Dems Challenge Bush With Iraq Timetable

Dems Challenge Bush With Iraq Timetable

There are 33 comments on the Newsday story from Mar 23, 2007, titled Dems Challenge Bush With Iraq Timetable. In it, Newsday reports that:

A sharply divided House voted Friday to order President Bush to bring combat troops home from Iraq next year, a victory for Democrats in an epic war-powers struggle and Congress' boldest challenge yet to the ...

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Newsday.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
I SLAM BUSH AS PREZ

Wayne, NJ

#1 Mar 23, 2007
The absolutely without exception never to be beat WORST PRESIDENT EVER IN THE HISTORY OF THIS COUNTRY!

HEY DUMBAYA SEND YOUR TWO BOOZE HOUND DAUGHTERS TO IRAQ TO JOIN IN ON THE FIGHTING!

OTHERWISE SHUT UP YOU WAR EVADER!

MAN WHAT A FREAKING IDIOT THIS CHIPMANZEE IS!
Fat Boy Kessel

Jersey City, NJ

#2 Mar 23, 2007
Get that old bag Pelosi out of the news and off TV. Do you see what she looks like!
Dems

Florham Park, NJ

#3 Mar 23, 2007
democrats= defeatist, there a disgrace to america and are underminding our troops. Democrats= disgrace.
jane

Monterrey, Mexico

#4 Mar 23, 2007
President George W Bush ,is the only President in the world who looks and is an idiot.. What a waste of humane life and a Bunch of Money for the Iraq War...

“Cristianity is not the answer”

Since: Mar 07

Seattle, WA

#5 Mar 23, 2007
This has to be the worst example of today's politics. It doesn't matter what you believe about the war, or the current administration, you should be appalled at this obvious attempt at political positioning.
The last major election nationwide had a resounding end the war motif. The Democratic party won a huge battle in the politcal arena and took back the house and senate, and what are they doing with the power the people gave them?
Nothing.
They are still complaining about the war, and this administrations bull-headed approach, but yet when confronted with how to deal with the issue they were resoundly elected to counter, they are unable to.
It is obvious to me that the Democratic party does not want to end this war until it will guarantee them the Presidential election in November of 08. That is the only reason that the date they included in this legislation is August '08, so that the last two months of campaigning can be about how they ended the war, and they can't even agree on that.

Party politics should be abolished. Both parties are corrupt beyond salvation. Both parties care more about appearing to do the right thing than actually doing it.
This is not to say that a few politicians aren't wholly corrupt or wholly self obsessed, but in general I think the parties no longer operate to do the anything that is in the best interest of the country.

“Viet Vet Speaks Out”

Since: Dec 06

Long Beach, NY

#6 Mar 23, 2007
Dems wrote:
democrats= defeatist, there a disgrace to america and are underminding our troops. Democrats= disgrace.
YOUR A DISCRACE TO AMERICA WE SHOULD HAVE INVADED IRAQ IN THE FIRST PLACE, DO YOU HAVE A KID ON THE GROUND IN IRAQ? IF YOU DO I PREY HE GETS HOME SOON AND IN ONE PIECE. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH DEMOCRATS OR REPUBLICANS. IT'S ABOUT ONE GOVERNMENTS GREED INVADING ANOTHER COUNTRY UNDER FALSE PRETENSES. JUST THINK FOR 1 MOMENT ABOUT THE BLOOD ON THE HANDS OF OUR PRESENT LEADER!!!! VIET VET

“Here we go!”

