Skip to comments.
Bush to be handcuffed on war funds
Herald Sun ^
| 11 May 2007
| Stephen Collinson
Posted on 05/10/2007 10:06:36 PM PDT by Aussie Dasher
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-35 next last
The defense of freedom is lost. Congress is fighting for the terrorists!!!!!
Isn't that called 'treason'???
To: Aussie Dasher
Polling shows the Dems favorable numbers overall are plummeting compared to when they came into power and I suspect this has a lot to do with it.
I’m looking forward to ‘08.
2
posted on
05/10/2007 10:09:47 PM PDT
by
festus
(The constitution may be flawed but its a whole lot better than what we have now.)
To: Aussie Dasher
Stephen, civics 101, the bill hasn’t passed yet; and it likely won’t. It will be vetoed. More rats dropped from last to this cart-wheel. More will drop again and funding will be passed.
3
posted on
05/10/2007 10:10:10 PM PDT
by
enough_idiocy
(Just like against terrorism, in politics you can't be on the defensive all the time!!!!)
To: Aussie Dasher
Notice the bull**** spin in this article? The Dems couldn’t get their witdrawal date through the House, but now are being presented as if they got their way.
4
posted on
05/10/2007 10:11:56 PM PDT
by
SolidWood
(Islam is an insanity cult that makes everyone act Arab)
To: Aussie Dasher
Technically no, it’s not treason, could be if war was ever declared, but it wasn’t. According to the resolution and the war powers act, it’s their option to fund it or not.
But I agree with your sentiment.
5
posted on
05/10/2007 10:15:45 PM PDT
by
CJ Wolf
To: Aussie Dasher
The title of the article is totally untrue at this point.
6
posted on
05/10/2007 10:17:40 PM PDT
by
spyone
To: SolidWood
“Notice the bull**** spin in this article? “
Not very hard ... if anything like this came to his desk he would veto it also - ... Do they have a point besides wasting time ?
7
posted on
05/10/2007 10:18:00 PM PDT
by
RS
("I took the drugs because I liked them and I found excuses to take them, so I'm not weaseling.")
To: CJ Wolf
What is wrong with demanding some kind of progress over the months? Maybe it will get bush to fire his generals and find a real general grant among them who is serious about victory. I think we need to start being ruthless, we can’t have war without end.
To: Aussie Dasher
He can veto again, can’t he?
9
posted on
05/10/2007 10:25:42 PM PDT
by
Salvation
(†With God all things are possible.†)
To: Aussie Dasher
war which has killed 3379 of their comradesThe Harold Sun gets it wrong again as does the entire MSM.
There have been 2765 US KIA's in the Iraq War.
10
posted on
05/10/2007 10:27:01 PM PDT
by
PISANO
To: Salvation
yes sir he can.
wonder how long this dance can go on, however, before the gummint is threatened with real shutdown.
To: Aussie Dasher
"This legislation ends the blank cheque for the President's war without end,'' Democratic House speaker Nancy Pelosi said.
Hey moron face. You do realize that the people we're at war with aren't going to just stop fighting us because we stop fighting them? For them, the war has been going on for 1400 years.
12
posted on
05/10/2007 10:27:24 PM PDT
by
Antoninus
(P!ss off an environmentalist wacko . . . have more kids.)
To: Antoninus
She’s saying “Get out and just let Iraq collapse.”
To: festus
My Dream...When a State of War exists, congressional pensions SHALL be part of the War Funding Bills.
No War $$$, No Checks to Ex Legislators.
14
posted on
05/10/2007 10:42:39 PM PDT
by
PizzaDriver
(an heinleinian/libertarian)
To: festus
"Im looking forward to 08."Both parties will be going into '08 with a lot of baggage.
The spending, the border, the illegals, the CFR, the Rx give-away and so much more.
The only ones I'm not disappointed in are our fine people in uniform.
To: festus
Polling shows the Dems favorable numbers overall are plummeting compared to when they came into power and I suspect this has a lot to do with it.Link please?
16
posted on
05/10/2007 10:43:48 PM PDT
by
MinorityRepublican
(Everyone that doesn't like what America and President Bush has done for Iraq can all go to HELL)
To: Aussie Dasher
Isn't that called 'treason'??? It's just their way of making sure we have to listen to their bull all the time from here on out.
To: Aussie Dasher
I can tell you this new Dem congress concentrates the mind regarding the prospect of Dems adding control of the executive branch after the next election. If the Hillary/Obama ticket wins, it will add congressional seats too, and things are going to get very ugly very fast.
18
posted on
05/10/2007 10:53:10 PM PDT
by
SaxxonWoods
(...."We're the govt, and we're here to hurt."....)
To: PISANO
3379 of their comrades....most likely it is the Dems referring to their allies in Iraq.
19
posted on
05/10/2007 10:57:11 PM PDT
by
OldArmy52
(China & India: Doing jobs Americans don't want to do (manuf., engineering, accounting, etc))
To: All
The way this will play is the Senate will not even bother with this bill. There will be pre agreement in conference on what is to pass, and that will be a bill with the usual full year of funding, but some benchmarks on Iraqi progress that affects their foreign aid budget, and not military troop funding.
By the time the benchmarks are watered down, the Iraqi military and police will be fully funded and the surge will be fully funded. The Dems will hate it, and they will offer verbage to their puppet masters to make it look like victory, but in the end, Bush will get full funding for the troops and a set of reportable benchmarks that are likely to be easy to meet, or vague, or both.
20
posted on
05/10/2007 11:09:57 PM PDT
by
Owen
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-35 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson