Pelosi threatens to reject funds for troop surge

Wash Times ^ | Jan 8, 2007 | Eric Pfeiffer

[jdm]

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other top Democrats yesterday said their party might deny funding for President Bush's expected call this week for a troop surge in Iraq if he doesn't meet their demands for detailed consultations and congressional debate on military strategy.

"If the president chooses to escalate the war, in his budget request we want to see a distinction between what is there to support the troops who are there now. The American people and the Congress support those troops. We will not abandon them," the California Democrat said during an appearance on CBS' "Face the Nation."

"But if the president wants to add to this mission, he is going to have to justify it. And this is new for him because up until now the Republican Congress has given him a blank check with no oversight, no standards, no conditions."

Rep. David R. Obey, Wisconsin Democrat and House Appropriations Committee chairman, echoed his party leader's warnings and some of her wording, saying, "There are certainly going to be no blank checks" from his panel.

"I think we're going to scrub his request and, at the same time, use it as a chance to really discuss whether or not the policy behind that request makes any sense," he said.

But he, like Mrs. Pelosi, was quick to emphasize that a rejection of a surge did not equate to abandoning the forces already stationed in Iraq.

"I think the Congress will provide everything that the troops need," he said during an appearance on ABC's "This Week."

In a letter to the president on Friday, Mrs. Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, cautioned Mr. Bush against calling for a surge, although it did not threaten to wield Congress' purse power.

[Darkwolf377]

The Dems are salivating at the thought of revisiting their rousingly successful method of defunding Vietnam, now in Iraq.

[familyop]

Pelosi wants our country destroyed, because she's jealous, angry and disappointed. She's jealous, because she wasn't born to be physically like Arnold Schwarzenegger. She's angry, because she doesn't own a man who looks like Arnold Schwarzenegger. She's disappointed, because most people aren't quite yet into goddess worship.

[wodinoneeye]

Bush should then threaten to veto every one of their bills that come across his desk.

[Danae]

Bring it Nancy, I am WAITING to F'ing RUIN you and your party with it.

[pieceofthepuzzle]

Bush's response should be that as before Congress will be provided with ongoing information about the war, and a chance to comment, but that to cede control of the war to Congress would be a violation of the separation of powers. If they balk, he should go straight to the people and point out that the Democrats are doing exactly what they said they wouldn't do, defund the war.

One of the tragedies of all this is that the President has all the ammunition he needs to make a compelling case to the public about why we must continue to fight the war on terror, but he doesn't use it. He's been so politically correct about Islam that he has failed to point out how real the threat is. Michael Moore actually believes himself when he says "There is no threat". The evidence refutes this, big time. The President should go right to the soccer moms, for example, and point out that unless the problem is dealt with now their children will most certainly be fighting this war later, and will have a much more powerful enemy to contend with by then.

[Prost1]

"Bush should then threaten to veto every one of their bills that come across his desk."

You have been reading my posts with an exception...

President Bush should not threaten, he should veto.

Action is the imperative!

[Chena]

"But he, like Mrs. Pelosi, was quick to emphasize that a rejection of a surge did not equate to abandoning the forces already stationed in Iraq."

Why would they even think that anyone would believe that they would abandon our forces already in Iraq? For everyone who helped put the Dems and Pelosi into office, hang your heads in shame and disgrace. Our troops counted on you, and you failed them.

[Liberty Valance]

Pelosi is a *poot*

[RunningWolf]

I am not surprised at all. And if she does succeed in that it will be the most destructive act against the WOT she has ever made good on.

This is not 1996 and she is not Newt Gingrich. It looks right now that she just might way overplay her hand. I might even be willing to make a bet here that many dems will self-destruct or separate from her in a few/several months.

Wolf

[upchuck]

It may well turn out that the Senate is our friend.

[Atchafalaya]

Posturing for the rabid left, I do hope the hounds are unleashed; this is the last shot at getting it done. Pray that the Iraqi's realize the oppertunity given. Pray the Iraqi's "get" it and get engaged.

[ChiMark]

For all of those so-called independents who switched to the dems, shame on you.

There was a concerted effort by those conservatives in
the radio media who bashed Pres. Bush and the republicans
daily. They have helped to manifest a great harm
to our country's security. Typically they use the term RINO
in describing republicans.

This is not Bush's fault.

[Chena]

I agree!

[cartoonistx]

The problem is that, from the democrats' perspective, Their handling of VietNam WAS a rousing success! They used it to remove two annoying presidents and increased their hold on congress. To date, that part of the world is relatively quiet and no one remembers that they were ultimately responsible for the deaths of millions of people after we were forced to leave southeast Asia. What's not to like?

[Darkwolf377]

That's just what I meant. Of course they thought it was a success and here they are, in a similar situation politically, making the same choices.

[RunningWolf]

hope the hounds are unleashed; this is the last shot at getting it done.

Insightful post. And I also pray that the Iraqi's realize the opportunity they have been gave, and that they 'get it' and get engaged to re-claim their destiny.

Wolf

[torchthemummy]

"But if the president wants to add to this mission, he is going to have to justify it. And this is new for him because up until now the Republican Congress has given him a blank check with no oversight, no standards, no conditions."

So Pelosi is essentially saying that Democrats have been shirking their oversight duties and have simply been issuing "blank checks" for the last four years. The oversight committees have Dems on them too but somehow they were left completely in the dark. Reminds me of how Harry Reid was asked if he had actually read the CIA intelligence estimate before he voted for the war. Answer - No.

[RunningWolf]

" Some of the other leading Democrats in Congress aren't ready to echo House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's suggestion that lawmakers might hold up funding for additional troops in Iraq"

http://www.kotv.com/news/national/story/?id=117627

Leading Democrats distance themselves from Pelosi

[tiger-one]

Without "Surge" it is abandoning our forces. Surge are reinforcements, without them our men and women twist in the wind.