97 - 0

From Wake Up Americans

Joe Lieberman along with McCain, Kyl, Graham, and Coleman, offered up an amendment to the Defense Authorization Act, confronting the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran over its proxy attacks on American soldiers in Iraq, and it passed with a vote of 97-0.

Roll call can be found here.

Statement of purpose: To require a report on support provided by the Government of Iran for attacks against coalition forces in Iraq.

Liebermans statement from his site (linked above)

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Senators Lieberman, McCain, Kyl, Graham, and Coleman today introduced a bipartisan amendment to the Defense Authorization Act, confronting the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran over its proxy attacks on American soldiers in Iraq.

The amendment details the publicly available evidence put forward over the past year by General David Petraeus, commanding general of Multi-National Force Iraq, and others about Iran’s violent and destabilizing activities in Iraq.

The amendment states that “the murder of members of the United States Armed Forces by a foreign government or its agents is an intolerable act of hostility against the United States,” and demands the government of Iran “take immediate action” to end all forms of support it is providing to Iraqi militias and insurgents. The amendment also mandates a regular report on Iran’s anti-coalition activity in Iraq.

“For many months, our military commanders and diplomats have warned us that the Iranian government has been training, equipping, arming, and funding proxies in Iraq who are murdering our troops,” said Senator Lieberman. “This amendment is a common sense, common ground statement of the Senate to Tehran: we know what you are doing, and you must stop.”

“American officials attest that the government in Teheran seeks to bleed the United States and render unsuccessful our efforts to bring about a stable and self-governing in Iraq,” said Senator McCain. “This amendment will send a clear signal: Iran’s activities in Iraq are wrong, and they must end immediately.”

“The Iranians are attempting to thwart our policies in the Middle East by actively supporting terrorists who are killing our troops in Iraq,” said Senator Kyl. “It is time we acknowledge this hostility against us, and this amendment tells the Iranians we will not tolerate any actions which threaten our troops or allies.”

“The evidence is increasingly clear the Iranian government is working to destabilize the Iraqi government,” said Senator Graham. “It is long past time for Congress to speak out about this destructive behavior by Iran. We need one voice, and I expect it will be a unified bipartisan voice, speaking out and condemning these actions by the Iranian government.”

“The United States will not tolerate Iran’s hostile attempts to sabotage our efforts in the Middle East region,” said Senator Coleman. “On my last trip to Iraq, our Minnesota troops in Southern Iraq showed me Iranian-made explosives that were used against them on convoy missions. This crucial amendment makes it clear to the Iranian government, and any other government in the region that seeks to harm our soldiers, that providing any form of support to Iraqi insurgents will not be tolerated and must cease immediately.”

The text of the actual amendment should be here, when they actually get it up on the site. (That link will be changed if it ends up being put up at a different URL)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Michael Goldfarb reports:

Iran Amendment Passes 97-0

The Lieberman amendment--confronting Iran on its proxy attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq--just passed the Senate unanimously, 97-0.

So let's look at the scorecard this week so far: The Webb amendment on trying to limit Iraq deployments went down to defeat. The Lieberman amendment confronting Iran passed unanimously. So much for the long-predicted collapse--at least so far. There will be some tough votes in the days ahead. Let's hope the Senate Republicans continue to hold the line.

Meanwhile, Senator Lieberman had this to say of the Senate's unanimous vote, confronting Iran:

"Today's unanimous vote sends a strong, clear message from the entire Senate to the Iranians that we know what they are doing in Iraq, and they must stop...This is a warning to the Iranians that whatever differences divide us politically here in Washington, we stand united against these outrageous attacks."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What does it mean? For one thing, take a stroll to Spree's place and read some comments from the far-left moonbat blogs. They are upset. Good. Maybe they will just end it all and do the world a favor.

97 - 0. If 97 Senators are all on the same page when it comes to Iran killing our people, why then do they support AQI from killing our people? I don't get it. Oh. Wait. Politics. OK. Never mind.

