You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: Politix
Reid Threatens No War Funding
2007-04-03
President Bush and Congress are wrestling for the upper hand in the Iraq war debate, with neither side willing to back down and a top Democrat saying for the first time he wants to yank money for combat. Bush was expected to speak Tuesday to reporters at the White House on Iraq war funding.

The president's remarks come one day after Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who previously has stopped short of saying he would support measures to cut off funds, announced he would try to eliminate money for the war if Bush rejects Congress' proposal to set a deadline to end combat.

"If the president vetoes the supplemental appropriations bill and continues to resist changing course in Iraq, I will work to ensure this legislation receives a vote in the Senate in the next work period," Reid said in a statement.

Reid spokesman Jim Manley said the bill to cut off funds for the war would likely be introduced as standalone legislation and would not be tied to the supplemental spending bill.
No pork attached to garner votes, Harry?
Reid's proposal would be the most extreme and divisive measure to be considered by Democrats to try to force Bush's hand on the war.

Most Republicans and many conservative Democratic senators, including Ben Nelson of Nebraska, have been reluctant to embrace a timetable in Iraq. Nelson agreed last week to swing behind the Senate spending bill, which calls for troops to leave by March 31, 2008, only because the date was nonbinding and not a firm deadline. Nelson also agreed to vote for the measure because Reid added language Nelson wanted outlining steps the Iraqi government should take to improve stability in Iraq.

Reid's promise marks a new shift in strategy for Democrats. Reid was previously reluctant to embrace the suggestion of using Congress' power of the purse and deflected questions on the matter by saying Democrats would provide troops with what they need to be safe.
The safest place is at their home base, eh Harry?

His latest proposal would give the president one year to get troops out, ending funding for combat operations after March 31, 2008, and allowing troops to conduct only counterterrorism operations, train Iraqi forces and provide security for U.S. infrastructure and personnel.

This latest challenge indicates Reid is likely both frustrated by Bush's insistence on the war and his own shaky majority in Congress. Unable to override a presidential veto because he lacks the necessary two-thirds majority support, Reid is trying to ratchet up the pressure on Bush in the hopes the president will cave.
A political expert on the radio this morning said the Dems were "caught between a rock and a hard place. The rock is the President and the hard place is the antiwar activists." [wipes tear]

While Bush has remained steadfast in his insistence on keeping U.S. troops inside Iraq in large numbers, he does so without the blessing of voters. Six in 10 Americans say they favor a timetable to remove all troops within six months, and the number grows to 71 percent if all troops are removed within two years, according to recent completely fair and unbiased AP-Ipsos polling.

But threatening to cut off funding for the troops makes Democrats a target for criticisms that they have turned their backs on the military — a charge administration officials and Vice President Dick Cheney made Monday. "Standing with the troops means getting them the money that they need now," said White House spokeswoman Dana Perino.
Posted by:Bobby

#22  I bet you everything that Dingus Harry will lose. The Prez will whip his ass like the mule he is.

Yeeha!

The Prez has the bully pulpit. The generals will begin talking about what's not being provided and Dingus Harry will end up looking like a used condom.

Posted by: Captain America   2007-04-03 19:06  

#21  This plus Drudges picture of Pelosi in Syria today make me want to puke with disgust. We either need a total re-haul of the House and Senate or someway to allow the citizens of their districts to have an IMMEDIATE VOTE to remove them from office. I know they were elected in the latter solution but with this traitorism in the forefront of their minds maybe the vote would be different.
Posted by: Charles   2007-04-03 17:11  

#20  If Bush will man up, the donks will have their collective cajones painfully squeezed. But, I am not convineced Bush will call their bluff. I think he will blink.

Confrontation isn't Bush's style... or rather President Bush's style. I think he's one of those "The office is too dignified for that kind of behavior" Presidents.

On the other hand he can be unbelievably loyal to people and ideas--even when his supporters would rather he not be (most notably on immigration from Mexico).

I don't think he'll blink on this, but nor do I think he'll ever be as roll-up-the-sleeves, in-your-face confrontational with the Democratniks as you, I or any other Red-Blooded Conservative would want.
Posted by: eLarson   2007-04-03 13:59  

#19  That %28 includes the %27 who believe in UFOs!
Posted by: 3dc   2007-04-03 12:55  

#18  Thanks for the link, Bobby. I wrote a brief note to Senator Reid, explaining that if he even tries to push through his bill to cut off funds for the war in Iraq, I would actively work against Democratic candidates and issues at the local and state levels -- as well as national -- for the next 10 years. Ohio is a swing state, so that might pique his interest.

