05-07-2007, 06:34 AM | #1 (permalink) |
Location: Washington DC
|
A reasonable solution to the Iraq funding statement....or not?
The Dems are looking for a reasonable way to proceed on the Iraq funding issue. The question is whether Bush really is as well or whether he will continue to insist that a funding bill have "no strings" attached (ie a blank check) despite no public support (a new low of 28% job approval in the latest Newsweek poll) and dwindling Republican support (at least privately).
Are the Repubs in Congress willig to compromise or would they rather continue with their bombastic rhetoric about Dem "surrender" plans. Congreeman Obey, the Chair of the House Approrpriations Committee ,has reportedly come up with a compromise (still in the planning stage) that would provide funding through July, then require Iraq to meet hard benchmarks on politcal and security goals in order for Congress to approve addtional funding beyond that. There would be no speficic timeline on US troop withdrawal. The bill would also remove all the domestic spending in the bill (some of which is reasonable to consider in an "emergency bill and some just plain ole pork) and vote on those in a separate emergency funding bill. http://electioncentral.tpmcafe.com/b...ing_up_to_bush There is not much more detail yet, but it sounds reasonable to me. Your thoughts or other options on the best way forward?
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire |
05-07-2007, 07:42 AM | #2 (permalink) | ||
Banned
|
It seems "reasonable"....after a four year occupation, removing the timetable for withdrawal, because our CIC, with his 28 percent approval rating, demands it?
With 133 Iraqi lawmakers are calling for US troops to leave, and the rest are planning a two month vacation... Quote:
Quote:
Maybe we have a different perspective, because this experience is in our family. Iraq occupation is not worth one more US casualty. It is not a time for anyone in the house or the senate, who voted for the bill that Bush vetoed, to vote for anything less, as far as a timetable for withdrawal. I favor small supplemental appropriations....force Bush to budget for the sixth year of this occupation, and seventh full year of war in Afghanistan. The emergency here is 16 month deployments for already over extended troops. The politics are that it is Bush who is destroying his party's chances for gains in the 2008 elections, not the democrats....and there is no public "sign" that his faithful, "get it", yet: This, to me is sobering....lemmings in lockstep with their failed president: http://www.wewintheylose.com/bloggers.php |
||
05-07-2007, 08:17 AM | #3 (permalink) |
Junkie
Location: Ventura County
|
What is the Democratic Party's case for continued funding of the war, even to July? I don't get the distinction between thinking the war was a mistake, poorly managed, lost - and, the desire to put more money into what they and many others think is a hopeless cause.
My thought is that you don't compromise on this issue. I think you have to support the Bush plan or fight it with 100% effort. Compromise leaves you with something half-assed, either way.
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch." "It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion." "If you live among wolves you have to act like one." "A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers." |
05-07-2007, 08:21 AM | #4 (permalink) | ||||
Banned
|
The withdrawal timetable must remain in any new bill drafted that includes the entire supplemental appropriation. Legislators must protect us, and our troops from the decisions of the American and Iraqi administrations:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||
05-07-2007, 08:45 AM | #5 (permalink) |
Location: Washington DC
|
Ok..so thats two votes (ace, host) for both sides digging in their respective heals, spewing bullshit at each other, until one is left standing.
Is that how you guys characterize strong "leadership"? Rather than trying to reach a pragmatic, acceptable (to some degree by both sides) solution that has a greater likelihood of success and support across the country than either extreme? Oh well, I hope wiser heads prevail on both ends of Pennsylania Ave.
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire |
05-07-2007, 08:58 AM | #6 (permalink) |
Junkie
Location: Ventura County
|
I asked what is the Democratic Party case for continued funding? Given what they have said, I don't get it.
How do you compromise being at war? You are either at war or you are not. I understand compromising to achieve peace, but that is not what is on the table, the issue is do we stop spending money on a lost war and bring our troops home or do we continue to fight in Iraq.
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch." "It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion." "If you live among wolves you have to act like one." "A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers." |
05-07-2007, 09:04 AM | #7 (permalink) |
Location: Washington DC
|
Ace...I dont believe it is that black and white, but we obviously differ on the war/peace and the qualities of leadership to resolve it.
IMO....what is on the table is how best to transition from a US led occupation (war) to an Iraqi led peace as quickly as possible, with a minimal loss of addtional lives.
