House, Senate both pass surrender legislation

[red states rule]

Go back and find the post in this thread where I said that my problem isn't with Bush vetoing the legislation, it was with you making up stuff when the poll numbers say otherwise. I don't believe that Congress should put in a timetable. They should either work with the President and have a mutual agreement on how those funds are going to be spent and fund the troops, pass enough funds for a certain amount of time, or just defund the war outright.

If the polls are with the Dems - why are they giving up on their "principals"?
Libs have bellowed how they are going to end this war - perhaps the voters are not backing them

 

[Dirt McGirt]

If the polls are with the Dems - why are they giving up on their "principals"?
Libs have bellowed how they are going to end this war - perhaps the voters are not backing them

Did you miss the November elections? The voters are backing them. Every time Bush goes against public opinion- especially on Iraq, it's a vote for Hillary.

 

[red states rule]

Did you miss the November elections? The voters are backing them. Every time Bush goes against public opinion- especially on Iraq, it's a vote for Hillary.

Dems ran on:

Not cutting off funding to the troops

Not cutting and running from Iraq

Not raising taxes

Cutting spending

Working with Republicans


So far the Dems are 0 - 5 and keep the books open

 

[Dirt McGirt]

Dems ran on:

Not cutting off funding to the troops

Not cutting and running from Iraq

Not raising taxes

Cutting spending

Working with Republicans


So far the Dems are 0 - 5 and keep the books open

The thing with the Dems is that they catered to any and everyone to take back control of the House and Senate. They don't have the votes within their own party to pull funding in Iraq, raise taxes, or cut spending. I've said since November that the only thing that they'd get done without trouble was passing a minimum wage increase and some consensus on health care reform. Still though, the true small government conservatives are in trouble because of Bush's stubbornness and failed policies. You know times are crazy when middle America is sharing common ground with Pat Buchanon in denouncing Bush's big government and fiscally irresponsible policies.

 

[red states rule]

The thing with the Dems is that they catered to any and everyone to take back control of the House and Senate. They don't have the votes within their own party to pull funding in Iraq, raise taxes, or cut spending. I've said since November that the only thing that they'd get done without trouble was passing a minimum wage increase and some consensus on health care reform. Still though, the true small government conservatives are in trouble because of Bush's stubbornness and failed policies. You know times are crazy when middle America is sharing common ground with Pat Buchanon in denouncing Bush's big government and fiscally irresponsible policies.

They did vote to raise taxes

$400 billion worth

As I said they are 0 - 5

 

[Dirt McGirt]

They did vote to raise taxes

$400 billion worth

As I said they are 0 - 5

Got a link to the Bill? I didn't think it made it past the House.

 

[maineman]

If the polls are with the Dems - why are they giving up on their "principals"?
Libs have bellowed how they are going to end this war - perhaps the voters are not backing them

stupid question.... democrats do not have a veto proof majority. We are going to send the bill to the president...he'll veto it.... which will further damage the standing of both Bush and the republican party with the voters...

 

[maineman]

Hate to break the news to you.................

http://www.usmessageboard.com/showthread.php?t=48383

as i have SAID, that is not news.... Democrats have known since November that we did not have a veto proof majority.... so Bush vetoes the bill.... big deal.... it only makes him and you all look worse for the voter.

 

[Superlative]

They did vote to raise taxes

$400 billion worth

As I said they are 0 - 5

4 years into a war, that has cost a 100 billion+ a year.

And the Dems want a 400 billion tax increase?

What dicks.

How else do you suggest we pay for that?

'Oh mighty cut and pastor'.

Especially with Multi national corporations concerned with short term profits,(and nothing more) moving their money into offshore tax havens to avoid paying taxes,

how do you suggest we pay for the war?

Maybe we could use some of the Taxes collected from the top oil sales?

ExxonMobil made 4.5 million dollars an hour in 06' based on 10 cents a gallon profit. Which the government does not tax (see tax havens above)

So the government, according to you, taxes the little people on fuel sales, thus making more than all the Big oil companies put together from taxes? Right?

I guess the US really doesnt need to raise taxes, especially when they have so much money coming in from the war, to pay for the war.

Maybe the Dems want to get started putting nuclear weapons in space?

Stupid Democrats, and their stupid taxes.

 

[red states rule]

They did vote to raise taxes

$400 billion worth

As I said they are 0 - 5

MM tried the same tactic - he failed as well

The Dems voted for the tax increase

Liberal compassion is getting very expensive to pay for

 

[red states rule]

as i have SAID, that is not news.... Democrats have known since November that we did not have a veto proof majority.... so Bush vetoes the bill.... big deal.... it only makes him and you all look worse for the voter.

So the Dems cave and it is not news?

 

[maineman]

So the Dems cave and it is not news?

how exactly have the dems "caved"? They passed a bill and the president is going to veto it. they never have had the votes to override.

 

[red states rule]

how exactly have the dems "caved"? They passed a bill and the president is going to veto it. they never have had the votes to override.

So why did Dems waste time passing the surrender bill?


"Probably a weakening of is what is going to happen," said an aide close to Mrs. Pelosi - sounds like the Dems are caving to me

 

[maineman]

So why did Dems waste time passing the surrender bill?


"Probably a weakening of is what is going to happen," said an aide close to Mrs. Pelosi - sounds like the Dems are caving to me

they passed it - and all the polls show that the American people support it - because they wanted Bush to sign it, and if he didn't sign it he would VETO it, which would further damage the standing of the republican party in the eyes of the voters. YOu really don't understand how politics works, do you?

 

[red states rule]

they passed it - and all the polls show that the American people support it - because they wanted Bush to sign it, and if he didn't sign it he would VETO it, which would further damage the standing of the republican party in the eyes of the voters. YOu really don't understand how politics works, do you?

If the voters want the surrender date - why will Dems drop it?

 

[maineman]

If the voters want the surrender date - why will Dems drop it?

because they do not have a veto proof majority.......duh

 

[red states rule]

because they do not have a veto proof majority.......duh

But if the people want it, you would think the Dems would stand their ground

Or, perhaops they see polls that show the opposite of your talking points

 

[maineman]

But if the people want it, you would think the Dems would stand their ground

Or, perhaops they see polls that show the opposite of your talking points

why would we stand our ground if we did not have the votes in Congress? that is ridiculous...the troops need funding and we will not be the party that withholds it! We will let YOUR party be the one who refuses to listen to the people and veto the deadline bill.

YOu know what the polls show...they show support for the deadline bill passed by congress.....

 

[red states rule]

why would we stand our ground if we did not have the votes in Congress? that is ridiculous...the troops need funding and we will not be the party that withholds it! We will let YOUR party be the one who refuses to listen to the people and veto the deadline bill.

YOu know what the polls show...they show support for the deadline bill passed by congress.....

If that was the case, you would think your anti war candidates would be doing better in the polls

Voters went with Dems because they promised not to cut and run in Iraq

Of cousre, Dems have not kept any promises up until now - why start now?

 

[maineman]

If that was the case, you would think your anti war candidates would be doing better in the polls

Voters went with Dems because they promised not to cut and run in Iraq

Of cousre, Dems have not kept any promises up until now - why start now?

All of our candidates are anti-war candidates.

Nancy kept all her promises. I am proud of her!