NationStates Jolt Archive

The House of Representatives approves a $120 billion war spending bill that includes benchmarks for the Iraq political progress and an increase in the U.S. federal minimum wage.

This is step one and now it is on to the floor of the Senate for debate and vote.

All I can say is, it is about time that they got this compromise and voted to pass it. Well done to all of the negotiators.

Finally congress figures out that passing something that is destined to get a VETO is worthless.

Finally congress figures out that passing something that is destined to get a VETO is worthless.

At least a veto that they cannot override.

Huzzah, more money for the Never Ending War.

Whilst it would have been good to see a bill pass with a timetable, the sad political reality is that either the Republicans will refuse to cross the aisle or Bush will veto.

At least there are benchmarks that the Iraqi government has to reach, which if not met will hurt them as far as funding goes.

However. Bush decides what the benchmarks are...

This is step one and now it is on to the floor of the Senate for debate and vote.

All I can say is, it is about time that they got this compromise and voted to pass it. Well done to all of the negotiators.

I'd have said an immediate pullout isn't what we want to do, considering the instability in Iraq, but now Iraq seems so far gone that I'm not sure what one more year of involvement can achieve.

And there is a very real deadline for a pullout: when our armed forces get so tired and stretched out that they can't be close to effective any longer. Tours of duty have already been extended so many times that I think we may be arriving soon at the breaking point.

They're tying an increase in minimum wage into an increase in spending on a never-ending war? It's just another way to get people to vote for the bill, which is utterly ludicrous; they really ought to prevent this stuff.

How soon they forget that the reason they got elected was due to strong dissatisfaction with this President and his unwilling, unbending, arrogant conduction of the Iraq War.

The fact is that I am sick to death of corporatists in both parties being paid off and NOT voting the courage of their convictions. But right now I am hopping mad at the Dems.

We elected them and gave them simple, easy to understand instructions, the poll numbers reflect it. We told them to get us out of this war. Sixty percent plus poll numbers on disengaging from this war with a President who is mired at a 32% approval rating and over 60% disapproval.

Let the son of a bitch continue to veto it. All it would have done is continue to weaken his party's chances in 2008.

So what do these cowardly assholes do? Cave in. It is a full on betrayal, and I will not stand by lightly while these folks "protect" their reelection chances instead of making a principled stand. I have chewed out Congressional and Senatorial aides all day. I have told all of my friends to do the same. To hell with e-mails. It has an impact when people call and chew people's asses out.

There comes a time to stop thinking about how badly a principled stand will hurt reelection chances and step up and actually represent the constituency.

Our government does not give a shit about us only themselves, and it is high time pull back on the bit and reign these people in. In both parties.

Now it just takes the guts to look over at the Republicans and say, "Join us, your party isn't listening to you, and ours isn't listening to us." Run the corporate politicians out on a rail and keep doing it until they start actually seeing real consequences for chickenshit chicanery, pettifoggery and dishonesty.

If it was any other issue I would agree with you completely, sir. However, on this occasion I see another issue. Normally, I would agree with you that the representatives were elected to represent and should do just that. However, in this situation, it takes a highly qualified person to make the decision about Iraq. The vast majority of Americans don't have those qualifications. In past wars, like Korea with McArthur, civilians should have been the deciders of what to do. It was a second generation war and therefore, the level where civilian decision making came into play was in the level of troop involvement. However, this war is a different one. The military's strategic level had moved up to encompass more. The number of troops involved is what the enemy seeks to change. By allowing a referendum to decide these things we are giving a very easy way for our enemy to win. They provide the bloody pictures and the American people provide the lack of will. Just like in Korea where strategy wouldn't have been set by referendum, numbers of troops shouldn't be set by referendum now.

So what do these cowardly assholes do? Cave in. It is a full on betrayal, and I will not stand by lightly while these folks "protect" their reelection chances instead of making a principled stand. I have chewed out Congressional and Senatorial aides all day. I have told all of my friends to do the same. To hell with e-mails. It has an impact when people call and chew people's asses out.I agree, and the number is 202-224-3121 (http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2007/05/24/202-224-3121-the-congress-weve-got/)

I have called, and I had 5 of my friends call these cowards at DC.

