Mar 27 2007
GOP & Bush Double Dare Democrats To Screw Up More
The GOP in the Senate and Bush have made a smart tactical decision to put the Dems in the hot seat regarding funding the troops and their liberal foolishness. The house has passed and the Senate will (barely) pass funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The problem is they have also added useless pork, including the crass amount of $100M for party conventions, along with useless verbage on surrender dates. The money needs to move fast so the GOP will let the Dem disaster limp to passage in the Senate (1 vote margin, as with the house) so Bush can come out and make the obvious statement.
Bush will tell the nation that first and foremost, both houses have shown support for the war and the surge by passing the needed funds. And then he will tell the nation that paying for party conventions should not be in this Bill, but if money is available should go directly to supporting the troops. Same with spinach and peanut subsidies And he will call on Congress to move their collective behinds and get the minimum necessary funding passed ASAP or risk lives. And the Dems will do as they are told. They played a weak hand will not only lose, but their in competence will give Bush a boost with America.
Retired Spook:
They are turning into Europeans.
Retired Spook, I wonder if they are getting terrorist money. There might be a reason for the leak that exposed our surveillance of the money transfer network. There is nothing I would put past the Democrats at this point.
Crosspatch: Interesting take on the money perspective – Bill Clinton has collected over $200 million from Arab Gulf states in the last few years – for consultation. Were they buying influence? Your guess is as good as mine.
As for the Senate vote the word is they wanted to get it to Bush so he could veto it – probably in a prime time speech. Seems it was pointed out by the acting spokesperson that the process had already been discussed between Senate Rep leadership and the White House.
As far as polls go and American sentiment on government competency – the last time I checked the Democrat lead congress was now 10 points below the President – wonder if they will drop further now.
How about this for an answer….as long as was given Saddam to comply with UN resolutions relating to his disarmament. (10 years?)
As Rush has stated, the leftist dems and the MSM have invested in defeat, so there is no other option for them.
Part of it is BDS, but there really is a disease of modern Liberalism, where being indiscriminate is the goal, thereby shunting reason, logic, principle, and traditional values. Why? B/c if one applies reason and principle and actually thinks then they inevitably discriminate (rational thought) — against bad, wrong, evil, dumb, stupid, etc. But to the Libs, to discriminate is bigotry and must be avoided (except by them — Libs are very good at discriminating). It’s an upside-down world where what is right and good and common sense is instead bigoted and wrong and judgmental and therefore evil. Which is why Saddam and his corrupt thugocracy are victims of the bigoted & evil & imperialistic U.S. Which is why we can’t profile at airports or question loud & intimidating imams. Which is why teaching abstinence is bad but hyping promiscuity is fine. Which is why we can’t question the global warming alarmists and that to question their draconian measures is evil. Which is why terrorists are freedom fighters but brave, selfless American soldiers are mercenaries or idiot tools of the imperialistic, evil Mr. Bush and his power-tripping administration. (and it goes on & on …)
While I believe the above, it was presented really well by Evan Sayet with his talk “How Modern Liberals Think” at the Heritage Foundation. I came across it at Powerline & it’s on YouTube — check it out. It’s excellent.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaE98w1KZ-c
As to whether the surge will work, a lot will depend on what happens with Iran. Remember there are several fronts in Iraq. Al Qaeda and its associates constitutes one enemy, but they’ve been losing ground for years. Between special ops groups like Task Force 145 and native resistance groups (the red-on-red fighting we keep hearing about) AQ isn’t long for this world as far as Iraq is concerned.
But the sectarian violence is another matter. There Iran holds most of the cards, thanks to its support of the Shiite militias. And that’s not a problem easily remedied, though through a combination of tough military action and backroom politicking the Coalition is certainly giving it its best shot.
Gang! Somebody’s starting a “Recall Hagel” website!
http://www.recallhagel.com/
If Bush vetoes this bill, I wouldn’t be surprised to see his approval ratings going up. Maybe?
I want to know why the American people have let the democrats attempt to place a time frame on the War on Terror.
We will fight this war for decades. Why? Because our very existence depends on defeating the Islamofascists. It will take as long as it takes. This faux outrage about length of time is a tool of those who want ratings.
We are in a mighty struggle not only with Islamofascism but with modern day communism/socialism. Woe to those who fight the battles for either of these two in our own country. They will end up in the ash heap of history…again.
America, the Beautiful, will remain the greatest country on the face of the earth, the country that lives and breathes freedom and the pursuit of happiness for all (the Islamofascists really hate that part).
And I find it truly laughable these days at how the dems think they have any authority on two things: honesty and competency.
The party of “it depends on what the meaning of is, is” wants to lecture the world on HONESTY? Puhleeze.
And how many five going on six year periods did the previous democrat administration have where no terrorist attacks were made on America?
Let’s see: WTC ’93, ’96, ’99 ’00
Their definitions are not my definitions, nor the sane, rational world’s definitions either.
Then do what the constitution allows. Cut the funding.
How about impersonating a republican?
The Libby Precedent
Opinion Journal/The Wall Street Journal, by Editorial writer
snip/
“If Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy wants to investigate the Bush Administration’s dismissal of eight U.S. attorneys, that’s certainly his prerogative. But he and other Democrats determined to play up this faux scandal shouldn’t be surprised if government officials decide they’d rather not step into this obvious perjury trap.”