It passed. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message


puella -> It passed. (3/23/2007 10:02:10 AM)

August, 2008.... it's something at least.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070323/ap_on_go_co/us_iraq




Vendaval -> RE: It passed. (3/23/2007 10:04:08 AM)

It's a beginning.  I feel a bit better now.  Thank you for the update, puella.




michaelOfGeorgia -> RE: It passed. (3/23/2007 10:05:38 AM)

well, it's about freakin' time. we've wasted far to much time, energy and expense on this. like 911...it took the government far too long to do anything. it's a moot point being over there any more. all they accomplished is tacking on even more deaths to the 911 tally.




sambamanslilgirl -> RE: It passed. (3/23/2007 10:07:18 AM)

quote:

Republicans were almost completely unified in their fight against the bill, which they said was tantamount to admitting failure in Iraq.

it's clear as the blue sky outside that dubya and this administration without any sound objectives of why the US is in Iraq have failed their mission in Iraq and have done so poorly.  even though he will veto, it's a good sign that they will override it.




puella -> RE: It passed. (3/23/2007 10:08:22 AM)

They being?? 




michaelOfGeorgia -> RE: It passed. (3/23/2007 10:09:35 AM)

the US government...the slow people with more money than brains




mnottertail -> RE: It passed. (3/23/2007 10:11:51 AM)

That's dangerously close to a political opinion, Mike.

Ron




mixielicous -> RE: It passed. (3/23/2007 10:14:06 AM)

think he'll veto?




Vendaval -> RE: It passed. (3/23/2007 10:17:11 AM)

Definately.  But then it can go back for an over-ride.




KatyLied -> RE: It passed. (3/23/2007 10:19:58 AM)

From linked article:

quote:

Democrats still face long odds of ultimately being able to force a troop withdrawal. In the Senate, Democratic leaders will need 60 votes to prevail — a tall order because they will need about a dozen Republicans to join them. And should lawmakers send Bush a compromise House-Senate measure, both chambers would need two-thirds majorities to override him — margins that neither seems likely to be able to muster.





stef -> RE: It passed. (3/23/2007 10:22:31 AM)

I only passed by 6 votes.  It's highly unlikely they'll get the numbers they need to overturn Shrub's impending veto on the next pass.

~stef




puella -> RE: It passed. (3/23/2007 10:23:42 AM)

Oh I am sure he will, and I have no idea if the votes will be there to override.. but that is besides the point.  The bigger crime by far is  inaction.  If this doesn't make it, they better get up, dust themselves off and try it again.  The people expect it of them, and hey, they work five days a week now just like us... no more excuses! hehe




puella -> RE: It passed. (3/23/2007 10:35:12 AM)

I think the term 'the goverment' isn't a wholly accurate direction in which to vest the majority of your disillusionment.

Remember, the Republican party has controlled both houses of Congress and the Executive branch of our governtment for almost years straight (don't even get me started about how they were not allowed a voice or a presence in many of the committees and subcommittees).   Though I would prefer the Dem's to be less worried about PC and galvanize there balls a bit, it should be noted that in 70 days they have had more oversight hearings and investigation than in the previous 7 years combined, they have passed legisltion on minimum wage increase, ethics reform, have halted billions of dollars in US subsidies given out to Big Oil, have had reform on prescription drugs, have had reform on student loans and enacated all of the bipartisan 9/11 reccommendations... and have had the first legislation passed on oversite in the Iraqi occupation since its inception.  They haven't exactly been sitting on their butts.




Mercnbeth -> RE: It passed. (3/23/2007 10:47:47 AM)

But how did it pass?

Congratulations to the Democratic leadership for again providing an example that there is no difference in the parties. The bill passed because as a result of many politicians coming to feed at the buffet serving their favorite food - PORK.

You'll see from the article that both sides of the aisle were bribed. But will that change anyone's perspective? Of course not. The tropical fish vote along with the spinach and peanut vote will put money in the pockets of the campaign from the representative from those districts. It doesn't take much bribe money to a district to get those heads bobbing.

