Friday, June 20, 2008

Democratic House passes $162 million war funding bill

Someone needs to explain how a Democratic-controlled House of Representatives can pass a bill for something they all talk against.

The House has voted to provide $162 billion for President
to carry out U.S. military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan through
the end of his term.

A supposed lame duck President is getting everything that he wants. He is getting money for a war deemed unpopular and wrong. But he's still getting it.

The bill would give Bush's successor several months to set Iraq policy after
taking office in January - and spares lawmakers the need to cast any more war
funding votes closer to Election Day.

Wouldn't the real story behind power in Congress be that a political party can get things done? Why do they need to wait for "closer to Election Day"? What does that have to do with anything, other than a Congress that is gutless and doesn't want to go against the grain?

If they are worried about pulling all the funding, a la Vietnam, why don't they demand a strategy before approving the funding? Or is there a secret one which the public is not made aware?

If the party in charge really wanted to get something done, while they are in power and against a lame duck President, why don't they do it now? And why doesn't Senator Barack Obama say something now, start leading and keeping his promise now?

It's because nothing will change. This is the clear indicator. Because how will Obama change anything with a weak House?

There are more questions than statements here. That's how confusing all this is. As a voter, I just don't understand how the Democratic Party can be against the War in Iraq and then pass all the funding in the world to President Bush.

That is one thing about President Bush that will be written in the history books: no matter what his approval rating, 29% on a poll I saw today on MSNBC news, he has continued to stay his path and do what he thinks necessary. And I believe history will judge him on that in the future. It may take 20 years, but history will see President Bush in a decent light.


Donny said...

No argument towards the premise that the House Dems allowed this to go disgusts me, but it was the only way there were going to get legislation through that benefits returning troops and education, homeless and the flood victims. Proposed separately these would have been vetoed...again.

But, I thought all along you were for the invasion and occupation of Iraq? Isn't this why you now support McCain and his promise of another 100 years in Iraq?

More importantly, didn't you see the news that 4 oil companies (Shell, Exxon, BP and one other) are in the last stage of securing no bid contracts towards the production of oil "in Iraq"? Do you realize that this confirms McCain's promise of 100 more years in Iraq...because who do you think will have to provide security for those corporations while they're in Iraq, producing oil? And, by the way, this means you and I will be subsidizing the oil produced in Iraq by having to pay for the troops and weaponry needing to stay in Iraq. This also confirms all of those wild tinfoil hat theories that Bush/Cheney used 9/11 to implement Cheney's energy policy of stealing Iraqi oil.

Change will happen in 2008, because not only will we get a real president in Obama, we'll also get significant change in the House and Senate...the true Dems (not the yellow dogs) will have the majority which is what is missing right now...their "majority" is still not enough today to override the thousands of vetoes that this administration uses today to override sorely need legislation.

Oh, and 20 years from now history will report on this administration as one of the darkest, most secretive and most corrupt of all time...and Bush and Cheney's name will have war crimes associated with them.

Finally, your comment on Bush staying the course...remember this...doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results is the definition of insanity.

Which rhymes with Hannity.

Donny said...

From Fresh Air / NPR -

...for the rest of their lives, those who authorized, ordered and/or assisted with the decision to use the interrogation techniques that have been found to be TORTURE – which means Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and a team of lawyers that includes Addington, Bybee, Haynes, Yoo and more – cannot step outside the United States without being vulnerable to arrest and prosecution for war crimes.

What was that about Bush*'s legacy 20 years from now?