Since: Feb 07

Tampa, FL

#7 Mar 23, 2007
Rev_Dave wrote:
This has to be the worst example of today's politics. It doesn't matter what you believe about the war, or the current administration, you should be appalled at this obvious attempt at political positioning.
The last major election nationwide had a resounding end the war motif. The Democratic party won a huge battle in the politcal arena and took back the house and senate, and what are they doing with the power the people gave them?
Nothing.
They are still complaining about the war, and this administrations bull-headed approach, but yet when confronted with how to deal with the issue they were resoundly elected to counter, they are unable to.
It is obvious to me that the Democratic party does not want to end this war until it will guarantee them the Presidential election in November of 08. That is the only reason that the date they included in this legislation is August '08, so that the last two months of campaigning can be about how they ended the war, and they can't even agree on that.
Party politics should be abolished. Both parties are corrupt beyond salvation. Both parties care more about appearing to do the right thing than actually doing it.
This is not to say that a few politicians aren't wholly corrupt or wholly self obsessed, but in general I think the parties no longer operate to do the anything that is in the best interest of the country.
Most of this is die to the fact that while most people voted for a change in November, they didn't necessarily vote for a pullout. I would venture to say that alot of dems who are new, carried mostly republican districts, where the voters simply wanted to see a change in strategy. Most of the people in my district,(solidly Republican), voted for a change in strategy. Most people want to use overwhelming force, win, or get the hell out. Most dems in these districts can't vote for a complete pull out if they want to get re elected in two years.
boobTube

Florence, OR

#8 Mar 23, 2007
What a farce that bill turned out as.
Unknown

Bronx, NY

#9 Mar 23, 2007
When there are many many domestic issues, such as Lousiana and Global warming and US contribution, sky roketting oil prices, lack of funding and suport to develop alternate fuel,the President has taken very irresponsible decision regarding Iraq War.
Admit the mistake and withdraw the troops within a few months. The longer we stay in Iraq the lesser they will become responsible and take matters into their hands.Iraq will survivie without US help.
If possible there should be a way to impeach the President when he makes such basic wrong reckless decisions.
A country like US if we cannot fund to develop an alternative fuel what good are these politicians. These people are divided on party basis not to do the right thing.

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#10 Mar 23, 2007
This bill is nothing short of political blackmail.

The only reason the bill got passed was the "pork" placed in the bill by the Dems.

Had the funding bill been a separate bill from the withdrawal/pork bill I would not have had a problem. But for the Dems to tie funding of our troops to such an obvious political ploy is traitorous.

Georgie, VETO the bill and lay the blame for the lack of funding for the troops where it belongs: With Pelosi, Murtha, Schumer, and of course Shillary.

Shame on Them.

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#11 Mar 23, 2007
"The American people have lost faith in the president's conduct of this war," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. "The American people see the reality of the war, the president does not."

Nancy, you don't speak for me.
Just GUNS-n-AMMO

East Hampton, CT

#12 Mar 24, 2007
Mike Long Beach wrote:
<quoted text>YOUR A DISCRACE TO AMERICA WE SHOULD HAVE INVADED IRAQ IN THE FIRST PLACE, DO YOU HAVE A KID ON THE GROUND IN IRAQ? IF YOU DO I PREY HE GETS HOME SOON AND IN ONE PIECE. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH DEMOCRATS OR REPUBLICANS. IT'S ABOUT ONE GOVERNMENTS GREED INVADING ANOTHER COUNTRY UNDER FALSE PRETENSES. JUST THINK FOR 1 MOMENT ABOUT THE BLOOD ON THE HANDS OF OUR PRESENT LEADER!!!! VIET VET
You are without a doubt, a complete and utter baffoon.
1) Iraq finance terrorism for many years, Sadam specifically, not to mention the fact that he was murdering hundreds of thousands of his people with a "Weapon of Mass Destruction" ( MUSTARD GAS ), and plowed them into mass graves.
2) In case you hadnt noticed you "non-vet" liar baffoon, We got our asses kicked by terrorists with the bombings of our embassy's killing hundreds, Marine Barracks some years ago, USS Cole ship attack, our Pentagon and NEW YORK CITY.
3) Only Cowards turn a YELLOW BACK to their enemy upon confrontation. Is that how you happend to survive Nam ? That is, if you even served.
4) It is always in the best interest to take the fight to the grounds of the opposing enemy rather than drawing the front line here, baffoon.
5) I served, and did so with honor, integrity, and took a oath. We all knew the risks, as they know now. We had a job to do, just as they have one to do now. Maybe you should do your part here instead of critisizing and ridicule, and being part of the problem, be part of the solution in ridding this world of those who's sole purpose in life is to kill you and your family. For that is EXACTLY what Islamic Radical Fascists want.
Noticer

Philadelphia, PA

#13 Mar 24, 2007
It's disheartening that this is the best our Congress can do to end an occupation that simply costs us the lives of our best & bravest on an ongoing basis, not to mention billions of our treasury dollars every week.

