Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 51

Thread: Good to see the defeatocrats and liberals remain as spineless as ever!

  1. #1
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408

    Good to see the defeatocrats and liberals remain as spineless as ever!

    [QUOTE][B]Congress OKs Billions for the Iraq War
    Updated 8:59 PM ET May 24, 2007 [/B]

    By DAVID ESPO

    WASHINGTON (AP) - Bowing to President Bush, the Democratic-controlled Congress grudgingly approved fresh billions for the Iraq war Thursday night, minus the troop withdrawal timeline that drew his earlier veto.

    "The Iraqi government needs to show real progress in return for America's continued support and sacrifice," said the commander in chief, and he warned that August could prove to be a bloody month for U.S. troops in Baghdad's murderous neighborhoods.

    The Senate vote to send the legislation to the president was 80-14. Less than two hours earlier, the House had cleared the measure, 280-142, with Republicans supplying the bulk of the support.

    Five months in power on Capitol Hill, Democrats in both houses coupled their concession to the president with pledges to challenge his policies anew. "This debate will go on," vowed House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and if anything, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada was more emphatic.

    "Senate Democrats will not stop our efforts to change the course of this war until either enough Republicans join with us to reject President Bush's failed policy or we get a new president," he said.

    From the White House to the Capitol, the day's events closed out one chapter in an epic struggle pitting Congress against commander in chief over a war that has claimed the lives of more than 3,400 U.S. troops.

    House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio choked back tears as he stirred memories of the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. "After 3,000 of our fellow citizens died at the hands of these terrorists, when are we going to take them on? When are we going to defeat them," he asked.

    The legislation includes nearly $95 billion to pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan through Sept. 30. In addition to jettisoning their plan for a troop withdrawal timeline, Democrats abandoned attempts to require the Pentagon to adhere to troop training, readiness and rest requirements unless Bush waived them.

    The bill establishes a series of goals for the Iraqi government to meet as it strives to build a democratic country able to defend its own borders. Continued U.S. reconstruction aid would be conditioned on progress toward the so-called benchmarks, although Bush retains the authority to order that the funds be spent regardless of how the Baghdad government performs.

    [B]In a highly unusual maneuver, House Democratic leaders crafted a procedure that allowed their rank and file to oppose money for the war, then step aside so Republicans could advance it. There were 194 Republicans in favor, as well as 86 Democrats, three members of the leadership among them. Pelosi and 139 other Democrats voted against the measure, as did two Republicans.[/B] [I]more usual talking loud and saying nothing from the rats....[/I]

    Moments earlier, the House voted 348-73 to include a separate package of domestic spending that Bush had once resisted.

    After months of struggle with the White House, Democrats took credit for forcing Republicans to begin changing course. At the same time, they emphasized their distaste for enabling the money to advance.

    "I hate this agreement," said Rep. David Obey, D-Wis., chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, who played a key role in talks with the White House that yielded the measure.

    He voted against the money, but Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., no less an opponent of the conflict, cast a different vote.

    "I cannot vote ... to stop funding for our troops who are in harm's way," said Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. "I simply cannot and I will not do that. It is not the proper way that we can bring this war to an end."

    Presidential politics spiced the proceedings across the Capitol.

    Sen. Christopher Dodd of Connecticut, alone among the Senate's Democratic White House hopefuls, pledged in advance to oppose the bill. Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware said he supported it.

    That left Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois publicly uncommitted in the hours leading to the vote, two leading White House rivals tugged in one direction by the needs of 165,000 U.S. troops _ and in another by party activists demanding rejection of the legislation. As time ran out on the roll call, first he, then she, voted no.

    After the previous bruising veto battle, Democratic leaders said they hoped to clear the bill for Bush's signature by this Memorial Day weekend. The president rejected an earlier measure, objecting to a troop withdrawal timetable, and the House failed to override his objection.

    In exchange for providing the war money on Bush's terms, Democrats won White House approval for about $17 billion in spending above what the administration originally sought. Roughly $8 billion of that was for domestic programs from hurricane relief to farm aid to low-income children's health coverage.

    Democrats also won a top priority _ the first minimum wage increase in more than a decade. The current federal wage floor of $5.15 an hour will go to $7.25 in three separate installments of 70 cents.

    Reflecting unhappiness among conservatives in his own party, Bush said he would have preferred less domestic spending than the bill contained. "But, still, by voting for this bill members of both parties can show our troops and the Iraqis and the enemy that our country will support our servicemen and women in harm's way," he said at a Rose Garden news conference.