The Hill

According to sources, Boehner and Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) were urging solidarity among House Republicans, explaining that they must distinguish themselves from their Senate colleagues.

A spokesman for Boehner said his comments were in no way meant to trivialize the war or the senators’ decisions. Rather, they were meant to emphasize the importance of allowing the troop surge to work and to urge GOP lawmakers to reserve their judgment on the situation until September, when Gen. David Petraeus is scheduled to brief Congress fully on the progress in Iraq.

CNS News

President Bush's Iraq "surge" strategy is not dead and should be given a chance to succeed, according to two security analysts who met at the American Enterprise Institute Monday to discuss military policy and politics.

AEI resident scholar Frederick Kagan and former acting Army Chief of Staff Gen. Jack Keane spoke out with rare voices of approval for the president's policy as part of an AEI panel called "Assessing the Surge in Iraq."

Kagan was critical of the surge's detractors, saying they had jumped to attack a policy that had only recently begun. He expressed incredulity at the idea that the surge was somehow not working.

"The current strategy has not failed. It just began June 15th," Kagan said.

Keane agreed, adding that the strategy needed more time. He also stressed that the situation was generally improving in Iraq and that coalition forces were gaining momentum in their efforts.

"All the Iraqis that I spoke to, numbering in the hundreds, believed the security situation was getting better," he said.

WSJ

The "surge" is working. Will Washington allow the current progress to continue?

In Washington perception is often mistaken for reality. And as Congress prepares for a fresh debate on Iraq, the perception many members have is that the new strategy has already failed.

This isn't an accurate reflection of what is happening on the ground, as I saw during my visit to Iraq in May. Reports from the field show that remarkable progress is being made. Violence in Baghdad and Anbar Province is down dramatically, grassroots political movements have begun in the Sunni Arab community, and American and Iraqi forces are clearing al Qaeda fighters and Shiite militias out of long-established bases around the country.

This is remarkable because the military operation that is making these changes possible only began in full strength on June 15. To say that the surge is failing is absurd. Instead Congress should be asking this question: Can the current progress continue?

One should be wondering why it is that the folks with the lowest approval ratings in history want to once again get shown the door. Reid and Pelosi cannot scrape enough votes together to override GWB's veto pen and those of us in the New Media won't allow them to win this round either. We trounced the ILLEGAL Alien Shamnesty bill into the dirt and we will do the same this time around as well.

We are strongly united in defeating the Leftinistra.

Be fair warned. We are watching.

Thanks Nancy...For NOTHING!

Send A Thank You To Nancy Pelosi!!
Send A Thank You To Nancy Pelosi!!
Thursday, April 12, 2007 12:40 AM

Send Nancy and Friends A Thank You Card Today!!

Please pass this one around to everyone you know!! (or don’t know)

House and Senate Democrats have betrayed our troops and betrayed America. They have voted for a needless, pointless surrender in Iraq.

Krueger Slams Pelosi

And Gunny Sergeant Krueger Said to Pelosi…
And Gunny Sergeant Krueger Said to Pelosi…
Friday, March 30, 2007 5:33 PM

A Message From Gy Sgt Krueger

A word from [Gunnery]Sergeant Krueger, USMC, to Speaker Pelosi:

How can you even think of pushing forward legislation to set a withdrawal date for US forces from Iraq? Do you know how much you embolden the insurgency here in Iraq? YOU ARE JEOPARDIZING THE LIVES OF US SERVICEMEN AND WOMEN WITH YOUR ACTIONS. You and your fellow Democrats are causing the Al Qaeda supported insurgency to use more catastrophic attacks against us and Iraqi forces. You will see more SVBIED’s with chlorine gas, more VBIED’s against civilians and security forces every time you and other Democrats open your mouths. You will have to live with yourself and try to sleep at night knowing all the defeatist propaganda you have spewed forth is nothing more than ammunition for Islamic extremist groups around the world and more US deaths. The unsuspecting people who support you know nothing of what goes on over here; you fill their heads with nonsense and talk of pullout to appease them. The only thing that will happen is the establishment of an extremist Islamic state where sharia law is the law of the land and no one is safe.