The right blathers on about Democrats not having a plan, but it's the Republican leadership that lacks any plan beyond continuing the occupation indefinitely. "The Enemy" McCain refers to consists for the largest part of Iraq's inhabitants (you know, the folks we were're supposedly there to "liberate"), and they will therefore "hang on" forever and will continue to resist our rule until we leave - be it now, or ten years and tens of thousand more American lives from now.

The situation in Iraq is a military occupation, not a war. You cannot "win" an occupation. You can only end it.

The sooner the better.
haha

Arlington, VA

#14 Mar 24, 2007
Bush vows he'll veto it. He's all mad because he can't have his way. What a spolied baby boomer. If it wasnt for his dad, he would probably be the assistant manager at WALMART, which is where he should be.

“Obama = Corruption”

Since: Dec 06

Keyport N.J

#15 Mar 24, 2007
Support the troops in their mission Mr. President. Use the Veto.
NIMBY Island

Willimantic, CT

#16 Mar 24, 2007
I didn't think the whiny wimpy democrats could go much lower, but this is the biggest disgrace in American history. God help us.
Jones

Bergenfield, NJ

#17 Mar 24, 2007
The House Dems Representatives led by Nancy Pelosi proved their loyalty to the Islamic terrorists of al Qaida that attacked US on 9/11 2001 and the Iranian evil regime of Ahmadinajad.
Nancy Pelosi proved that she is ready to bribe the Dems representatives with billions of Pork money from the American people taxes so that they will be ready to stub our US troops in the back while they are sacrificing their lives in the battlefield for the security and destiny of the American people.
Nancy Pelosi proved that she cannot care less about US troops victory and defeat of the Islamic terrorists in Iraq and that she wants to undercut their operation regardless if they win the war, and let the Islamic terrorists and Iran take control of Iraq and it oil fields, with severe consequences to US economy and security.
Nancy Pelosi proved that she is the most anti-American and Anti-US troops Speaker of the House in US history and that she is ready to betray our US troops and their families while giving great victory to the worst enemy of US on a silver platter: The Islamic terrorists and the terrorist controlled country Iran.
boobTube

Florence, OR

#18 Mar 24, 2007
Sultan of Swing wrote:
Support the troops in their mission Mr. President. Use the Veto.
Am I stuck in a time warp. What did he veto yesterday?
Noticer

Philadelphia, PA

#19 Mar 24, 2007
Eron wrote:
<quoted text>
Most of this is die to the fact that while most people voted for a change in November, they didn't necessarily vote for a pullout. I would venture to say that alot of dems who are new, carried mostly republican districts, where the voters simply wanted to see a change in strategy. Most of the people in my district,(solidly Republican), voted for a change in strategy. Most people want to use overwhelming force, win, or get the hell out. Most dems in these districts can't vote for a complete pull out if they want to get re elected in two years.
"Overwhelming force" against whom, exactly? "The enemy" actually consists of many different factions with a multitude of motives. The majority of them inhabitants who have turned to militant means to get us out of there. What's the point of staying, just to say "We didn't let them 'win?'"

It's no longer a war, it's a military occupation. We can't "win" that. We can only stay, or leave. It's far past time that we left, already.
Noticer

Philadelphia, PA

#20 Mar 24, 2007
NIMBY Island wrote:
I didn't think the whiny wimpy democrats could go much lower, but this is the biggest disgrace in American history. God help us.
Yeah, God help us. The Iraqi's might pull their army back together, invade us, and take us over, hu? We're doomed.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Walter Jones Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Porn Still Turning Up in the Federal Workplace ... Mar '18 DUH 9
News Cherokee, Lumbee argue over recognition bill (Apr '07) Sep '17 New River - 993
News Trump to GOP: Pass health care bill or seal you... (Mar '17) Mar '17 Lottery Traitors 176
News Office of Management and Budget Mick Mulvaney, ... (Mar '17) Mar '17 Chilli J 33
News 2 Republicans join Democratic effort demanding ... (Mar '17) Mar '17 Chilli J 73
News Party Unity? Trump faces criticism from Gop ran... (Feb '17) Feb '17 YouDidntBuildThat 6
News It's time for an independent commission on Russ... (Feb '17) Feb '17 Cheech the Conser... 9