Bush Won Again - And Here's His Thank You To The Dems That Made It Possible......

[global1]

for him to get his money to continue this occupation.








A chance for him to gloat again.

[zulchzulu]

1. As the song goes...see you in September...

It's pretty pitiful, but the Chimperor knows that even a fair number of Republicans are going to jump the Occupation Ship of Endless Death...

[Dhalgren]

2. It is getting to the point where it won't matter who is for him or against him.

He will just do whatever he wants and dare anyone to stop him. So far, no one has shown any interest in actually stopping his madness. Lots of politicians pretend to want to stop him, in order to make political gains (gains that will not pan out), but few have actually shown signs of doing anything...

[zulchzulu]

10. The funding goes to September 30...after that point, some Republicans will join Democratic ranks

I hate this occupation as much as anyone else, but we have to understand that the way to end it is with votes and make it veto-proof.

About 20 moderate Republicans (if not more by then) will join the Democrats and pass a veto-proof bill that will hopefully stop the funding and the war in September. We obviously need to keep the pressure up, but we have to understand that this is a democracy, sort of...

The Chimp will have painted himself in a corner with this bill. Republicans that want to win in 2008 will leave him in the dust in droves after they realize the "surge" is just more of the same...

[murray hill farm]

11. It was NOT the only way....

All they had to do was just LET THE VETO RIDE. That is all they had to do.

[Oreo]

14. Do you promise?

Or will another Friedman Unit be added come October.

[babylonsister]

7. Nah, the second 'surge' should be starting around September; they

don't plan on going anywhere.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=937691&mesg_id=937691

[Oreo]

13. Wake Me Up When September Ends

Disgusted with all but Feingold today. Need to hear what Obama and Clinton have to say. If they vote for the bill they'll be shooting themselves in the foot.

[jackster]

3. is that second picture photo-shopped?

Hard to believe it's real - even for Little Lord Pissy Pants

[WCGreen]

4. If they didn't have the votes to override the veto,

why should we risk putting the troops in more danger...

The point is this could have all been avoided had the GOP done their job while they were in power...

They never passed the budget resolutions because they didn't want to take any political risks running up to the election last Novemeber...

This should have been passed last September...

Only two apporpriation bills out of the eleven needed to fund the government were passed while the GOP had the power...

Why don't the dem's make that a point right now...

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[WCGreen]

12. I'm not saying to blame them....

But I think they should at least be pointing this out time and time again...

Look, if this was reversed, don't you think they would be all over us...

We have to fight the enemey we have...

Not the one out text books say we should have...

[mike_c]

8. they do not need a veto proof majority-- that is a smoke screen....

A veto-proof majority is needed ONLY to override a presidential veto, but Pelosi and the dem House have the authority RIGHT NOW to simply pull the plug on the war against Iraq. The House must ORIGINATE any supplemental appropriations-- for crimes against humanity, mind you-- and the easy way out of the problem is to simply block appropriations. End of war.

[AndyA]

9. That's exactly right. Just do...NOTHING.

For once, it would be OK for Congress to be a "do nothing" Congress in this respect.

There are lots of other things that need their attention, just go on to something else. They can be nice and tell Bush, "We've sent you all the funding bills you're going to get for Iraq, and you vetoed them. There are no further bills forthcoming."

War over. Troops home. Bush ended the war.

[onenote]

15. yes, Democrats could've not provided any funding -- and then paid the price at the polls

The polls are clear on this -- the public supports a timetable for ending the war. But they don't support defunding the war. NOt surprisingly, a majority of the House also doesn't support de-funding. Whether or not Pelosi would or wouldn't support defunding is irrelevant. She isn't going to create a situation where the chances that Democrats will maintaint and strengthen their majorities in Congress will be endangered by an action (or inaction) that lacks popular support and would put the Democrats not the repubs on the defensive.

[Dhalgren]

17. Democrats only care about winning elections, not about ending the occupation...

[onenote]

18. if that was the case why did Democrats, not repubs, vote for a timetable bill?

Kinda screws with your argument, doesn't it?

[Dhalgren]

19. Right. All democrats are heroes and have stopped funding the

Occupation of Iraq. They should publish their victory over Bush so that everyone knows how they have won and have ended the Occupation. Yay! :eyes:

As I have said before, the Democrats want to be seen as opposing the Occupation, they don't want to do what is necessary to end it. It might be too risky for their election goals...

[madrchsod]

5. the democrats nor the republicans can or will stop him.

75% of the american people deserve better.

[onenote]

16. 75% ? Link?

If you have a link to a poll indicating that 75% of the public supports immmediate defunding, I'd like to see it.