I may pop by later to share some interesting survey statistics I saw at the NRO's The Corner:

*A Bloomberg poll last month found that 61% of Americans believe withholding funding for the war is a bad idea, while only 28% believe it is a good idea.

*According to a March USA Today/Gallup poll, 61% of Americans oppose “denying the funding needed to send any additional troops to Iraq.”

*That poll also showed that only 20% of Americans want to withdraw the troops immediately.

*Public Opinion Strategies (POS) recently reported that a majority of voters (54%) oppose the Democrats imposing a reduction in troops below the level military commanders requested.

*A POS poll in February found that 59% of voters believe pulling out of Iraq immediately would do more to harm AmericaÂ’s reputation in the world than staying until order is restored.

*That POS poll also finds 57% of voters support staying in Iraq until the job is finished and “the Iraqi government can maintain control and provide security for its people.”

*According to a Time magazine poll also taken in March, only 32% want to withdraw the troops within the next year no matter what happens.
Posted by: trailing wife   2007-04-03 12:42  

#17  
Posted by: anymouse   2007-04-03 12:40  

#16  Â“I will work to ensure this legislation receives a vote in the Senate in the next work period."

“There...Now get outta the lobby of my office you goddamn hippies!
Posted by: DepotGuy   2007-04-03 12:36  

#15  If Bush will man up, the donks will have their collective cajones painfully squeezed. But, I am not convineced Bush will call their bluff. I think he will blink.
Posted by: anymouse   2007-04-03 12:29  

#14  Sent my email via King Reid (via the address given above by Bobby), that is to be published on Leaders something??? It was part of the process of chosing, so I chose it!

Quoted a few parts of this article by Thomas Sowell

and it even let me include a pic, so I included this one:



Posted by: Sherry   2007-04-03 12:27  

#13  Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Benedict Arnold.
Posted by: Anonymoose   2007-04-03 11:07  

#12  Need to bitch slap the donks hard and make it hurt.
Posted by: JohnQC   2007-04-03 10:47  

#11  I sent my letter to the President on Sunday via fax, but I have not heard from the WH yet, heh. The WH needs some fire in its belly, or the dems will run all over them. This play by the dems is as much an act of war against this country as al Q. And I am not going for hyperbole here.
Posted by: Alaska Paul   2007-04-03 10:45  

#10  Reid is a major dick head. This strays from their game plan of carping, critisizing, having no plan, and never being responsible for anything. If they roll the dice and pull funding, they will lose later. In the mean time they are providing comfort and encouragement for the enemy and being a major pain in the ass.
Posted by: JohnQC   2007-04-03 10:37  

#9  Please of PLEASE let Bush play hardball with the Donks on this. They don't appear to have turned their backs on the Military, THEY HAVE TURNED their backs on the military. Shame on them.
Posted by: Cyber Sarge   2007-04-03 10:31  

#8  That'd be great, 'Moose, but I don't think Bush & Co. possess the kind of callous brutality it would take to do that. Casper Milquetoast is not going to be slicing off any Democrat's balls; he going to be trying to "work with them to find a bipartisan solution". Barf...
Posted by: Dave D.   2007-04-03 10:20  

#7  it started this morning with W's press conference
Posted by: Frank G   2007-04-03 10:20  

#6  In the short term, the Pentagon has considerable fat stores laid up to keep the troops going for at least a year. However, this is dependent on Bush just punishing the democrats--making them bleed out the ears--for cutting off the troops.

I'm taking a political attack campaign that would make Karl Rove as much a general as Norman Schwartzkopf. Incredible pressure put on every single democrat in the country until they are pleading to give the Pentagon more money.
Posted by: Anonymoose   2007-04-03 10:06  

#5  This is why the Democrats will not do well in '08.
Posted by: DarthVader   2007-04-03 09:55  

#4  I blame THIS on Nevada. Time to hold the population responsible for their representation. FU nevada for putting this trash into office. FU and Vegas.
Posted by: newc   2007-04-03 09:01  

#3  I just wrote him to tell him what I think of his cowardice and treason. He's a contemptible whelp. Better he should stick to fraudulent land deals.
Posted by: Mac   2007-04-03 08:13  

#2  When you show weakness or lack of resolve in the face of aggression, you get more aggression.

This is such a universal and invariant truth that it may as well be a fundamental principle of Newtonian physics. And any society that fails to muster a near-unanimous recognition of this principle is doomed.

Fucking liberal idiots...

Posted by: Dave D.   2007-04-03 07:11  

#1  You may e-mail Senator Reid here.

Unlike Queen Nancy, who claims to represent everybody, but only listens to her local constituents, Harry accepts e-mails from outlanders.
Posted by: Bobby   2007-04-03 06:14  

00:00