Getting Rolled

4:47 pm EST October 22nd, 2007 | Uncategorized | 12 Comments

Harry Reid is talking big on the President’s new request for Iraq War money.

Minutes after Bush spoke, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, warned the president not to expect Congress to “rubber-stamp” the latest request.

“In the coming weeks, we will hold it up to the light of day and fight for the change of strategy and redeployment of troops that is long overdue,” Reid said.

He said the new request means the overall cost of the widely unpopular war now approaches $650 billion since the March 2003 invasion that toppled Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.

“The entire war in Iraq is being paid for with borrowed money,” Reid said.

If the recent performance of the Democratic Senate is any indication, they’ll once again give Bush everything he asks for without a single string attached. Remember, Sean Hannity might say bad things about you, and we can’t have that!

I’ll believe it when I see it, Reid & Co.

Topic:

Related Posts

«
»

12 Responses to “Getting Rolled”

  1. Sean D. Martin says:
    October 22, 2007 at 5:16 pm

    Perhaps the Dems should offer an amendment to the legislation to clarify that nothing in the bill “shall be construed to provide any actual money for the war effort.”

    After all, it worked for the Repubs on FISA.

    Seriously, when are these people who won majority on the unpopularity of staying the course on this war going to actually do anything to change course?

    GOD!

  2. Diamond LeGrande says:
    October 22, 2007 at 8:18 pm

    The Democrats have decided that anti-war types are a captive audience, and will vote for them no matter what. There really is only one other solution, and that’s to not vote for them, vote for a third-party candidate and everyone faces the consequences. There was a minor such issue with Ralph Nader in 2000, and the Democrats threw a fit. Since most of this demographic — the part the Democrats wanted, the more marginal Nader voters who leaned Democrat (about half his total) — repented in 2004, I doubt there will be a similar movement anytime soon. To affect the course of the Democrats, you’d need something bigger than Nader in 2000 was.

  3. Rounds77 says:
    October 22, 2007 at 9:41 pm

    Diamond, normally I would agree with you, but let’s not make the mistake the born again’s are talking about. It would become a game of chicken if Democratic voters also threatened to take their votes elsewhere.

  4. PoliShifter says:
    October 22, 2007 at 11:37 pm

    Reid’s tough talk is supposed to distract us from his caving in and not letting Dodd’s hold stand on the telecom immunity bill.

    Not this time Reid. Talk’s cheap and whiskey costs money.

    I’ll believe it when I see it.

  5. Bruce Godfrey says:
    October 23, 2007 at 1:24 am

    Maybe we need to open ourselves to the possibility that Bush is smarter than we thought and Reid is stupider. When I see him, I see Fredo. Bush is at least a Sonny, if not a Tom Hagen, of late at least politically. We cannot keep calling Bush stupid if stupid is as Harry does.

  6. gary sacco says:
    October 23, 2007 at 8:21 am

    Like a gerbil perpetually running on a wheel, President Bush continues to demand that Congress approve his funding plan for a war that was supposed to pay for itself. Senate majority leader Harry Reid, again, vows to really scrutinize the president’s request. Like a guillotine executioner, he holds over Congress’ heads troop well being.

    Its’ time for Congress to really get tough and, never mind the funding, re examine the original resolution that lead to this Iraq mis adventure. The President of the United States promised war as a last resort after diplomatic efforts failed. That Security Council charade hardly qualifies as diplomacy. Neither does “leave Iraq in 48 hours and we won’t invade” rhetoric. The President, long ago, violated his own resolution. Congress passed the resolution to invade Iraq, they can surely revoke it.

  7. Mickeleh says:
    October 23, 2007 at 8:56 am

    Reid’s (and Pelosi’s) pronouncements about standing up to the Bush administration have the same hollow ring as Bush’s repeated declarations of “progress” in Iraq.

  8. jrcjr says:
    October 23, 2007 at 11:31 am

    diamond, you’re right.

    what they fail to grasp is that turnout is important. someone with a 30% approval rating can still win an election if he could get turnout high enough. bush knew that, and used it.

  9. Zython says:
    October 23, 2007 at 12:29 pm

    Like a gerbil perpetually running on a wheel, President Bush continues to demand that Congress approve his funding plan for a war that was supposed to pay for itself. Senate majority leader Harry Reid, again, vows to really scrutinize the president’s request. Like a guillotine executioner, he holds over Congress’ heads troop well being.

    Therein lies another problem with cutting funding. Where will Bush & Co. cut costs first? Of course, equipping the troops adequately (if you can call the current levels “adequate”). Then, they’ll blame the Democrats for it and say they hate the troops.

    Not to defend Harry Reid completely, of course, he and the Dems should be pushing for a phased withdrawl. However, keep in mind that they’re up against a party that will resort to attacking widows, veterens, terminaly ill men, sick children, and people whose homes have burned down to name a few.

  10. bill l. says:
    October 23, 2007 at 1:29 pm

    The dems are playing an incalculably stupid game here. They are clearly banking on letting public dissatisfaction with the GOP carry them into the oval office in 2008. To that end, they seem to be more than willing to let Bush have his way and soak up all the corporate money they can. However, while I don’t think there is much chance many people will want the alternative to even a compromised democratic party in control in 2008, I think there is a profound chance that an significant percentage of voters will simply not vote at all thanks to the dispiriting actions of the Dems. If that happens and the radical base shows up (not to mention the usual vote tampering shenanigans), hello President Giulani.

  11. neil says:
    October 23, 2007 at 1:42 pm

    Harry Reid will do what he always does. Nothing.

  12. durablend says:
    October 23, 2007 at 6:38 pm

    However, while I don’t think there is much chance many people will want the alternative to even a compromised democratic party in control in 2008

    Don’t kid yourself–there’s plenty of people who simply won’t vote for anyone without that (R) next to their name, no matter who it is. If there even is a Democratic victory (and that becomes even less likely daily thanks to the relentless efforts of the “Capuitulation Party”), it’s only going to be by a few points at most.