House passes war appropriations bill - Chimpy throws a hissy fit

Hitler did not have an exit strategy either.

When you have lost a war and need to fold. Even Japan, who you should admit tried hard, did surrender to cite one prominent example.

Better to have an exit strategy sometimes, than continue the bleeding.

As I admit frquently we can nuke them and therebye "win". We can also keep them at bay by intensive conventional bombing.

This should allow you to rest easily and still be proud of our country. Rest assured that we are certainly tougher and stronger and more capable than Iraq.

If the war was very very popular we could draft 10 miillion troops, move 10 million single women over there, conquer them, intermarry and eventually convert the Iraqis to Christianity in a few generations as Ann Coulter initially called for.

Speaking of Ann, have I missed her, or is she losing popularity?

 

Not yet. It all depends on how desperate the GOP in swing distircts get to distance themselves from Bush.

 

Don't worry, the oil money will pay for the war....maybe not

Between 100,000 and 300,000 barrels a day of Iraq’s declared oil production over the past four years is unaccounted for and could have been siphoned off through corruption or smuggling, according to a draft American government report.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/12/world/middleeast/12oil.html

 

It would provide funds for military operations in Iraq through Sept. 30, the end of the fiscal year.

October 1 is now the new and final deadline for the surge to work. Some Republicans have hinted that they will jump ship in the fall, so Chimpy's veto might not be enough. Good political move by the Dems. Chimpy will not be able to argue that Iraq needs more time since they were already given that time. Plan B will be complete and the cut and run can begin.

 

I still would like to have seen them stick to their guns on timelines and benchmarks, even ones that could be waived by the president. However, I agree that the shorter appropriation will give them a chance to revisit the issue in October.

 

I still think the timelines and benchmarks are political stunts and very questionable from a Constitutional standpoint. The purpose of these bills was to show GW Bush officially on record as wanting to keep the troops in Iraq as long as possible. I don't believe the Congressional Democrats ever seriously believed or intended for these bills to pass.

 

of course not, and that is why their approval rating is even lower than chimpy's. they should do what they were elected to do and use their constitutional power of the purse to provide funding for first class tickets home for all our troops and nothing more. that is what they were elected to do.

 

There are potentially benefits to sending the bill even if you know it will be shot down. When the issue comes up again in September, some people might be more inclined to feel able to support similar legislation the second time around.

I would describe these benefits as political, (as in making it politically more acceptable for people who have been aligned with the President to vote against him), but not political electioneering as you imply.

 

What's ironic is that would be more Constitutional than what they've been doing.

 

amen. Cases like this is where politics just rubs me the wrong way.