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire |
05-07-2007, 09:04 AM | #8 (permalink) |
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
|
the proposal is a bit....um...vague, isnt it?
any idea what these "benchmarks" will be? and what would the implications be of a string of vetos? if i restrict the frame of reference to the world of horsetrading and even that at the level of what might sound ok (without knowing any of the details that is), i would favor the simultaneous floating of the de-authorization proposal or an equivalent and this short-term funding thing. the only reason for this is that it would effectively set up a more far-reaching confrontation if the short-term thing were to be vetoed (but again, the devil is in the details and there aren't any yet).... aside:why is there no public pressure being brought to bear on this issue? moving outside the frame that would take such horsetrading as the extent of the political again, what i would really favor is a long hot summer for the bush people, even if the effect of that long hot summer is an acceleration of a slide toward a serious political crisis...so far as i am concerned, the states is already in one, but in slow-motion. the remarkable feature of this crisis is that everyone seems committed to pretending it isnt there.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite |
05-07-2007, 09:35 AM | #9 (permalink) | |
Location: Washington DC
|
roach.... I assume the proposal is an intentionally vague trial balloon.
I think, at the very least, the benchmarks would include those that Bush/Rice suggested last year, but have never been firmly applied to the Iraqi govt: * reversal of the de-Baathification laws that are widely blamed for alienating Sunnis by driving them out of jobs in government ministries; * final approval of an oil law regulating distribution of oil revenues and foreign investment in the oil industry; * the holding of local elections and reform of Iraq’s Constitution * measurable progress on training and capacity of Iraq security forces The LA Times has an interesting article: Secy of Defense Gates may not be following Bush's Playbook: Quote:
And the debate rages on with no end in sight. What does that accomplish?
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire |
|
05-07-2007, 09:42 AM | #10 (permalink) |
spudly
Location: Ellay
|
Benchmarks are better than timetables for all concerned, save the President.
Whether we leave this week or next year, the Iraqis would benefit from us achieving at least a couple of tangible goals. Congress gets to look like they care about the issue rather than humiliating the president. Most of all, benchmarks would mean that for continued funding, President Bush would have to make a case for progress going down a bulleted list. If there's progress, so much the better for the Iraqis, the troops, and for us. If there isn't, the media glare will be far uglier for Bush than anything a forced withdrawal would have accomplished. Ace, the case I would make for continued funding with strings is the old standby: "you break it, you buy it". To me, the idea of doing the damage we've done without setting viable structures in place is pretty repugnant. In that vein, I'm not all that interested in President Bush's proposal of more of the same, without strings, benchmarks, or expiration. There's a reason the corporate world doesn't function that way.
__________________
Cogito ergo spud -- I think, therefore I yam Last edited by ubertuber; 05-07-2007 at 09:56 AM.. |
05-07-2007, 09:57 AM | #12 (permalink) | ||
Banned
|
Quote:
The only "benchmark" I see the leaders of the Iraqi government supporting are Shi'a political dominance and a summer vacation. IMO, it is long past the point of benchmarks...they are indistinguishable from four years of "they'll stand up, so we can stand down", rhetoric. The people in the Iraqi government are in it for the power and the money, and the Baker ISG report plainly told us that most Iraqi troops refuse to serve away from their home districts, and take a week off per month to bring their pay home to their families.....bullshit, considering that they refused to serve very far from home, in the first place. Further, the ISG found that being AWOL is common and does not result in consequences to the absent Iraqi soldier. Quote:
There is no "there", "there"....nothing that Iraqis are willing to fight and die for....so why should Americans be making a coninued, open ended, life and death sacrifice, to give "benchmarks more time".....more time for more Americans to be killed, with no evidence of increased Iraqi commitment to preserve and advance what Americans are ordered to fight and die to maintain, until "they stand up"! C'mon, uber....."supporting the troops" should not mean leaving them in a place, with no timetable for withdrawal, after the president's hand picked Iraq assessment committee, led by one of his family's closest and most supportive friend and "fixer", described the local military and the police, after a 42 month effort, (as of last fall) to "stand them up", to provide security for the sustainability of their own country in it's present politcal form.... Waiting for "benchmarks" to "take hold", and nothing more.....is not to be taken seriously, IMO...in view of the amount of American time, money, and lives to achieve an Iraqi "stand up"....with so little commitment indicated coming from Iraqis.....in the course of such a long period of time, US encouragement, and the incentive of a peaceful, "dictator free" environment to live and build a future in. This is over....the Baker ISG report says so.....and 5 months later, nothing has happened to contradict it's findings.... Last edited by host; 05-07-2007 at 10:15 AM.. |
||
05-07-2007, 10:09 AM | #13 (permalink) |
spudly
Location: Ellay
|
Benchmarks could come in many different forms. They could be set by increased support for international peace-keeping forces from the UN. They could be set around increased infrastructure improvements, around placing economic structures that reinforce stability. You're only considering the types of benchmarks that would reinforce the current situation.
