All In The Family

Watch this to see where Bush gets his good morals from.

Video

House passes election-year Iraq resolution

By Vicki Allen

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - In a vote charged with election-year politics, the U.S. House of Representatives on Friday passed a symbolic resolution that wrapped the
Iraq conflict into the war on terrorism and rejected a deadline for U.S. troop withdrawal.
ADVERTISEMENT

The House voted 256-153 largely on party lines for the resolution that sparked two days of emotional debate as Republicans sought to depict Democrats as weak on terrorism while Democrats decried
President George W. Bush's policies that they said led to chaos in Iraq and detracted from the fight against al Qaeda.

"Will we fight or will we retreat? That's the question that's posed to us," said House Majority Leader John Boehner, an Ohio Republican. "Defeating repressive radical terrorists and their allies is our defining task of the 21st century."

But in impassioned debate, Rep. John Murtha (news, bio, voting record), a Pennsylvania Democrat, erupted in anger at Republicans who advocated continuing the fight in Iraq.

Murtha, a Vietnam veteran and defense hawk who rocked the Congress last year when he turned against the war, said it was "easy to stay in an air-conditioned office and say I'm going to stay the course." He added, "That's why I get so upset when they stand here sanctimoniously and say we're fighting this thing. It's the troops that are doing the fighting."

Bush has seen his popularity plummet this year largely because of the war, and Republicans are hoping to avoid being dragged down by the conflict in November elections that will determine control of both chambers of Congress.

The Senate prepared to debate Iraq next week after Republicans forced a vote on Thursday on Massachusetts Democratic Sen.
John Kerry's amendment to withdraw U.S. forces by this year's end.

With Democrats blasting Republicans for the maneuver, the Senate overwhelmingly voted to put aside the measure which allows Kerry to bring it up again next week for full debate.

A large group of Senate Democrats also was working on an amendment to the defense policy bill for a troop withdrawal starting this year, but without a deadline for completion.

In the House, many Democrats called the Republican resolution a sham that tried to connect the Iraq war with the September 11 attacks, even though no such links have been established.

The nonbinding resolution that has no force of law declares that the United States will prevail in the war on terrorism and declares that it is not in the national interest to "set an arbitrary date to withdraw or redeploy U.S. forces" from Iraq.

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi of California called it "an affirmation of the president's failed policy in Iraq."

But Republicans portrayed a vote against their resolution as a vote against winning the war on terrorism.

This vote is "sending a message about what they believe America's capable of doing, and about whether the global war on totalitarianism is worth fighting," said House Republican Whip Roy Blunt of Missouri.

With mounting public discontent over the war that so far has caused 2,500 U.S. military deaths, some Republicans acknowledged errors were made, but that the United States must stay to stabilize Iraq.

"To be sure mistakes have been made in Iraq, from pre-war intelligence to de-Bathification, to the destructive events of
Abu Ghraib, but these mistakes should not stop us from our goal," said Rep. Charles Dent, a Pennsylvania Republican.

"There's no question Iraq is a petri dish for terrorists now," said Republican Rep. Tom Davis of Virginia.

Forty-two Democrats crossed lines to vote for the resolution, while three Republicans voted against it.

Amnesty for Insurgents?

Looks like the puppet Prime Minister of Iraq, Nouri Maliki, is looking to forgive insurgents for killing Iraqi forces and U.S. troops. Plus Bush and the Republican controlled Congress supports it as well.

WTF!

You have to be kidding me! With our troops still on the ground in Iraq, the Prime Minister with the approval of Bush, have just said anyone who kills U.S. soldiers will be forgiven. Go ahead kills soldiers, no biggie. Does anyone see a problem with this?

Normally amnesty is given after the enemy lays down its weapons and surrenders. As it has been done in previous wars we have been involved in. This is a first though, with troops still on the ground in Iraq and fighting to offer a free pass for the soldiers already killed and any others that may be killed from today forward.

Where do the Republicans dig up all these completely incompetent people?

Nonsense vote in House today

In a completely political move by the GOP, House Republicans created a bogus bill designed to "support" the troops and make Democrats look bad. They are looking to set up the Democrats and use their votes against them in November.

This bill allows this war to go on forever without any real timetable or plan to withdraw out troops and get them out of the civil war they are in between.

The Republicans are full of it when they are taking the side that they "support our troops" and that they don't "cut and run." If they supported our troops they would have voted for the money to be provided so the soldiers would have the proper equipment. They would have made sure that there was a plan for ending the occupation of Iraq once they elected a government. They wouldn't leave are troops in the middle of a civil war that has erupted because they fear having U.S. troops stationed there permanently.

This bill only proves that these Republicans and this Administration plan on leaving troops there forever.

Bush Rejects Calls for Pullout From Iraq

So Bush rejects calls for troop withdrawals from Iraq, no big shock. Although his reasons leave me scratching my head.

"It's bad policy," Bush said in a Rose Garden news conference Wednesday, about six hours after he returned from Iraq. "I know it may sound good politically. It will endanger our country to pull out of Iraq before we accomplish the mission."

Endanger the country? Bad policy? How does an illegal war against innocent people help our security? How is it good policy?

Is lying to the world to get us into war good policy? Not giving our troops proper equipment and body armor, is that good policy? What about creating a terrorist training ground is that good policy?

Ignoring advice of experts and Generals endangers our safety more than withdrawing troops does. What about showing up unannounced and undermining the authority of the Prime Minister of Iraq, is that good policy? Won't that just tear apart the relationships and trust he is trying to build amongst fighting factions of society? Won't that make it look like he is not in control of his own country? Is that good policy?

Let's just admit that this was a politically motivated photo-op trying to capitalize on the death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Polls show that Bush's approval rating has gone down since the announcement of Zarqawi's death.

Let's see how they spin this latest failure in judgement.

So Much Going On!

I haven't posted for a while because there is so much going on! Where to start?

Bush's 5 hour visit to Iraq? Undermining the authority of the Prime Minister of Iraq by not announcing his visit until 5 minutes before his arrival.

Karl Rove being let off the hook for lying to the grand jury in the CIA leak case?

The death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi

The Republicans removing language in bills that passed in the Senate and the House, that talked about the U.S. not setting up permanent bases in Iraq?

The Gay marriage amendment being stopped in Congress?

U.S. Senate blocks estate tax repeal. A tax that only effects .25% of the people in America?

Congress passing a law making english the official language?

Arlen Specter not holding hearings on the NSA wiretapping scandal?

Ohio and Louisiana presenting bills that would ban abortions in their states?

That filthy c*nt, Ann Coulter attacking 9/11 widows?

Prisoners in Guantanamo Bay commiting suicide?

Homeland Security cuts funding to New York because the home of the Empire State Building and the Brooklyn Bridge has "zero" national monuments or icons.

There's more but I won't go into it in this post. How can the citizens of this country feel that the government is looking out for the people's best interests? I know I don't.