    One of the most vocal war critics in Congress readily agreed. "This is not a game. They run out of money next week," said Rep. John Murtha of Pennsylvania, whose speech opposing Bush's Iraq policy more than a year ago was a turning point in the debate.

    Bush ordered the deployment of an additional five brigades to Iraq in January to try and quell sectarian violence, and he said summer would be critical to the fate of the new strategy.

    Gen. David Petraeus, the top commander in Iraq, has pledged to report to the administration and Congress in September on the progress made in the war, and Bush conceded that al-Qaida terrorists and illegal militias will make sure there is heavy fighting in the interim to try and sap the will of the United States.

    "And so, yes, it could be a bloody _ it could be a very difficult August," he said.

    He said he wants to see American troops "in a different configuration at some point in time in Iraq." He said that meant moving from mostly combat to training, border security and special forces anti-terror operations.

    "However," Bush said, "it's going to require taking control" of Baghdad.

    With a new poll showing that 80 percent of self-described independents oppose the war, it was unclear how long Bush could fend off his Democratic critics in Congress _ or even count on Republicans to hold firm.

    "It seems to me it's time for them (Iraqi troops) to show what is their ability and professionalism to step up," said Sen. John Warner, R-Va. He said if conditions do not improve by mid-July, the president should reconsider his strategy.

    Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
    [/QUOTE]

    good to see they remainded true to the electorate....wasn't there a lib (parafly??) whining like a b!tch that Joe Lieberman deceived people claiming he would vote/caucus with the rats if he was re-elected last November???

  2. #2
    Would you of rather have had the Democrats f#ck over the troops in harms way?

    Then again what would you and the other 95 percent of rightwingers know about actually volunteering to fight for your country. You and you ilk are about talking about sacrifice, not actually making a sacrifice.

    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY]good to see they remainded true to the electorate....wasn't there a lib (parafly??) whining like a b!tch that Joe Lieberman deceived people claiming he would vote/caucus with the rats if he was re-elected last November???[/QUOTE]

  3. #3
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    typical bullsh!t from the looney left....too bad you got f#cked over by the reps you put in power....you are as spineless as the leaders of your beloved rat party....

    [QUOTE=cr726]Would you of rather have had the Democrats f#ck over the troops in harms way?

    Then again what would you and the other 95 percent of rightwingers know about actually volunteering to fight for your country. You and you ilk are about talking about sacrifice, not actually making a sacrifice.[/QUOTE]

  4. #4
    if the democrats didn't pass this bill you'd be here making the same noise. what you would rather the troops get cut off from funding? For shame CBNY.

  5. #5
    What did you think would actually happen? Did you think the WH would actually accept a timetable? No, because then they would actually have to take responsiblity for the future and why do that when Bush can hand this mess off to the next President.

    Once again you and all the others who are gung ho to keep this war going, but will make zero sacrifices during it.
    I have a friend who is 49 and just re-enlisted. Get some balls CBTNY and do the same, since you understand the war on terror more than anyone else.

    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY]typical bullsh!t from the looney left....too bad you got f#cked over by the reps you put in power....you are as spineless as the leaders of your beloved rat party....[/QUOTE]

  6. #6
    there is a timetable, whether Bush wants one or not. the day after he leaves office is the hard deadline for this wonderful experiment in nation building.

  7. #7
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    gung ho about to keep the war going?? wrong dope-

    I'm gung ho about winning the war on terror which in large part was caused by the failed state of the FBI/CIA and other government agnecies where tools like you draw checks and salaries for incompetence....

    what's pathetic are people like you who need this to be a drawn out battle to further your political agendas while you continue to pound your chest in the case of failure- something you are very used to in your stated field...


    [QUOTE=cr726]What did you think would actually happen? Did you think the WH would actually accept a timetable? No, because then they would actually have to take responsiblity for the future and why do that when Bush can hand this mess off to the next President.

    Once again you and all the others who are gung ho to keep this war going, but will make zero sacrifices during it.
    I have a friend who is 49 and just re-enlisted. Get some balls CBTNY and do the same, since you understand the war on terror more than anyone else.[/QUOTE]

  8. #8
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [QUOTE=bitonti]if the democrats didn't pass this bill you'd be here making the same noise. what you would rather the troops get cut off from funding? For shame CBNY.[/QUOTE]


    gift wrap it all you want but the rats are failing...they were put into office by people such as yourself- the extreme and radical left wing- with the expressed purposes to end the war....they caved to the "lame duck" President...it must suck for you to admit it....