Sunni Moslems here are coming to our side and joining forces with the government to defeat Al Qaeda(AQI) here in Iraq, but they need our help and they need us to stay. I have spent the last 7 months(3rd tour) in Iraq. I have watched Iraqi citizens pick up weapons and form militias in areas to join forces with Iraqi police/Army. Common citizens who fight and die because we are standing next to them. Not cutting and running or talking of withdrawal. This started after the surge forces the President sent here arrived. We have lost Marines also and it hurts more than you will ever know but we have made a commitment to these people. And I for one will not abandon them and I have of a platoon of Marines who feel the same. I have no control over what happened in 2003 and why we invaded Iraq. That is another discussion, but we are here and they need our help to rid their country of these terrorists. Yes eventually we will leave but we need to do a phased withdrawal without a timeline. At least without a timeline that is published for the world to know. The citizens of Iraq need to see some solidarity in our government, Democrats and Republicans coming together and supporting our President in this war. There is a middle ground here for both parties, you all need to come together and work towards a solution. What we don’t need is more theatrics and clashes between the parties. AQI loves to see that it causes them to do more attacks and continue with the murder and intimidation campaign against Iraqi citizens.

Someone needs to step forward and bring the two parties together. Meet and talk about what you all can do and come to an agreement on the war. Like I said before we need a unified front to present to the world on the Iraq war. The Iraqi people need a morale boost, they need to see we are behind them and we will support them and not cut and run. The insurgency needs to see our resolve is strong and we will endure and defeat them. Extremist Islamist terror groups use our perceived weakness against us. They misunderstand our kindness for weakness. Weakness shown to the world brings more recruits to their cause; it causes more civilian deaths and violence.

Please I implore you to not push this agenda. I have watched you on television and you seem to be using this as a steppingstone to further your political career. STOP!!! More is at stake here. Our countries word is on the line, my word to many Iraqi citizens is on the line. Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines lives are at stake. We know the risks and we face them daily. Don’t make our mission more difficult.

Gunnery Sgt. Stephen F. KruegerPlatoon Sgt 3rd Recon Bn

Sam Johnson

What A REAL War Hero Says…
What A REAL War Hero Says…
Friday, March 23, 2007 8:31 PM

War Hero, Rep. Sam Johnson, On the Ill-Advised Democrat Plan to Micromanage the War

“We must give all our men and women in uniform everything they need to thwart the insurgency in Iraq and come home safely and soon. You know, we can’t tie the hands of the guys on the ground with timelines or benchmarks. And worse, we shouldn’t be using an emergency troop spending bill as a way to finance the political gimmickry of special interest projects.”(Rep. Sam Johnson, 3/23/07)

THE ENTIRE SPEECH FROM TODAY…the current CONgress disgusts me…

Sam Johnson blasts pork-laden troops’ spending bill

Today on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives U.S. Congressman Sam Johnson (3rd Dist.-Texas) spearheaded the Republican efforts against a so-called emergency troop spending bill filled with non-related spending. Specifically, the emergency bill for the armed forces in harm’s way contains: $25 million for payments to spinach producers; $120 million to the shrimp industry; and $74 million for peanut storage, among other things. The Democrat’s bill barely passed 218 to 212 with one Member of Congress voting present.

A 29-year Air Force veteran, Johnson served in both the Korean and Vietnam Wars. Johnson spent nearly seven years as a Prisoner of War, more than half of that time in solitary confinement. Johnson experienced fighting in a war for this country when the Congress pulled the plug on funding and he vowed that when he returned home, he would never, ever let that happen again.