If it is your belief that there is no internal support for a unified Iraq and that the tensions within that country are so high that there is no chance for peaceful, pluralistic resolution, then your desire for complete withdrawal implies that you wish to see a "lord of the flies" style pogrom as the region degenerates into warlords and factions fighting over the tempting natural resources. I do not share this desire. Before abandoning innocent people to that fate, I'd rather see more creativity applied to the idea of stabilizing the region. In the end, that may mean revisiting the political structures we've already created.
__________________
Cogito ergo spud -- I think, therefore I yam |
05-07-2007, 10:29 AM | #14 (permalink) | |
Banned
|
I'd rather see a rapid elimination to the "hell" that so many American families go through....now in 16 months doses.....wondering whether they'll get the knock on the door, from two crisply uniformed representatives of the Secretary of Defense who "regret to inform them".....
....have you ever, uber.....have you ever rehearsed how you would react to such a knock on your door.....I have....starting for the first time, last October. We'll be doing it again...starting this fall. This is not worth the sacrifice demanded of our troops, or of their families. Iraqis have had their opportunity. They have chosen to fight each other, or the American occupier..... Quote:
I'm not willing to.....and I've only lived a small "taste" of what it must be like to actually answer the door at the knock of two crisply uniformed....on behalf of the secretary....we regret to inform you that...... |
|
05-07-2007, 10:31 AM | #15 (permalink) | |
Junkie
Location: Ventura County
|
Quote:
If the Democrats and the majority of US voters want a new direction, the Democrats need to force the issue. I don't want to discuss it any further, but this is why I had a problem with the confirmation of General Patraus. The Democrats should have forced the adoption of a new plan at that moment in time, now we have wasted more lives, time and resources. When will the Democrats take a stand, if they won't do it now with Bush's popularity below 30%, and when most people in Iraq want us out, when will they ever do it? Bush will push his Iraq agenda until the day he leaves office, we all know that. And, Bush is almost certain not to compromise anything material unless forced, we all know that too. So we sit, wait while they play games in Washington.
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch." "It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion." "If you live among wolves you have to act like one." "A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers." |
|
05-07-2007, 10:34 AM | #16 (permalink) |
spudly
Location: Ellay
|
Yes. I was a military brat and spent many years living on bases.
You don't have a monopoly on this. These memories don't change my opinion of the disaster that would ensue if your view were the adopted by our leadership.
__________________
Cogito ergo spud -- I think, therefore I yam |
05-07-2007, 10:44 AM | #17 (permalink) | |
Illusionary
|
Quote:
|
|
05-07-2007, 10:48 AM | #18 (permalink) | ||
Banned
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
05-07-2007, 10:52 AM | #19 (permalink) | |
spudly
Location: Ellay
|
Quote:
__________________
Cogito ergo spud -- I think, therefore I yam |
|
05-07-2007, 10:52 AM | #20 (permalink) | |
Junkie
Location: Ventura County
|
Quote:
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch." "It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion." "If you live among wolves you have to act like one." "A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers." |
|
05-07-2007, 10:55 AM | #21 (permalink) | |
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
|
Quote:
The best way to end the war is to push decent legislation about ending the war through the Senate and to get BIG support. The idea is to bypass the veto-machine in the oval office. |
|
05-07-2007, 10:57 AM | #22 (permalink) | |
Junkie
Location: Ventura County
|
Quote:
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch." "It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion." "If you live among wolves you have to act like one." "A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers." |
|
05-07-2007, 11:04 AM | #23 (permalink) | |
spudly
Location: Ellay
|
Quote:
__________________
Cogito ergo spud -- I think, therefore I yam |
|
05-07-2007, 11:04 AM | #24 (permalink) | ||||
Junkie
Location: Ventura County
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch." "It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion." "If you live among wolves you have to act like one." "A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers." Last edited by aceventura3; 05-07-2007 at 11:16 AM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost |
||||
05-07-2007, 11:32 AM | #25 (permalink) | ||
Banned
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
05-07-2007, 01:31 PM | #26 (permalink) | |
Illusionary
|
Quote:
and was ill directed in my opinion, as it was the compromise he asked for in the first place. |
|
05-07-2007, 02:15 PM | #27 (permalink) |
Location: Washington DC
|
ace....the political realities as I see it is that there is no way the Dems can get a veto=proof majority for a new plan. There are not enough Repubs who will abandon Bush completely....there may be enough who will support benchmarks in order to allow the Bush surge to continue for a few more months. If the surge continues to fail by later summer, it gives the Dems time to coalesce around one plan and the Repubs the political cover they will need to support an alternative to more of the same.
