Skip to comments.Bush's veto: Who to believe?
Posted on 05/01/2007 3:40:42 PM PDT by SmithL
President Bush vetoed legislation to pull U.S. troops out of Iraq Tuesday night in a historic showdown with Congress over whether the unpopular and costly war should end or escalate.
In earlier remarks, during a visit to U.S. Central Command in Iraq, Bush said US failure in Iraq "should be unacceptable to the civilized world. The risks are enormous."
Will his words be persuasive?
'Americans Assess the Reliability of Information Sources on Iraq.' President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have reliability scores near the bottom of the list. Democrats Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid also have low reliability scores, but are less likely to be viewed as unreliable than Bush or Cheney.
Americans rate Gen. David Petraeus, the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, as a more reliable source than any of 15 other government, political, and military leaders measured. (The Gallup Poll)
'Americans Favor Iraq Timetable, But Not Necessarily a Speedy Withdrawal.' Only 1 in 3 Americans favor timetable having troops out of Iraq by mid-2008 (Gallup).
War news 2.0?
'U.S. military shows its side of Iraq war on YouTube.' Channel offers a 'boots-on-the-ground' perspective of the conflict. (Los Angeles Times)
Follow the money
The bitter fight over the latest Iraq spending bill has all but obscured a sobering fact: The war will soon cost more than $500 billion. 'Price tag for war in Iraq on track to top $500 billion.' (McClatchy Newspapers)
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
I believe the President.
There is no difference between Petraeus’ and Bush’s position on Iraq. I trust the military and therefore the President. Regarding news sources: Military and genuine Iraqi sources.
The media and democraps credibility ranks right after Al-Qaeda propaganda.
I do Too.
The word of Reid, Polosi, Kerry, Leahy,
Kennedy, Boxer, Jackson Lee
No contest! Despite his stand on
Immigration, I’ll stick with Bush.
Another vote for Bush.
Absolutely! - The congress showed Klinton that much respect, even when his favorite general (Wesley Clark) was bombing innocent women and children in hay wagons for the crime of not being muslims.
What’s a “veto”? Isn’t that some sort of outmoded political concept from the Middle Ages or something? Isn’t it something that modern, enlightened executives don’t do? Surely this goes against the “New Tone”.
Are you being facetious or just holding
your tongue in your cheek? <>g<>
History of Presidential Vetoes...
It was intended as sarcastic commentary on W’s failure to hold some outrageous legislation in check (e.g. Medicare drug bill). I figured I’d get a pounding from several FReepers, but haven’t seen much in the way of responses at all.
Korrect. The GOP had the courtesy not to undermine Prs. Karter. I still cannot understand why the GOP didn’t undermine the appointment of Ginsberg to SCOTUS. The DIMS think the GOP won’t regain the House (possibly the Senate as well if you count RINOS as GOP) WRONG and I hope the GOP wakes up and stops playing nice until the Dims disintegrate. After the moderate Dim, GWB, the GOP will have killed off Presidential aspirations with its own hands. BUT American people generally try to balance the power of each party.
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.