In January Johnson introduced legislation calling on Congress to support all troops in harm’s way and prohibiting Congress from cutting any funding for the armed forces while deployed. Johnson’s measure, H.R. 511, has 179 co-sponsors. This week, Johnson filed a discharge petition to force an up-or-down vote on his bill. The discharge petition is a parliamentary procedure that demands 218 signatures for a bill to go straight to the floor for full House consideration.

Johnson’s remarks follow:

“I rise today in support of a clean emergency spending bill for our troops…but this one is all smoke and mirrors.

“We must give our men and women in uniform everything that they need to thwart the insurgency in Iraq and come home safely and soon…We must not tie the hands of the guys on the ground with timelines or benchmarks, and worse, we must not use the emergency troop spending bill as a way to finance the political gimmickry of special-interest projects.

“It’s just exasperating that the Democrat leaders have turned the Emergency Troop Spending Bill into a pork-barrel project give-away. This bill gives piles of money to shrimpers, spinach farmers, and peanut storage. What does throwing money at Bubba Gump, Popeye the Sailorman, and Mr. Peanut have to do with winning a war? Nothing!

“The special-interest projects added to increase the likelihood of this bill passing are an insult to the troops who want, need and deserve our full support. The Democrats are trying to buy the majority vote today one pork project at a time perhaps…. because the majority does not support their slow-bleed surrender strategy.

“Since the President announced his new plan for Iraq in January, there has been measured, steady progress. He changed the rules of engagement and removed political protections.
“Coalition forces nabbed more than 50 suspects and dismantled a bomb factory in Iraq over the past few days. Coalition forces in Iraq detained seven suspects with reported ties to foreign-fighter groups.

“In Ramadi, troops nabbed four other suspects with alleged ties to al Qaeda. In Mosul, coalition forces captured a former paramilitary leader who allegedly is responsible for setting up al Qaeda terrorist training camps in Iraq and Syria.

“During another operation, troops captured a suspected terrorist with alleged ties to an al Qaeda car-bomb and assassination cell. We must seize this opportunity to move forward and not stifle future success and harm troop morale.

“More importantly, I want to know, how many of you have ever asked your constituents, ‘Do you want to lose in Iraq?’ I think if you asked that question, ‘do you want to lose in Iraq,’ Americans will whole-heartedly say no! We have smart, strong men and women serving in Iraq and they need our help. They need the full support of their country and their Congress.

“Our troops don’t need 435 generals in Washington declaring, ‘we’ll send you money for bullets, but we won’t send you bullet-proof vests.’ Our troops don’t need folks in suits sitting in wood-paneled rooms on Capitol Hill saying, ‘we’ll send you armored tanks, but we won’t send you gas.’ Literally, this bill forces our guys on the ground to fight a war with one arm tied behind their backs. That’s just smacks of defeat.

“Most of you in the chamber know that I spent nearly seven years as a Prisoner of War in Vietnam, more than half of that time in solitary confinement. Well, that was during my second tour in Vietnam.

“During my first tour I worked for General Westmoreland at MAC-V Headquarters, Military Assistance Command Vietnam. While working late at night we had a bunch of men involved in the first real hand-to-hand combat using bayonets. It was gory. This was war. Turns out that someone sent back footage to Washington that would match the opening scene of Saving Private Ryan.

“In the middle of the night the red phone rang and I answered it. I heard an earful that is not fit for the house chamber. Something like, ‘This is the White House. What in the hell is going on over there?’

“I replied, ‘I’ll wake up General Westmoreland.’ They slammed the phone down and hung up.
“Starting in 1965, we had folks in Washington trying to tell the Generals how to run things on the ground in Vietnam. A generation ago we saw what happens when you stop the funding…and America stiffs its friends. As a matter of fact, just this morning Iran captured British sailors. This bill prevents us from responding from Kuwait for our close allies, the British, in an emergency.