It's the No Iraq Left Behind Bill.

Finally congress figures out that passing something that is destined to get a VETO is worthless.

Passing something that won't get vetoed, but violates their conscience is no better. In fact, it is worse.

How utterly angering. I am enraged. Since neither of my state's Senators had the guts to stand up to Mr. 28% on this "compromise" of their morals, I am looking foward to progressives in my state stepping up to see them deposed in the primaries and replaced with real candidates who have real spine.

I am disgusted. When do the huge protests start? It's time to take this to the street with numbers that will make Vietnam protests look small.

This is step one and now it is on to the floor of the Senate for debate and vote.

All I can say is, it is about time that they got this compromise and voted to pass it. Well done to all of the negotiators.
I think that this bodes ill for "democracy" in the US.

The people lose out on this one for sure!!

Hey guys, don't be too upset. Even if the bill had passed with timetables, there would still have been the gi-fucking-normous embassy, medley of bases, provisions for special forces and contractors, and a big loophole to use the military for fighting al-Qaeda or whatever terrorists there may have been. So it's not as big a let down as it might seem.

I think that this bodes ill for "democracy" in the US.

The people lose out on this one for sure!!

That is your own opinion. I on the other hand, have a different opinion. You know why? Afghanistan was also in this bill.

Senate passed the bill too and is now moving to the white house for signature.

Democracy in action. Have a stalemate? Compromise! Do not like the compromise, you vote against it. However, voting against it means losing minimum wage increases and other projects the dems wanted but I guess that would be a price to pay.

Democracy in action.

This must have been a big decision for Bush and the Republicans.

Screw the Poor, work till you die policy Vs. Never Ending Story (aka Conservative War 2.0)

Democracy in action. Compromise! Democracy in action.
Democracy in action? More like tail wagging the dog.

Compromise? More like......this is my toy and if you don't like it, I will run it into the ground and blame you for the results. Just incredibily horrible BS!!

BTW, what happened to Corny? He hasn't posted since (http://forums3.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12670656&postcount=45)you felt it necessary to defend his love for Bush.

Democracy in action? More like tail wagging the dog.

Call it what you will.

Compromise? More like......this is my toy and if you don't like it, I will run it into the ground and blame you for the results. Just incredibily horrible BS!!

The democrats got something and the Republicans got something. Both sides had to give up something. That is compromising. You want to call it BS, that is fine and the beauty of living in a free society.

BTW, what happened to Corny? He hasn't posted since you felt it necessary to defend his love for Bush.

How should I know? I am not his keeper!

Call it what you will.



The democrats got something and the Republicans got something. Both sides had to give up something. That is compromising. You want to call it BS, that is fine and the beauty of living in a free society.

It's a compromise, yes, but we got the shit end of the deal in it. The dems got scared because they didn't know what the public reaction would be. They were holding all the cards, and yet still fell for Bush's bluff. It would be like if you hired somebody to repair your $100,000 house, and then he sold it for you for $20,000.

Speaking of money, what kind of minimum wage increase does the bill have?

Speaking of money, what kind of minimum wage increase does the bill have?

$5.25 -> $7.50 I believe.

$5.25 -> $7.50 I believe.

Then yeah, my analogy stands. They didn't even jack it up to what us boys in Washington state get paid.

If it was any other issue I would agree with you completely, sir. However, on this occasion I see another issue. Normally, I would agree with you that the representatives were elected to represent and should do just that. However, in this situation, it takes a highly qualified person to make the decision about Iraq. The vast majority of Americans don't have those qualifications. In past wars, like Korea with McArthur, civilians should have been the deciders of what to do. It was a second generation war and therefore, the level where civilian decision making came into play was in the level of troop involvement. However, this war is a different one. The military's strategic level had moved up to encompass more. The number of troops involved is what the enemy seeks to change. By allowing a referendum to decide these things we are giving a very easy way for our enemy to win. They provide the bloody pictures and the American people provide the lack of will. Just like in Korea where strategy wouldn't have been set by referendum, numbers of troops shouldn't be set by referendum now.

