Going for 41 straight losses. You should get Harry and Nancy's faces photoshopped on that thing...
WASHINGTON - Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Tuesday that Democrats won't approve more money for the Iraq war this year unless President Bush agrees to begin bringing troops home. By the end of the week, the House and Senate planned to vote on a $50 billion measure for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The bill would require Bush to initiate troop withdrawals immediately with the goal of ending combat by December 2008.
Sure it will. What else ya got? Need some funding for some LSD Museum in Haight Ashbury?
If Bush vetoes the bill, "then the president won't get his $50 billion," Reid, D-Nev., told reporters at a Capitol Hill news conference.
Sure he won't, Harry. Selling out American fighting men and women. Make sure you put that in your reelection brochure...
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., made a similar statement last week in a closed-door caucus meeting.
I can't take these filthy hippies pissing on my lawn any more! I CAN'T TAKE IT!!!
The tough rhetoric does not necessarily foretell another veto showdown with Bush on the war. Similar legislation has routinely fallen short of the 60 votes needed to overcome procedural hurdles in the Senate. It is possible the upcoming bill will sink, in which case Democrats would probably wait until next year to revisit the issue.
Wait'll next year. Red Sox fans know what that means. Maybe in 86 years Harry and Nancy might actually pull it off too...
But their remarks reflect an emerging Democratic strategy on the war: Force congressional Republicans and Bush to accept a timetable for troop withdrawals, or turn Pentagon accounting processes into a bureaucratic nightmare.
...and that's worked really well for them. Really elevated those public opinion polls on Congress.
If Democrats refuse to send Bush the $50 billion, the military would have to drain its annual budget to keep the wars afloat. Last week, Congress approved a $471 billion budget for the military that pays mostly for non-war related projects, such as depot maintenance and weapons development.
The tactic stops short of blocking money outright from being used on the war, an approach that has divided Democrats and fueled Republican criticism that Democrats are eager to abandon the troops. But forcing the Pentagon into a painful budget dance to pay for the wars spares Democrats from having to write a blank check on the unpopular war. "We will and we must pay for whatever cost to protect the American people," said House Democratic Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md. "But tragically, unfortunately, incredibly, the war is not making us safer."
beep..."But tragically, unfortunately, incredibly, the war is not making us safer."...beep..."But tragically, unfortunately...
In a recent letter to Congress, Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England warned that the Army was on track to run out of money by February. England also said that without more money the military would eventually have to close facilities, layoff civilian workers and defer contracts.
Oh,no...no more pork!
Also, the budget delay could disrupt training efforts of Iraqi security forces and efforts to protect troops against roadside bombs, he said. "The successes they (the troops ) have achieved in recent months will be short lived without appropriate resources to continue their good work," England wrote in a Nov. 8 letter.
Isn't that the point of this exercise?
A White House spokesman said Bush would veto any legislation that sets a timetable for troop withdrawals. Despite the administration's opposition, the Democratic legislation is not a dramatic departure from Bush's current plans for Iraq. The Pentagon has already begun to reverse its buildup of 30,000 troops — an act that would more than satisfy the bill's requirement that Bush withdraw an unspecified number of troops. But the administration says troop levels should be based on conditions on the ground and not predetermined by Congress.
The bill to be voted on this week is similar to one Bush rejected in May. Unable to muster the two-thirds majority needed to override the veto, Democrats stripped the timetable from the $95 billion bill and approved the war money without restrictions.
Coming up next: Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead...