“If you don’t believe me, just think back to the dark day in history when we saw visions of American Marines airlifting Vietnamese out of the U.S. Embassy. Do you remember that? That’s what happens when America makes a commitment, Congress cuts the funding, and we go home with our tails between our legs.

“The brave Marines who died on that day in 1975 while innocent people desperately clung to life on a rope tied to a helicopter are a testimony to what happens when Congress cuts the funding and we leave without finishing the job. We can not let that happen again and I don’t think Members in this Chamber want that to happen.

“Frankly, we all want our troops to come home… when the job is done. We want to win!

“Internationally announcing our timelines for withdrawal literally hands the enemy our war plan….and gives them hope that they’ll win if they just wait it out.

“What world-super power would do such a thing? We are the United States of America.
We are the premiere military force on the globe. We are the land of the free and the home of the brave. Surely we do not go around announcing to the world how we will conduct and win a war.

“Surrendering is not an option. Abandoning our troops is not an option. Look around you - we are America!

“Do you want to lose in Iraq? Voting to set a hard exit date for U.S. troops in Iraq and imposing strict standards for deploying forces gives hope to the enemy and is a prescription for failure.

“Worse - forcing Members of Congress to decide on this issue when the bill is cluttered with excess money for spinach and peanuts is abhorrent, infuriating and ill-advised.

“My dear colleagues - if you really want to debate the merits of a timed withdrawal - give each Member of Congress an up-or-down vote so we can vote our conscience. The sweeteners in this bill are political bribery and our troops deserve so much better than this.

“We can not abandon our men and women in uniform simply for politically charged benchmarks wrapped up in fat-cat constituent projects.

“If we learned anything from those brave Marines who died trying to save innocent people that day at the embassy in Vietnam…it’s that the Marines never quit - neither should we!”

Mitch Slapped

MITCH SLAPPED!!!!
MITCH SLAPPED!!!!
Thursday, March 15, 2007 7:05 PM

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! The Defeatist Leftinistra went DOWN in flames today!!! COOL!! Well done!!

Mitch Slapped!!

What the Hades…the WHOLE article. IT IS WORTH IT!!!

Thursday, March 15, 2007

“Mitchslapped”

Posted by Hugh Hewitt 6:17 PM

That’s the term flying around the e-mails discussing today’s vote in the Senate defeating the Democrats’ full throated demand for defeat on a timetable.

GOP Senate Leader Mitch McConnell rolled the Dems today. And McConnell’s statement on the floor as to the president’s constitutional authority as Commander-in-Chief was pointed and correct. Hat’s off to the new GOP chief.

Here’s a statement from McConnell’s office that deserves reading in full:
Wednesday, March 14, 2007

“Setting a date certain for withdrawal will send a chill up the spine of every Iraqi who has dared to stand with America.”

Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell spoke on the Senate floor Wednesday regarding S. J. Res. 9, the latest Democrat proposal to set a timeline for withdrawal from Iraq. The following are his remarks from the floor.

“Today, Senate Republicans will agree to move to a debate on an important question, and that question is this: Should a majority of Senators direct the activity of the War in Iraq?

“Republicans are eager to engage in this debate on the Reid Resolution because it’s different in kind from any previous Democratic proposal.

“It is unprecedented in the powers it would arrogate to the Congress in a time of war; it is a clear statement of retreat from the support that the Senate only recently gave to General David Petraeus; and its passage would be absolutely fatal to our mission in Iraq. “Previous resolutions proposed by the Democrats were a mere statement of opinion, or sentiment. This one has a binding quality. It would interfere with the President and General Petraeus’ operational authority to conduct the war in Iraq as he and his commanders see fit. It would substitute for their judgment the judgment of 535 members of Congress.

“And the judgment they’ve made is this: That Iraq is a distraction in the Global War on terror, and that U.S. troops should begin to withdraw in four months, with all combat forces leaving within a year. That’s the judgment that the Reid proposal makes.

“This is the memo our enemies have been waiting for.

