February 16, 2007
The Democratic-controlled House was set to vote late on Friday on a symbolic resolution supporting U.S. forces in Iraq but opposing the Republican president's decision to send another 21,500 troops.The resolution is the first step in a Democratic scheme to defund the Iraq theater of the War on Terror, paving the way for a humiliating American defeat and withdrawal that can then be blamed on Bush and the Republicans."Congress has a right to express its views," White House spokesman Scott Stanzel said. Bush was holding his fire, prepared to fight any subsequent effort by lawmakers to cut funding for the war.
Posted by: Bluto at
11:58 AM
| Comments (30)
| Add Comment
Post contains 155 words, total size 1 kb.
Posted by: Vinnie at February 16, 2007 01:18 PM (fdAim)
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at February 16, 2007 01:30 PM (p52Ne)
Gleep, do your homework, look up Benedict Arnold find out what his motivations were for his actions, they are exactly the same as our current democrats. Treason is treason it doesn’t matter what your motivation for committing it.
http://www.mp3.com.au/artist.asp?id=16834
Posted by: doriangrey at February 16, 2007 01:52 PM (JeeIJ)
I really hate to explane that everyone of those troops is attached to a family. The families all have votes.
So do all the non-binding resolutions that you want. The dhimmicrats may be out of power for the next 20 yrs. They have been out of power for the last 12!
Posted by: Credit Man at February 16, 2007 02:04 PM (+DJYZ)
"Nothing except a battle lost can be half so melancholy as a battle won."
Lefties believe that supporters of the Long War want war. How do you argue against beliefs mired in a rejection of the universal rights of man? How do you argue against the Lefty viewpoint that democracy is a form of totalitarianism?
The Claremont Institute has a very description of this principle in its explanation of the Declaration of Independence:
"WE hold these Truths to be self-evident
The Founders are about to state four truths that they describe as self-evident. But they know that nearly every other political power on earth denied these truths. In what sense, then, can they be called "self-evident"?
The phrase "self-evident truth" has a particular meaning in the western philosophical tradition. It means a proposition whose truth is known as soon as the definitions of the terms in question are known. For example, one knows it is a self-evident truth that "a whole is equal to the sum of its parts," as soon as one understands the definitions of "whole," "sum," and "parts."
For those who do not understand the definitions--for instance, using the example above, for someone who doesn't know what "sum" means--a self-evident truth does not appear true. Nonetheless, it is."
So, I guess you just keep Speaking Truth to Dumb.
Posted by: OregonGuy at February 16, 2007 02:20 PM (+o9uR)
The American people decide on the best course for our country.
This resolution will not be on a strict party line vote. I expect at least 20 Republicans to not vote against the resolution
Americans are against the troop escaltion/surge/reinforcement by at least 2-1.
Posted by: JOHN RYAN at February 16, 2007 02:26 PM (TcoRJ)
Remember, this assclowns have been debating and will vote against the "President's escalation" in Iraq. However, it is not use who escalated the fighting, it was the terrorists. The Surge is the President's reply to the terrorist's escalation. Congress is voting against fighting back, plain and simple.
Calling them traitors is being too kind.
Posted by: Fred Fry at February 16, 2007 02:33 PM (JXdhy)
Posted by: Howie at February 16, 2007 02:46 PM (YHZAl)
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 16, 2007 02:56 PM (6zYAC)
Then again, the US would never have come into existence had Washington and the Continental Congress allowed public opinion to determine the course of the American Revolution.
In fact, modern self-givernance might never have existed at all had Leonidas of Sparta allowed public opinion to preclude his marching to oppose the Persians during a religious festival, ultimately buying time for the other Greeks, most notably Athens, to get organized.
Sometimes, the majority is wrong. Which is exactly why the founders designed a Federal Republic and not a direct democracy.
Posted by: geobandy at February 16, 2007 02:58 PM (5jnES)
Be that as it may, we live in a Republic, not a pure democracy. You might want to study a little of the history of Athens to determine how effective pure democracies are at warfare...and survival.
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at February 16, 2007 03:34 PM (p52Ne)
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at February 16, 2007 03:35 PM (p52Ne)
Posted by: Howie at February 16, 2007 04:14 PM (YHZAl)
Posted by: Legrand at February 16, 2007 04:25 PM (/etUv)
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at February 16, 2007 05:13 PM (p52Ne)
Posted by: Gleep! at February 16, 2007 05:55 PM (Zlbra)
That way we can have them all put their money where their mouth is.
Posted by: davec at February 16, 2007 06:49 PM (yaQM4)
Stop the war,stop the destruction of humanity, stop the imperialism, stop the torture and renditions and begin practicing a compassionate way of living.
Posted by: civil behavior at February 16, 2007 10:06 PM (S1/Ta)
Inanity aside, what do they support? The hopes and aspirations of individual soldiers? Their right to exist? Their nut-sacks? Are the dhommies human jock straps?
The job of a soldier is to kill enemies of his country. The Dhimmies are trying to prevent them from doing so.
EVERYBODY knows that the Dhimmiecrats do not support our troops. They are more than willing to let millions of Iraqis be slaughtered by the terrorists and have Iraq become the next Taliban style Afghanistan. American casualties are just a means to more political power. They want to run from Al Qaeda in Iraq, and pay lip service to Afghanistan--where Al Qaeda was driven out years ago.
That's because they're compassionate.
Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at February 16, 2007 10:31 PM (Dt3sl)
Posted by: Rep J at February 16, 2007 11:01 PM (MVF7/)
Posted by: greyrooster at February 16, 2007 11:09 PM (7m0Mc)
Posted by: greyrooster at February 16, 2007 11:10 PM (7m0Mc)
Posted by: greyrooster at February 16, 2007 11:16 PM (7m0Mc)
Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at February 17, 2007 04:38 PM (p52Ne)
Posted by: greyrooster at February 18, 2007 08:02 PM (v+LdF)
knee beyond reason. As for my alleged insult to Legrand, he spews some profanity-laced diatribe in my direction and then insulates himself from retort by claiming he's a wounded vet. Claiming, mind you, claiming he's a wounded vet, much like dozens of others here claim military service when they have none. I don't know this Legrand fellow nor does Bluto. So let's cut the bullshit and tell Greyrooster of the real sensitivities which earned my my little reprimand.
Posted by: Gleep! at February 19, 2007 10:28 AM (Zlbra)
Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at February 19, 2007 06:41 PM (Dt3sl)
Posted by: greyrooster at February 20, 2007 03:08 AM (PFUNQ)
Posted by: Jeff Bargholz at February 20, 2007 03:30 AM (Dt3sl)
Posted by: Gleep! at February 23, 2007 01:12 PM (Zlbra)
34 queries taking 0.0229 seconds, 185 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
