Another reason to dislike/distrust Democrats...Social Security

[Joeychgo]

Ah, yes, nice to see that you proudly put the capstone of Democratic achievement where it belongs - DEFEAT. That is the ONE THING the Democrats are really good at - cutting and running.

Figures you'd be proud of that.

I know you cant read fossten. I actually dont agree with it. But I do like to see GW's rubber stamp run out of ink. That is nice to see after 6 years.

Veto? So GW must be against supporting the troops because he will veto the spending bill that supports the troops.

 

[MonsterMark]

Yes,

I want and this Country needs Bush to veto this bill.

Make the Libs remove the pork and make them withdraw their stupid, idiotic timetable for defeat.

If he signs it, I want to see him pull the troops completely. 100% by the time he leaves office. I want the Dems to win the Presidency and then i can sit back and watch the world tear itself apart with the Dems in charge.

That's what I want. I want the Dems to destroy the world so we can rid ourselves of their plague once and for all two years after they take control in '08.

It is the only way to wake up the sheeple in this country. A revolution against Democrat ideals and the MSM is what is needed.

 

[shagdrum]

It's called separation of powers. Congress has no business trying to dictate military strategy

 

[Joeychgo]

It's called separation of powers. Congress has no business trying to dictate military strategy

I agree 100%. The constitution says the President is Commander in Chief, and I agree, congress has no business setting timetables, no matter how bad the President screws things up.

In this instance, this is nothing but Politics. Its a game. GW and the republicans have stepped on the dem's neck for 6 years, and not its payback. The dems will appear to look like they are listening to the people, while the republicans are not. Ultimately, the bill will pass without the timetable.

Oh, one more thing. Dont preach about the pork. GW and the republicans have had 6 years of it. Those who live in glass houses shouldnt throw stones. Remember the 2005 highway bill that had $24 Billion in republican earmarks? (source) --

Things included like

• Horse riding facilities in Virginia ($600,000).
• A snowmobile trail in Vermont ($5.9 million).
• Parking for New York's Harlem Hospital ($8 million).
• A bicycle and pedestrian trail in Tennessee ($532,000).
• A daycare center and park-and-ride facility in Illinois ($1.25 million).
• Dust control mitigation for rural Arkansas ($3 million).
• The National Packard Museum in Ohio ($2.75 million).
• A historical trolley project in Washington ($200,000).
• $941 million to 119 earmarked projects in Alaska, including $223 million for a mile-long bridge linking an island with 50 residents to the town of Ketchikan on the mainland.
• Another $231 million is earmarked for a new bridge in Anchorage, to be named -- this is specified in the legislation -- Don Young's Way.
• There is $3 million for a film ''about infrastructure that demonstrates advancements in Alaska, the last frontier."

Thats all republican pork from just one spending bill in 2005. So, I dont want to hear you criticize the dems for doing the same thing. Thats a BS point. Its wrong for both to do, but dont make it sound like the dems are evil when the conservatives have done the same garbage for 6 years.

 

[fossten]

See, this is the funny part. Im not a liberal. Im not a conservative. Im neither. Each issue has different meanings for me and my opinions are more left on some things and more right on others.

Now that's an interesting statement. Most of the time you sound like a liberal, Joey. But if you're neither, then you must simply be a person who doesn't stand for anything.

 

[MAC1]

I agree that republicans, in general, have no business criticizing democrats for pork spending given their own miserable track record over the last 6 years. Likewise, President Bush has no business either since he has also failed to curb wasteful spending.

However, by sending the President a bill they knew he would not sign, democrats have chosen to exploit the Iraq War and American soldiers to gain political points for the 2008 election. It just goes to show that nothing is off limits when it comes to Beltway politics, even lives of American soldiers. But clearly, this time, it's congressional democrats that are the instigators as they have sought to use there newly granted majority powers to shamelessly exploit the Iraq War.

What happened to the democrat mantra about supporting the military and our soldiers? If they truly support the military then why are they trying to usurp the President's constitutional authority as Commander-in-Chief and supplant themselves as little generals in the middle of pitched battle? Clearly, democrats are doing what they want to do purely for political purposes. Why else would they ignore the President who is in consultation with the real generals running the War, and instead, pass an arbitrary troop withdrawal timeline knowing full well the President would not accept such a timeline.

So, downplay the bill as politics if you want, but it’s clearly more dangerous and unnecessary than “politics,” and in the least will only create more divisiveness. Unfortunately, if allowed to stand, it will likely sabotage the military effort currently underway to restore security to Baghdad and finally gain the upper hand on the insurgents since it will, as many have argued, provide the insurgents a timeline within which they can lie in wait until the Americans leave.

Why then, have congressional democrats insisted on interfering? Again, because they do not want a victory in Iraq—They can’t afford one since they have too much invested in defeat.