Monday, April 23, 2007

The House and Senate agree on the war funding bill to send to the White House


The House and Senate have agreed on an Iraq/Afghanistan war funding bill. They will vote on it Wednesday or Thursday,then send it to President Bush for his signature after it passes.

For his part, Bush vowed to veto the proposed bill, saying that "I will strongly reject an artificial timetable (for) withdrawal and/or Washington politicians trying to tell those who wear the uniform how to do their job."

Given that the Democrats lack the votes to overide Bush's veto, this is nothing less than a collosal waste of time.

The bill would start removing U.S. troops from Iraq as early as this July, with a goal of a total exit by March 2008.

Some of the billions of dollars of special interest funding the Democrats used to bribe people to vote for the bill originally were removed, but much of it remains and Congress also stuck in a raise in the Federal Minimum Wage, from $5.15 to $7.25 per hour.

The bill also establishes benchmarks for the Iraqi government to meet, including disarming the sectarian militias, allowing former Baath Party cronies of Saddam to participate in government and the final passage of a oil revenue-sharing law.

Given the current climate, meeting those benchmarks by this July even if the Iraqi government was that mythical Arab democracy the president was so excited about has some pretty long odds.

Speaking of democracy,both sides of this argument are letting some absolutely incredible things come out of their mouths...though, in fairness, I have to give overall points for vacuity and viciousness to Reid and the Democrats.

Senator Harry Reid had some of his normal insults for President Bush on hand, saying that the president was `living in denial'. He also took care to massage the Angry Left.

"I understand the restlessness that some feel. Many who voted for change in November anticipated dramatic and immediate results in January,'' he said. "But like it or not, George W. Bush is still the commander in chief - and this is his war." Reid said.

How odd....now, I thought that the whole country was at war. Perhaps that's what happens when you're a Democrat with your own foreign policy as opposed to the way things used to work in American government.

And people like Reid talk about the president being the one who's ignoring the Constitution!

Sheer grandstanding and posturing, from both sides.

If Reid, Pelosi and the Democrats had any courage and ethics whatsoever, they would have the courage to defund what they both have called a `lost war' and a disaster immediately...and take the political hit this would rightly entail. As a matter of fact, they have a moral obligation to do so, instead of merely sabotaging things.

And as far as President Bush is concerned, he should stop hiding behind the support most of the American people have for the troops and quit using that admirable sentiment to muddle through on policies that failed a long time ago.

The president should take the responsibility to come up with real strategies for victory like dropping the Arab democracy fetish and using Iraq as a base to deal with real problems like Iran and the other Muslims nation states that support and finance jihad against the West...and start communicating honestly with the American people for a change.

What a concept..we could actually start fighting this war to win.

Now that would make sense, instead of both sides merely folding one's arms like a five year old and saying `Won't! Won't Won't!"

3 comments:

B.Poster said...

You write that George W. Bush should:
"Take the responsibility to come up with real strategies for victory like droping thew Arab democracy fantasy and using Iraq as a base to deal with real problems like Iran and the other Muslims nation states that support and finance Jihad against the West.

What a concept..we could actually start fighting this war to win."

I could not have said this better myself. When we first made the decision to invade Iraq, I initially supported it because I thought what you wrote was what we would actually do.

Doug Purdie said...

It's not a waste of time for the Dems if they can accuse the President of withholding funds for troops.

Freedom Fighter said...

I disagree, Doug.

Short term political advantage should not be an issue when our troops are being shot at..and I think that most Americans will put the blame on both sides, but especially towards the democrats because of their past record, and because Bush said in advance that he would veto a strict pull out date.