There are no good alternatives. We should be looking for the least damaging to the US, our troops, the goverment of Iraq and the Iraqi people. Poliitics is, and has always been, the art of compromise and consensus buidling. But it requires real leaders who wont act as petulant children stubbornly crying my way or no way, something lacking particularly in the WH, but in Congress as well.
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire |
05-07-2007, 02:22 PM | #28 (permalink) | |
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
|
Quote:
|
|
05-08-2007, 08:10 AM | #30 (permalink) | |
Junkie
Location: Ventura County
|
Quote:
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch." "It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion." "If you live among wolves you have to act like one." "A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers." |
|
05-08-2007, 10:10 AM | #31 (permalink) |
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
|
i have some trouble posting to threads about this any more because the topic just makes me angry.
there is no debate about this. the war in iraq was is and will remain wholly unacceptable to me. that it could have happened is an index of dysfunction at the system level. that it continues is an index of dysfunction at the system level. that the administration responsible for it remains in power is beyond comprehension to me--i understand the procedural and political (in the trivial sense) situations--but that changes nothing. benchmarking and low approval ratings and so forth mean very little: the fact of the matter is that this administration remains in power and that fact is somehow ok. well, it isnt ok. it is an index of fundamental problems within the american political structure itself. in the end, there is no accountability: not if the crime is huge enough, not if addressing it would require thinking seriously about systemic change. i dont understand this: it seems that the historical situation in which we find ourselves is characterized by a deep, deep ideological paralysis that is repeated and repeated in a total lack of imagination, a complete lack of any sense of coherent alternatives to a socio-economic and political order that is self-evidently incoherent, self-evidently adrift, lost..and in its anxiety about being adrift (those traces that cannot be wished away), the existing order is eating itself---incoherent at the level of rationality, incoherent at the level of ideology, self-blinding at the level of consequences, assessment of consequences, incapable of adjustment, a particular type of incoherence the primary characteristic of which is a simple refusal to see--a refusal to see the consequences of capitalism in its present form, a refusal to see the problems in the nature and characteristics of state power, a refusal to address the evacuation of any meaningful democratic elements in the american political process. there are so many problems that it is hard to know where to start listing them. when i manage a list, it is always the same list. in the context of a micro-space like this, repetition becomes itself a grind. there is no sublimation to be had from it. there is nothing to be had from it. and so i get tired. i have to say that i admire the fact that host is able to continue, that he is able to direct his anger in ways that enable him to continue---his is a deeply personal anger--the vectors that shape it are such that he can express it and still remain to some extent within the parameters of debate here, such that they constitute meaningful actions. mine is more abstract. i dont know what else to say at this point. it is not this space, but the fact that the situation addressed across it does not move. the larger stasis is simply repeated in the smaller space. this is not a "normal" situation we are living through. this is a kind of crisis, it seems to me, the kind of thing that is not reducable to television imagery and as a consequence is not named for us. but there is always the stream of other "crises" that we can watch unfold and deplore or feel bad about, all of which are in a certain sense distractions in themselves and at another level are fundamentally problematic in that they feed into the circuit of avoidance that seems to be the basic characteristic of the times we are living in. i doubt this makes sense. i am not going to edit it. i am going to go do something else.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite |
05-08-2007, 01:16 PM | #32 (permalink) | |
Location: Washington DC
|
Quote:
The Dems had numerous plans that may or may not have had the support of the American people. All the plans took a stand against Bush....and they coalesced around the one they thought was best for the US and Iraw and had the best chance of passage...the emergency supplemental bill that included this languague: Directs the President to commence the phased redeployment of U.S. forces from Iraq no later than 120 days after the enactment of this Act, with the goal of redeploying, by March 31, 2008, all U.S. combat forces from Iraq except for a limited number essential for: (1) protecting U.S. and coalition personnel and infrastructure; (2) training and equipping Iraqi forces; and (3) conducting targeted counterterrorism operations.How is that NOT a plan to get out (at least relative to the "surge" plan)? Because it doesnt call for immediate and complete withdrawal? I think it is far more responsble by giving the Iraqis time to get their shit together, politically and in terms of their security forces. Yet, it had virtually no Repub support, many of whom characterized it as the "surrender bill"....and you think Repubs will support something stronger in the current environment? We have far different views of the political realties. I am looking a solution that can get bipartisan support...I have no idea what you are looking for or believe the highly partisan Congress can unite around. to end this failed endeavor.