We will simply have to agree to disagree. This President is out of control and has expanded the control of the Executive to embarassing levels. Only Congress may declare war, only Congress may fund or defund wars. The President only has control of the conduct of the war. He has been a complete embarassment, and his record on actually supporting soldiers is utterly pathetic. Only this jackass would cut the VA budget while fighting a war he is utterly unwilling to abandon, despite the best advice of some of the best military officers to wear a uniform.

Iraq must demonstrate within a REASONABLE amount of time to stand up and defend their own interests, and no longer rely upon our largesse. Refusing benchmarks and having the audacity to suggest that setting some clear terms and benchmarks is equivalent to "surrender" is utterly reprehensible.

We lost this thing from the beginning when the military men who refused to conform to the wishes of the architects of this whole sorry episode were canned by those refused to see anything but the most rosy view of this whole sorry conflict. We never have had enough troops to control this, and the blatant refusal to engage in a multilateral, multidimensional approach using military, political and diplomatic power to solve this proves just how many complete and utter amateurs are embedded in this corrupt and vile administration.

We do not work for President Bush, HE works for us. Our money pays his salary and when a temporary employee fails to listen to the boss in any other circumstance, what happens? He gets fired. We have sent him a clear message and the bastard is flat ignoring us. He does not have my support, my respect nor can he claim I gave him total carte blanche to do what he sees fit without my input. To do so is to lie infamously. It makes me sick to my stomach to see this man stand in front of soldiers when he is neither honorable enough nor worthy enough to wear the uniform he and his family so fatuously leased so he would not have to be a REAL man, fly a REAL operational fighter aircraft and go to Vietnam.

Never forget, this man works for us... and right now he is a bad employee who could NOT pass a polygraph if he tried.

We will simply have to agree to disagree. This President is out of control and has expanded the control of the Executive to embarassing levels. Only Congress may declare war, only Congress may fund or defund wars. The President only has control of the conduct of the war. He has been a complete embarassment, and his record on actually supporting soldiers is utterly pathetic. Only this jackass would cut the VA budget while fighting a war he is utterly unwilling to abandon, despite the best advice of some of the best military officers to wear a uniform.

Iraq must demonstrate within a REASONABLE amount of time to stand up and defend their own interests, and no longer rely upon our largesse. Refusing benchmarks and having the audacity to suggest that setting some clear terms and benchmarks is equivalent to "surrender" is utterly reprehensible.

We lost this thing from the beginning when the military men who refused to conform to the wishes of the architects of this whole sorry episode were canned by those refused to see anything but the most rosy view of this whole sorry conflict. We never have had enough troops to control this, and the blatant refusal to engage in a multilateral, multidimensional approach using military, political and diplomatic power to solve this proves just how many complete and utter amateurs are embedded in this corrupt and vile administration.

We do not work for President Bush, HE works for us. Our money pays his salary and when a temporary employee fails to listen to the boss in any other circumstance, what happens? He gets fired. We have sent him a clear message and the bastard is flat ignoring us. He does not have my support, my respect nor can he claim I gave him total carte blanche to do what he sees fit without my input. To do so is to lie infamously. It makes me sick to my stomach to see this man stand in front of soldiers when he is neither honorable enough nor worthy enough to wear the uniform he and his family so fatuously leased so he would not have to be a REAL man, fly a REAL operational fighter aircraft and go to Vietnam.

Never forget, this man works for us... and right now he is a bad employee who could NOT pass a polygraph if he tried.

and I believe that would be.... yes it is.
[/thread]

We elected them and gave them simple, easy to understand instructions, the poll numbers reflect it. We told them to get us out of this war. Sixty percent plus poll numbers on disengaging from this war with a President who is mired at a 32% approval rating and over 60% disapproval.

Maybe because they consider the lives of the Iraqies worth more than your opinions. The Iraq study group have made it clear. Iraq needs a long term US millitary commitment.

