to emasculate American troops abroad:
…(quotes)
Meanwhile AJ Strata thinks the President can simply ignore the unconstitutional provision:
…(quotes)
While Strata is right that th….
I posted and linked to this, but I am not sure the Constitutionality of the provision is what is at issue here. I think this bill is “political cover” for the Dems to defund the war completely if the troops are not home by August. I don’t think the President or our troops can live with that. Better to find the interim funds elsewhere in the budget until the Dems either put a clean bill through or else defund the war entirely.
If this comes to his desk in current form, I think the Prez has to veto.
This is unbelievable isn’t it? Of course, I stopped trying to predict how far the Dems will go in their determination to destroy this country and what it stands for. Now the truth is being told and it’s not a pretty picture. These morons are absolutely incapable of leadership and responsibility and doing ANYTHING that doesn’t involve politics and bringing down their “enemy” George Bush. Al Qaeda doesn’t even register on their radar. When was the last time that Hillary or any Dem did anything or said anything that didn’t involve money, power, or votes? Anybody?
I think it was extremely telling that, when asked what would make her enter the race when she was just thinking about it, Hillary said something like her priorities were #1 – Party (figures), #2 – Family (yeah right…like they’d stand in her way), #3 – Voters (here we go with the polls and focus groups again), and a DISTANT #4 – her COUNTRY. This should tell everyone anything they need to know about Hillary Clinton and indeed ANY Democrat (except Joe Liberman). They could care less about their country except when it comes to votes and money (especially money) It’s ALL a power trip!
Bush just cut off their gravy train, and from here on it will be open warfare. You think the last 6 years have been tough? Fasten your seatbelts!!
I believe the President hit the nail dead on the head when he described what the Democrats are doing as “political theatre”. That is exactly what they have been engaging in since the elections.
he described what the Democrats are doing as “political theatreâ€. That is exactly what they have been engaging in since the elections.
Crosspatch, at least Clinton was good at it. This present crop of Donks is pretty pathetic.
Quote Retired Spook:
“I’m beginning to think that the loss last fall was not such a bad thing after all. It’s good to remind the people every so often just what a bunch of dangerous and irrational idiots the Libs really are.”
In peacetime, maybe. In wartime, no. But I definitely understand your sentiment, and would almost be inclined to agree PROVIDED somebody stopped the Democrats before they push it too far. Someone mentioned the Gingrich-led Republicans shutting down the government. There’s a perfect example of lemmings putting pedal to the medal. But at least lives weren’t at stake then, and the only cost to the country was political.
Also… and I’d be interested in getting AJ’s and Crosspatch’s views on this, as well… aside from the obvious political fallout, wasn’t this a political miscalculation on the part of the Democrats for another reason? Namely, unless the Dems stop the bleeding quickly, won’t public outrage over the war vote completely overshadow any supposed outrage over the US Attorneys scandal?