“Osama Bin Laden and his followers have repeatedly said that the U.S. does not have the stomach for a long fight with the terrorists. Passage of the Reid Joint Resolution will be the first concrete sign since Sept. 11, 2001, that he was right on target.

“Timetables are bad. But don’t just take my word for it.

“Speaking at the National Press Club in 2005, my good friend the Majority Leader himself said this: ‘As for setting a timeline, as we learned in the Balkans, that’s not a wise decision, because it only empowers those who don’t want us there, and it doesn’t work well to do that.’

“Six months after that, the Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Biden, said this: ‘A deadline for pulling out … will only encourage our enemies to wait us out’ … it would be ‘a Lebanon in 1985. And God knows where it goes from there.’ That was our friend, Joe Biden, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

“And three months later, Senator Clinton made the same point when she said, ‘I don’t believe it’s smart to set a date for withdrawal,’ said Senator Clinton. ‘I don’t think you should ever telegraph your intentions to the enemy so they can await you.’ “That’s the Majority Leader, Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, and a prominent Democrat presidential candidate.

“Surely Senators Reid, Biden, and Clinton have not changed their minds about who would benefit the most if we set a date certain for withdrawal. They know just as well as I do that this is what the terrorists have been waiting for — and just what our allies in Iraq, and the entire region of the world have feared.

“Setting a date certain for withdrawal will send a chill up the spine of every Iraqi who has dared to stand with America. Millions of good men and women have helped us in this fight. Since we arrived in Iraq, nearly 120,000 Iraqis have volunteered to serve in their army. More than 8,000 Iraqis have died in uniform to defend the fledgling Democracy over there. And recently, in Anbar province, we’re told that roughly 1,000 Sunnis volunteered for the police force over a period of a couple weeks.

“These brave men and women, Mr. President, are watching what we do here: They know, as we do, that chaos will engulf Iraq and the rest of the region on that day. They know they and their families will likely face a firing squad soon after we leave. And the message we send them with this resolution is this: good luck.

“General Petraeus understands the importance of the mission in Iraq, and his new Mission to Secure Baghdad. In a recent letter to the soldiers under his command, he wrote: The enemies of Iraq will shrink at no act, however barbaric. They will do all they can to shake the confidence of the people and to convince the world that this effort is doomed. We must not underestimate them. Together with our Iraqi partners, we must defeat those who oppose the new Iraq. We cannot allow mass murders to hold the initiative. We must strike them relentlessly. We and our Iraqi partners must set the terms of the struggle, not our enemies. And together, we must prevail.

“These are the words of the man this body recently sent to Iraq. They are the words of a military commander: confident yet realistic, and committed above all to victory. This is the voice of courage and resolve in the face of danger. We do best to listen to voices like this, which speak of victory rather than defeat and withdrawal. We owe it to him, his soldiers, our allies, and the world.

“Republicans are ready for this debate.”

Roy Blunt Says to the WFRs

Towel Throwers
Towel Throwers
Thursday, March 15, 2007 5:00 AM

From Roy Blunt, via email:

Roy Blunt of Missouri is the Republican whip in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Throwing the fight in Iraq

By Roy BluntMarch 14, 2007

House Democrats had an opportunity last week to send an unambiguous message of strength and resolve to our troops in harm’s way in Iraq, to our allies and enemies around the world and to Americans here at home.

Instead, they used the occasion to announce a timetable for wholesale retreat, declare their intention to hand over command-and-control authority in Iraq to 535 commanders in chief on Capitol Hill and, already on a roll, float the bizarre idea to close the terrorist detention facility at Guantanamo Bay and import hundreds of the most insidious elements of the worldwide terrorist network to the United States to process like common criminals. Quite a week, I would say.

Tomorrow Democrats will attempt to follow up that performance by bringing their plan to committee for executing their slow-bleed strategy in Iraq. But what we understand of the product now is enough to tell me their plan would yield disastrous results.