We will simply have to agree to disagree. This President is out of control and has expanded the control of the Executive to embarassing levels. Only Congress may declare war, only Congress may fund or defund wars. The President only has control of the conduct of the war. He has been a complete embarassment, and his record on actually supporting soldiers is utterly pathetic. Only this jackass would cut the VA budget while fighting a war he is utterly unwilling to abandon, despite the best advice of some of the best military officers to wear a uniform.

Iraq must demonstrate within a REASONABLE amount of time to stand up and defend their own interests, and no longer rely upon our largesse. Refusing benchmarks and having the audacity to suggest that setting some clear terms and benchmarks is equivalent to "surrender" is utterly reprehensible.

We lost this thing from the beginning when the military men who refused to conform to the wishes of the architects of this whole sorry episode were canned by those refused to see anything but the most rosy view of this whole sorry conflict. We never have had enough troops to control this, and the blatant refusal to engage in a multilateral, multidimensional approach using military, political and diplomatic power to solve this proves just how many complete and utter amateurs are embedded in this corrupt and vile administration.

We do not work for President Bush, HE works for us. Our money pays his salary and when a temporary employee fails to listen to the boss in any other circumstance, what happens? He gets fired. We have sent him a clear message and the bastard is flat ignoring us. He does not have my support, my respect nor can he claim I gave him total carte blanche to do what he sees fit without my input. To do so is to lie infamously. It makes me sick to my stomach to see this man stand in front of soldiers when he is neither honorable enough nor worthy enough to wear the uniform he and his family so fatuously leased so he would not have to be a REAL man, fly a REAL operational fighter aircraft and go to Vietnam.

Never forget, this man works for us... and right now he is a bad employee who could NOT pass a polygraph if he tried.

You, sir, have my profound respect.

Maybe because they consider the lives of the Iraqies worth more than your opinions.
Bush doesn't care about American OR Iraqi opinions....period!!

Poll of Iraqis: Public Wants Timetable for US Withdrawal, but Thinks US Plans Permanent Bases in Iraq (http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/brmiddleeastnafricara/165.php?nid=&id=&pnt=165&lb=brme)

The Iraq study group have made it clear.
Yup, they made it clear alright, yet Bush isn't listening (http://edition.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/12/06/iraq.study.group/index.html)!! What a surprise?

In delivering its report to Bush and Congress, the bipartisan panel listed 79 recommendations for change in Iraq strategy, including direct talks with Iran and Syria as part of a "diplomatic offensive."

All 10 members of the panel, chaired by former Secretary of State James Baker, a Republican, and former Democratic Rep. Lee Hamilton of Indiana, met with Bush at the White House to present the bound report. (View the complete report -- PDF)

The Bush administration has repeatedly rejected calls to seek help from Iran and Syria.

But the report states that "Iraq's neighbors and key states in and outside the region should form a support group" to help Iraq achieve long-term security and political reconciliation -- "neither of which it can sustain on its own."

"If we don't talk to them, we don't see much progress being made," Hamilton said. "You can't look at this part of the world and pick and choose which countries you're going to deal with."

The panel, which was chartered by Congress, warns of dire consequences, both at home and abroad, if the U.S. fails to take action. (Watch Democrats claim vindication on Iraq )

"If the situation continues to deteriorate, the consequences could be severe. A slide toward chaos could trigger the collapse of Iraq's government and a humanitarian catastrophe," the report says.

"Neighboring countries could intervene. Sunni-Shia clashes could spread. Al Qaeda could win a propaganda victory and expand its base of operations. The global standing of the United States could be diminished. Americans could become more polarized."
Yet you blindly follow Bush and his "pick and choose" policies. Nice!! :p

Bush doesn't care about American OR Iraqi opinions....period!!

Poll of Iraqis: Public Wants Timetable for US Withdrawal, but Thinks US Plans Permanent Bases in Iraq (http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/brmiddleeastnafricara/165.php?nid=&id=&pnt=165&lb=brme)


Yup, they made it clear alright, yet Bush isn't listening (http://edition.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/12/06/iraq.study.group/index.html)!! What a surprise?


Yet you blindly follow Bush and his "pick and choose" policies. Nice!! :p

You are indeed right CanuckHeaven. We should have done what the ISG stated LONG ago.