  9. #9
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    23,029
    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY]I'm gung ho about winning the war on terror which in large part [B]was caused by the failed state of the FBI/CIA [/B] and other government agnecies where tools like you draw checks and salaries for incompetence....[/QUOTE]


    There you go again...blaming America first. ;)

  10. #10
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [QUOTE=PlumberKhan]There you go again...blaming America first. ;)[/QUOTE]


    America- no; just the incompetent intelligence agencies that have failed the nation for more than a decade (with a little help from people like jamie gorelick..)

  11. #11
    You, Wofiwitz, Libby and Cheney all thought you knew more than the CIA, FBI and the State Dept. and look what they created.

    Iraq has nothing to do with what you are talking about, we half-azzed Afghanistan and created a new terror zone in Iraq.

    You can hide behind the same BS all you want, but one thing will not change, they were all wrong and remain to be.

    Let me know the next time you do something worth talking about as you go door to door selling AFLAC and lying to people about what they will get from you. How was the transition? You know going from selling used cars to insurance?


    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY]gung ho about to keep the war going?? wrong dope-

    I'm gung ho about winning the war on terror which in large part was caused by the failed state of the FBI/CIA and other government agnecies where tools like you draw checks and salaries for incompetence....

    what's pathetic are people like you who need this to be a drawn out battle to further your political agendas while you continue to pound your chest in the case of failure- something you are very used to in your stated field...[/QUOTE]

  12. #12
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    this is classic.....


    [QUOTE][B]Dems: Fight Over Iraq War Has Just Begun
    Friday, May 25, 2007[/B]

    WASHINGTON [B]Democrats may have lost the first round with President Bush on ending the war in Iraq since taking over Congress in January, but they say their fight has just begun.[/B]

    In the months ahead, lawmakers will vote repeatedly on whether U.S. troops should stay and whether Bush has the authority to continue the war. The Democratic strategy is intended to ratchet up pressure on the president, as well as on moderate Republicans who have grown tired of defending Bush administration policy in a deeply unpopular war.

    [B]"I feel a direction change in the air," said Rep. John Murtha , D-Pa., chairman of the House panel that oversees military funding.[/B] [I]another senile old fuq[/I]

    Democrats looked to the upcoming votes after losing a bruising battle with Bush on an emergency war spending bill. Lacking the two-thirds majority needed to overcome another presidential veto, Democrats dropped from the legislation a provision ordering troops home from Iraq beginning this fall.
    Democratic leaders said they hoped to ready the bill for Bush's signature by this Memorial Day weekend.

    Democratic presidential rivals Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama both voted against the bill.

    "I fully support our troops" but the measure "fails to compel the president to give our troops a new strategy in Iraq," said Clinton, D-N.Y.

    "Enough is enough," Obama, an Illinois senator, declared, adding that Bush should not get "a blank check to continue down this same, disastrous path."

    Their votes continued a shift in position for the two presidential hopefuls, both of whom began the year shunning a deadline for a troop withdrawal.

    Thursday's legislative action capped weeks of negotiations with the White House, which agreed to accept some $17 billion more than Bush had requested as long as there were no restrictions on the military campaign.

    "If all funding bills are going to be this partisan and contentious, it will be a very long year," Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said.

    Democrats said they were successful in moving the war debate forward and would try again when Congress takes up spending bills for the 2008 fiscal year that begins Oct. 1. [I]well we didn't score a touchdown on that last drive but we got across the 25 yard line!!! hence we won!![/I]

    "This debate will go on," vowed House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.

    "Senate Democrats will not stop our efforts to change the course of this war until either enough Republicans join with us to reject President Bush's failed policy or we get a new president," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said.

    The Senate will go first when it considers a defense policy bill authorizing more than $600 billion in military spending. Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, plans to offer an amendment that would order troop withdrawals to begin within 120 days.

    Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., said he would press to repeal the 2002 resolution authorizing combat in Iraq.

    Sen. John Warner, R-Va., said Thursday that if the security situation in Iraq does not improve by mid-July, the president should consider adopting a new strategy there.

    "It seems to me it's time for them (Iraqi troops) to ... step up," said Warner, R-Va.

    The most critical votes on the war are likely to be cast in September when the House and Senate debate war funding for 2008. The House plans to consider one measure that would end combat by July 2008 and another intended to repeal Bush's authority to wage war in Iraq.