Here’s what we know for sure: In the next few weeks, Democrats will bring an “emergency” funding measure to the House floor, weighed down with billions in nonemergency spending and loaded up with reams of rules and restrictions on how and when vital resources may be spent for our men and women in uniform.

Of course, those limitations will not apply to the $735 million included for health insurance programs or the $500 million for the wildfire suppression activities or, for that matter, the $400 million for energy assistance accounts.

But on issues relevant to war and peace — on matters of basic operational authority in Iraq — Democrats insist that bureaucratic reporting requirements for commanders on the ground be ratcheted up. But don’t worry: If Gen. David Petraeus crosses all his t’s and makes sure to initial every page, Democrats assure him that he may be allowed to conduct his mission until 2008. Of course, if the reports don’t pass bureaucratic muster, he may have to pack his forces up as early as June.

Does anyone think that demoting our military generals to administrative assistants represents our best chance to achieve our goals in the region? Does anyone believe our commanders in the field have at their disposal too much authority and too much flexibility to get the job done?

Of course, a plan to fail may be precisely what the “Out of Iraq” crowd hopes to achieve. In fact, it fits nicely within their larger strategy to certify defeat, assert congressional control over something Congress is ill-suited to handle, and execute a precipitous withdrawal of on-the-ground support — as early as three months from now, by their own accounts.

Only hours after proving how hard it is for their caucus to come up with a resolution on emergency military spending, House Democratic leaders want to micromanage an active military engagement being fought on an ever-shifting landscape of sand, soil and public opinion 6,000 miles from our shores. Or, just maybe, they don’t want anyone to win a war that some of them no longer want to fight.

This willingness to accept defeat unites Republicans and divides Democrats — both on Capitol Hill and around the country. But not only is their plan fundamentally wrong on its merits, it is exceedingly cynical in its design. After all, if Democrats thought this latest strategy represented the best way forward in Iraq, perhaps they wouldn’t have needed to attach the amount of pork they did; money that will be needed to influence their growing chorus of dissenters into supporting the final product.

Congress has an important role in debating the merits and execution of the Global War on Terror in general, and the conflict in Iraq in particular. But using the emergency funding package for our soldiers in uniform as a platform to attach operational strings and nonemergency spending doesn’t meet the standard of common sense — whether you’re trying to command an army unit, or win a war.

Blood Sucking Parasites

Responsible Approach?
Responsible Approach?
Wednesday, February 28, 2007 11:52 AM

I think NOT! It is more like an a blatant coward’s response to the coming Ultimate Reproach. What a bunch of LOSERS these Defeatocrats, aka Socialist Liberals, Pacifistic Cowards are, eh? They hide behind the facade of “caring” but what do they really care about? Their careers as life-long blood sucking parasites called politicians. That’s right. Parasites.

Poli = many.Tic(k)s = blood suckers.Politics = many blood sucking parasites.Democrats Back Away From War Fund Plan Liberals Are Losers…PERIOD!! Anyway, here is an excerpt on how the Leftinistra have backed off due to their ignorance of the Will of the American People (as opposed to the stupidity of the White Flaggers):

“…House Democratic leaders are backing away from a plan to scale back U.S. involvement in the Iraq war by using Congress’ most powerful tool _ withholding money in the budget.

Instead, party officials said Tuesday, leaders are weighing a proposal that would attempt to embarrass Bush into abandoning his war strategy. Under a plan discussed behind closed doors, Democrats probably would fund President Bush’s entire $93.4 billion request for war spending this year but require that any troops sent into battle that don’t meet certain standards receive a presidential waiver and that Congress be notified of the shortcoming.

The compromise is an attempt to please members who want to end the war immediately by cutting funding and others who do not want to appear as though Democrats are turning their back on troops.

“I think it’s a responsible approach,” said Rep. Chet Edwards, D-Texas…”

Chet Edwards = Moron