Skip to comments.Senate votes to require Iraq withdrawals
Posted on 04/26/2007 10:26:19 AM PDT by 50mm
WASHINGTON - A defiant Democratic-controlled Senate passed legislation Thursday that would require the start of troop withdrawals from Iraq by Oct. 1, propelling Congress toward a historic veto showdown with President Bush on the war.
The 51-46 vote was largely along party lines, and like House passage of the same bill a day earlier, fell far short of the two-thirds margin needed to overturn the president's threatened veto. Neverthe less, the legislation is the first binding challenge on the war that Democrats have managed to send to Bush since they reclaimed control of both houses of Congress in January.
And the Leftist Propoganda campaign fully intends to blame BUSH for Soldier’s deaths by not signing it.
This has ALREADY hit more than one of the message boards I monitor.
“So a VETO by AWOL BUSH , will leave the blood of all future GI deaths in Iraq on his hands.”
WILL NONE DARE CALL IT TREASON???
Congress can only fund or defund,
not set foreign policy.
The defeatists of the free world have spoken.
The party of hatred has a new friend.....AlQueda.
Now we shall see who our real friends are.
And who are the traitors to America.
No, there are a couple other things they could do.
If Congress capped the size of the armed at 100000 troops, only 100000 troops could be in Iraq.
Congress passed a law that
1. aids and abets the enemy
2. Is clearly unconstitutional.
Therefore is treason.
This is going to get very ugly.
Let me guess. Hagle voted with the Rats again on this one.
Looking for the official list of the alqaeda-enabling traitors.
Can anyone think of a bigger morale booster for the terrorists?
Democrats are guilty of high treason. They have emboldened Al Qaeda today just as they did last week when their leader declared victory for Al Qaeda. The result was Al Qaeda set up to prove Harry Reid right and murdered 9 Americans in Iraq. The Democrats have blood on their hands and the guilt of knowing they have undermined the nation on their conscience, if they even have one any longer.
Which Republicans voted in favor of this nonsense?
The most unfortunate thing out of all of this, is that Bush had a friendly Congress for severals - years in which he could have increased the size of the military, particularly the Army. He blew that opportunity and now has a Congress that would not only allow the military to expand, but is trying to clamp down on the one we have.
The Official Democrat War Position is:
“This war is lost”-Harry Reid
“But The War Can Be Won”-Chuck Schumer
The Democrat Position on the War depends on whether they are dealing with Polling data, or MoveOn’s Checkbook.
And of course, they voted FOR IT, before they voted AGAINST IT.
To quote Broder”:
“Not since Bill Clinton famously pondered the meaning of the word “is” has a Democratic leader confused things as much as Harry Reid did with his inept discussion of the alternatives in Iraq.”
“The 51-46 vote was largely along party lines”
What republicans voted for it?
We can only hope that W will sternly remind them of this when he vetos.
But, since McCain-Feingold, you can’t even count on a veto.
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.