    The September votes likely will come after Iraq war commander Gen. David Petraeus tells Congress whether Bush's troop buildup plan is working. Also due by September is an independent assessment of progress made by the Iraqi government.

    "Those of us who oppose this war will be back again and again and again and again until this war has ended," said Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass.

    The U.S. has spent more than $300 billion on Iraq military operations so far, according to the congressional Government Accountability Office.

    [/QUOTE]

  13. #13
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    23,029
    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY]America- no; just the incompetent intelligence agencies that have failed the nation for more than a decade (with a little help from people like jamie gorelick..)[/QUOTE]


    You can add the entire signature line from the PNAC website to that list.

    What about Wolfie? Everything that dude touches turns to a giant steaming pile of dogcrap...

  14. #14
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    Iranian elections, obl's where about, hamas elections, etc...etc..."they" were wrong based on the incompetence of the agencies people like you steal money from for "work"..(ha-ha)

    though you get a pass for pushing the broom through the precint to draw your salary.....

    [QUOTE=cr726]You, Wofiwitz, Libby and Cheney all thought you knew more than the CIA, FBI and the State Dept. and look what they created.

    Iraq has nothing to do with what you are talking about, we half-azzed Afghanistan and created a new terror zone in Iraq.

    You can hide behind the same BS all you want, but one thing will not change, they were all wrong and remain to be.

    Let me know the next time you do something worth talking about as you go door to door selling AFLAC and lying to people about what they will get from you. How was the transition? You know going from selling used cars to insurance?[/QUOTE]

  15. #15
    You fail to realize that the Iraq war was created by the WH and all of their cronies.
    Care to actually admit that?
    The Dems tried to get their bill passed and it was VETOED, care to count how many vetoes were used before the Dems tookover?

    After 9-11 this Adminstration still demanded the FBI to create task forces to investigate PORNO, you know how dangerous the porno industry is to the safety of the U.S.

    Stick to what you know CB, insurance premiums.



    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY]Iranian elections, obl's where about, hamas elections, etc...etc..."they" were wrong based on the incompetence of the agencies people like you steal money from for "work"..(ha-ha)

    though you get a pass for pushing the broom through the precint to draw your salary.....[/QUOTE]

  16. #16
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    classic...created by the WH???

    the dims who tried to get the bill passed to stop the war were the same ones on the floor of the congress voting to give authorization for the war in 2002!!

    all of whom were pineing hussien had to be removed the prior half dozen years....sad the way just must divert blame for failures...

    [QUOTE=cr726]You fail to realize that the Iraq war was created by the WH and all of their cronies.
    Care to actually admit that?
    The Dems tried to get their bill passed and it was VETOED, care to count how many vetoes were used before the Dems tookover?

    After 9-11 this Adminstration still demanded the FBI to create task forces to investigate PORNO, you know how dangerous the porno industry is to the safety of the U.S.

    Stick to what you know CB, insurance premiums.[/QUOTE]

  17. #17
    Yea, you got me the WH had nothing to do with the war started in Iraq. Man you are good.

    How much for a million dollar life insurance plan?

    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY]classic...created by the WH???

    the dims who tried to get the bill passed to stop the war were the same ones on the floor of the congress voting to give authorization for the war in 2002!!

    all of whom were pineing hussien had to be removed the prior half dozen years....sad the way just must divert blame for failures...[/QUOTE]

  18. #18
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    classic...in 30 seconds you've gone from "creating the war" to "starting the war"....need any furhter proof why the intelligence agencies were in such dire straits???

    [QUOTE=cr726]Yea, you got me the WH had nothing to do with the war started in Iraq. Man you are good.

    How much for a million dollar life insurance plan?[/QUOTE]

  19. #19
    Wow, you are on a roll. Let's start a discussion in the difference between creating and starting.

    Please stick to what you know. Your arrogance was shared by Wolfy and Libby and look how well they are doing.

    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY]classic...in 30 seconds you've gone from "creating the war" to "starting the war"....need any furhter proof why the intelligence agencies were in such dire straits???[/QUOTE]

  20. #20
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    as opposed to your level-headedness and humility??? laughable....

    [QUOTE=cr726]Wow, you are on a roll. Let's start a discussion in the difference between creating and starting.

    Please stick to what you know. Your arrogance was shared by Wolfy and Libby and look how well they are doing.[/QUOTE]

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us