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire Last edited by dc_dux; 05-08-2007 at 01:53 PM.. |
|
05-08-2007, 01:34 PM | #33 (permalink) |
Junkie
Location: Ventura County
|
Perhaps it is the way they communicate their message.
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch." "It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion." "If you live among wolves you have to act like one." "A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers." |
05-08-2007, 03:04 PM | #35 (permalink) |
Junkie
Location: Ventura County
|
Democrats are near perfect. I get your point. However, perhaps there are Republicans at the grass root level looking for answers, and it is the rhetoric that is preventing an open assesment of alternatives to the Bush plan.
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch." "It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion." "If you live among wolves you have to act like one." "A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers." |
05-08-2007, 03:38 PM | #36 (permalink) |
Location: Washington DC
|
ace....I am looking for any post of mine where I said or implied the Democrats are near perfect. Can you point me to one, please. The closest I could find was the most recent one where I said that Congress needs to demonstrate better leadership skills.
I agree that it is the rhetoric that is preventing an open assessment of the alternative plans. Calling such plans surrender plans, abandoning the troops, caving into terrorists, etc....is not helpful. Republicans at the grassroots had the same access to the details of the plan in the emergency supplemental as I had. I took the time to read it before making a judgement. Did you?
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire Last edited by dc_dux; 05-08-2007 at 03:44 PM.. |
05-08-2007, 04:22 PM | #37 (permalink) | ||
Junkie
Location: Ventura County
|
I simply suggested that the Democrats are not effectively communicating the plan you outlined, your response was:
Quote:
In your last post you say: Quote:
What I don't see is where there is room for Democrats to do a better job, of perhaps communicating their plan to grass root Republicans. As a Republican, I don't understand what the Democrats want. It is confusing to me. Perhaps, I am not at the grass roots level, perhaps Democrats don't care about getting me on board with their plan. I get that also.
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch." "It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion." "If you live among wolves you have to act like one." "A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers." |
||
05-09-2007, 04:50 AM | #38 (permalink) |
Illusionary
|
Americans, in general do not know what they want in this.....it's extremely complicated. On the one hand I think we all want Iraq to be a safe, healthy, and functional State capable of sustaining itself and creating stability in the region. On the other hand we really can't accept that People are Dying in huge numbers for a plan that seems incapable of bringing this about. I doubt very much ANY policy change at this point can correct the situation, and create a dynamic in the area that will lead to peaceful resolution.
Expecting the Democrats in congress to fix this mess is rather disingenuous on the part of anyone attempting to understand just how screwed up Iraq now is. We have managed to remove the infrastructure (what there was of it) of prosperity, thereby creating instability in the population and making any hopefor peace in the region unobtainable. At the same time we have placed our troops into the middle of the inevitable civil strife, poverty, and religious powerplay likely to come about in the aftermath of an invasion within the area. The history of the middle east should have been payed attention to before we took on something NO ONE in history has managed to succeed at, Peace in the middle east. Case in Point: http://www.mapsofwar.com/images/EMPIRE17.swf The Democrats it seems, have come to the realization that this was a terrible mistake, and as the current leadership on high is blind to the obvious they are in the inenviable position of trying to get us out of an unwinnable situation. Sucks to be them. |
05-09-2007, 06:28 AM | #39 (permalink) | ||||
Junkie
Location: Ventura County
|
Quote:
I think if the Democrats could clearly communicate what the underlying basis for their plan is, I could understand where they want to take us. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch." "It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion." "If you live among wolves you have to act like one." "A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers." |
||||
05-09-2007, 06:32 AM | #40 (permalink) |
spudly
Location: Ellay
|
Ace, this isn't a difference between Democrats and Republicans - it's a difference between the Congress and the White House. The White House speaks with one unified voice, and that gives Congressional Republicans something to fall in line with, even though in reality, they probably have as many plans among them as the Dems do. The Democrats don't have a similar leader - so they make a plan by compromising and combining the many different goals of many different people.
I think you may be ignoring this fact in order to set the Dems up to fail an impossible standard that you invented, which is speaking with one voice as persuasively as the White House.
__________________
Cogito ergo spud -- I think, therefore I yam |
Tags |
funding, iraq, reasonable, solution, statementor |
|
|