I haven't read the entire bill in its final form, but I'll let you know where this year's "bridge to nowhere" is being built so you can plan your summer vacations around a visit to seeing your tax dollars at work.

Congress can end the war today if they wanted to stand behind their expressed belief;  but that would require integrity. As many of the Democratic representatives wanted, why not make the timing tomorrow? Put that to a vote and be respected. They say they are acting on behave of the will of the people. Do any of the people agree in deferring? Wouldn't we all be happier to get a result today? Wouldn't we all like to have people we voted for act with integrity? Why should they have integrity when we don't demand it and keep sending the same people back to represent us, because our spinach growing and tropical fish are being taken care of by the "nanny state".

The timing is great - August 2008. A nice deferral for more wasted USA blood. Insurance of deferring the final decision to the peak of the political voting season. And a nice date for the enemies of our troops to add to their 2008 calendars. They now know the date for surrender and can get a discount in production by ordering their 2008 calenders early, and plan for their celebrations.  

This article was published prior to the final vote. Check the details and see how this "success" came about:

quote:

WASHINGTON - The U.S. House began debating a bill to pay for the Iraq war Thursday, but behind the scenes negotiations had as much to do with spinach, peanuts and tropical fish as the unpopular war.
Democratic leaders who are having trouble rounding up enough votes to pass the $124-billion emergency spending bill have resorted to a time-honored tradition: offering up goodies in exchange for a vote.
That includes $25-million for spinach growers, $74-million for peanut storage and $5-million for tropical fish.
Ranchers and farmers in Colorado would benefit from billions of dollars for drought recovery in Republican Marilyn Musgrave's district. Spinach farmers would benefit from millions meant to offset losses from last year's contamination outbreak in California Democratic Rep. Sam Farr's district. Hurricane victims would benefit from billions of aid in Louisiana Republican Rep. Bobby Jindal's district.
Rep. Charles Boustany Jr., another Louisiana Republican, spent more than a year trying to get money to prevent saltwater from damaging rice fields in his district. Fifteen million dollars - twice as much as he wanted - showed up in the Iraq spending bill.
Source: http://www.sptimes.com/2007/03/23/Worldandnation/Iraq_vote_brings_back.shtml




GoddessDustyGold -> RE: It passed. (3/23/2007 11:04:40 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

But how did it pass?

Congratulations to the Democratic leadership for again providing an example that there is no difference in the parties. The bill passed because as a result of many politicians coming to feed at the buffet serving their favorite food - PORK.

You'll see from the article that both sides of the aisle were bribed. But will that change anyone's perspective? Of course not. The tropical fish vote along with the spinach and peanut vote will put money in the pockets of the campaign from the representative from those districts. It doesn't take much bribe money to a district to get those heads bobbing.

I haven't read the entire bill in its final form, but I'll let you know where this year's "bridge to nowhere" is being built so you can plan your summer vacations around a visit to seeing your tax dollars at work.

Congress can end the war today if they wanted to stand behind there expressed belief;  but that would require integrity. As many of the Democratic representatives wanted, why not make the timing tomorrow? Put that to a vote and be respected. They say they are acting on behave of the will of the people. Do any of the people agree in deferring? Wouldn't we all be happier to get a result today? Wouldn't we all like to have people we voted for act with integrity? Why should they have integrity when we don't demand it and keep sending the same people back to represent us, because our spinach growing and tropical fish are being taken care of by the "nanny state".

The timing is great - August 2008. A nice deferral for more wasted USA blood. Insurance of deferring the final decision to the peak of the political voting season. And a nice date for the enemies of our troops to add to their 2008 calendars. They now know the date for surrender and can get a discount in production by ordering their 2008 calenders early, and plan for their celebrations.  

