Posted on 12/08/2006 4:02:15 PM PST by IntelliQuark
Top Democrats in Congress left a White House meeting with President Bush on Friday frustrated over what they perceived as his reluctance to embrace major recommendations from the bipartisan Iraq Study Group.
"I just didn't feel there today, the president in his words or his demeanor, that he is going to do anything right away to change things drastically," Senate Majority Leader-elect Harry Reid, D-Nev., said following the Oval Office meeting. "He is tepid in what he talks about doing. Someone has to get the message to this man that there have to be significant changes."
Bush has been cool to some of the report's main recommendations. He's said he won't deal with Iran until it verifiably suspends its nuclear enrichment program and won't sit down with Syria until it stays out of Lebanon's political affairs and prevents the flow of weapons and cash to insurgents in Iraq.
And Bush has stressed many times that U.S. troops will stay in Iraq until they successfully complete their mission.
(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...
You don't have to. He's not doing what you accuse him of doing.
As for the 'nasty.' Your vulgar language in your first post belies your present attempt at civility.
I'll leave you to do your own research.
When the truth comes out, they run and hide.
They're brave'ns they are......
Frankly, even another attack will not dissuade the lefty Dems from cutting and running. They hate the military, remember unless it plays social justice and handing out goodies roles. If and when they try to cut the military budget, once again, will the public stand up and say NO? My guess is No they will not . Can Obama or Hillary be far behind as our next failed leadership??
Come up with a plan, Harry, and perhaps we can have a meaningful debate about what to do in Iraq.
I'm sorry we are not having an actual discussion about this matter because it is far more important and complicated than has been addressed on this thread. At some point, the political pain and human loss will require a serious explanation.
I told you to educate yourself because he hadn't appointed them.
You then said that if he didn't control everything done like Clinton did, he was naive.
I don't think there's a whole lot more to discuss on this subject.
I'm not quite sure what your cryptic comment about pain and 'human loss' was about, but I don't think I like what you are implying here, so it cements even further the need for me to leave the conversation.
Ohio, Let's just chalk this one up to misunderstanding and part as friends. Have a Merry Christmas and a Happy Hannukah!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.