This article was published prior to the final vote. Check the details and see how this "success" came about:

quote:

WASHINGTON - The U.S. House began debating a bill to pay for the Iraq war Thursday, but behind the scenes negotiations had as much to do with spinach, peanuts and tropical fish as the unpopular war.
Democratic leaders who are having trouble rounding up enough votes to pass the $124-billion emergency spending bill have resorted to a time-honored tradition: offering up goodies in exchange for a vote.
That includes $25-million for spinach growers, $74-million for peanut storage and $5-million for tropical fish.
Ranchers and farmers in Colorado would benefit from billions of dollars for drought recovery in Republican Marilyn Musgrave's district. Spinach farmers would benefit from millions meant to offset losses from last year's contamination outbreak in California Democratic Rep. Sam Farr's district. Hurricane victims would benefit from billions of aid in Louisiana Republican Rep. Bobby Jindal's district.
Rep. Charles Boustany Jr., another Louisiana Republican, spent more than a year trying to get money to prevent saltwater from damaging rice fields in his district. Fifteen million dollars - twice as much as he wanted - showed up in the Iraq spending bill.
Source: http://www.sptimes.com/2007/03/23/Worldandnation/Iraq_vote_brings_back.shtml



Bold emphasis Mine...
Applauding loudly.  In fact, the first thought that popped into My head, when seeing deadline dates regarding this bill was "Good call!  Just in time for the 2008 election!"
Please pay attention, folks!
 
Love your new tag line, Mercnbeth! 




Vendaval -> RE: It passed. (3/23/2007 11:45:27 AM)

Time to get the phone, fax, e-mail and letter writing to your
elected representatives folks!




puella -> RE: It passed. (3/23/2007 12:17:51 PM)

Yeah, the funding for the ravages of Hurricane Rita and Katrina  and the provisions for troop training, rest, and armor were nothing to be excited about compared to the tropial fish and spinach bucks....

There is 'pork' in every bill.  It does not negate the good and important that is the main thrust.  I certainly do not know much about the peanut storage problem or what the deal is with the tropical fish.. but am I the only person who remembered the huge tainted spinach problem that severely damaged that industry.. I would bet this money was being used to help offset those problems and to help keep consumer prices low.  (Not all pork is bad.. though it is something tha makes me uncomfortable due to the very high risk of it being used for special interests)  All in all, still seems better than the bridge to nowhere, hehe.




GoddessDustyGold -> RE: It passed. (3/23/2007 12:39:09 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: puella

There is 'pork' in every bill.  It does not negate the good and important that is the main thrust. 



I think it is sad that this is a common attitude.  I am not trying to argue with you, Puella, and I am sure that the ultimate good may not be negated if one agrees with the main thrust of the bill in the first place.  But to accept this, as the American people, only gives tacit permission for these games to buy/bribe votes to continue.  It takes away the integirty of our representatives.  And I think that that was one of the fine points Merc was trying to get across. 
 
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

Congress can end the war today if they wanted to stand behind their expressed belief;  but that would require integrity. As many of the Democratic representatives wanted, why not make the timing tomorrow? Put that to a vote and be respected.

 
Let it stand on it's own.  And let our elected representatives vote for that, and that only.  Then they can justify or defend their vote in a clean and clear manner.  And they might have a shot at honestly representing the will of their contituents.
This nonsense that is completely typical and totally accepted as the way to get things done is why I am all in favor of a "line item veto". 
If the bill can't stand on it's own, then our representatives in congress should not be sweetening the pot.




cyberdude611 -> RE: It passed. (3/23/2007 12:47:54 PM)

It'll never pass the Senate. And even if it does, Bush will veto it. The chances of this becoming law is zero.




farglebargle -> RE: It passed. (3/23/2007 1:42:48 PM)

If Bush had any balls, he'd say, OK, and then accept the 2008 deadline, THEN HOLD THE IRAQIS to a 2007 deadline, just to prove he's got what it takes.

I guess he just can't deliver.






Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125