Bottom about to drop out on war support

top gun

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 15, 2007
Messages
4,940
Location
Ohio, USA
Bottom about to drop out on Iraq war support. In the critical recruitment month of June due to graduation the Army has missed and missed badly it's recruitment goal by 1300 new recruits. Add this to the month before missing the target number by 400 and the pattern is undeniable.

One major reason given by the Army is "Mommy syndrom"... parents are now starting to steadfastly oppose their children enlisting due to the fact they would be sent to Iraq.

In other news Ultra Conservative Bill Oreilly today on his radio show said the war in Iraq cannot be won and that we have given the Iraqi people more than enough time to establish a democracy. He goes on to say it's an unfortunate turn of events but we just cannot continue to offer up our men & women in this fight. Oreilly went on to say Republicans in Congress are going to start breaking away from the president in greater and greater numbers because they need to get re-elected in 08.

When Bill Oreilly a Conservative who had highly supported the Iraq occupation sees the bottom dropping out and agrees with it on his show... can there be any doubt just how bad things have gotten for the Bush policy?
 
Werbung:

Truth-Bringer

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2007
Messages
880

When Bill Oreilly a Conservative who had highly supported the Iraq occupation sees the bottom dropping out and agrees with it on his show... can there be any doubt just how bad things have gotten for the Bush policy?

Indeed, but the Washington Neocons are never going to give it up. They will keep their blinders on until the end.
 

top gun

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 15, 2007
Messages
4,940
Location
Ohio, USA
Indeed, but the Washington Neocons are never going to give it up. They will keep their blinders on until the end.

This is true... but if enough moderate Republicans will vote with the Democrats for withdraw or cut funding things could quickly change.

I think there is now some hope of this before the 08 election. A stanch Republican supporter like Oreilly publicly broadcasting on his radio show the need to get out can have some effect on other Republican Senators because a lot of their base listen to him (I know not why.. but they do).
:D
 

lipmonkey

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 23, 2007
Messages
145
Location
Northeast zoo
I'm encouraged by the moderates of the Republican party jumping ship.

Here are the Republicans up for re-election

Alabama Jeff Sessions
Alaska Ted Stevens
Colorado Wayne Allard
Georgia Saxby Chambliss
Idaho Larry E. Craig
Kansas Pat Roberts
Kentucky Mitch McConnell
Maine Susan M. Collins
Minnesota Norm Coleman
Mississippi Thad Cochran
Missouri James Talent
Nebraska Chuck Hagel
New Hampshire John Sununu
New Mexico Pete V. Domenici
North Carolina Elizabeth Dole
Oklahoma James M. Inhofe
Oregon Gordon Smith
South Carolina Lindsey Graham
Tennessee Lamar Alexander
Texas John Cornyn
Virginia John W. Warner

As you can see by the list and Republican defections up to this point, re-election is playing a big role in their attitude towards the troop deployment and how they feel about the war now.:)

What a difference an election can make.;)
 

top gun

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 15, 2007
Messages
4,940
Location
Ohio, USA
I'm encouraged by the moderates of the Repubkican party jumping ship.

Here are the Republicans up for re-election

Alabama Jeff Sessions
Alaska Ted Stevens
Colorado Wayne Allard
Georgia Saxby Chambliss
Idaho Larry E. Craig
Kansas Pat Roberts
Kentucky Mitch McConnell
Maine Susan M. Collins
Minnesota Norm Coleman
Mississippi Thad Cochran
Missouri James Talent
Nebraska Chuck Hagel
New Hampshire John Sununu
New Mexico Pete V. Domenici
North Carolina Elizabeth Dole
Oklahoma James M. Inhofe
Oregon Gordon Smith
South Carolina Lindsey Graham
Tennessee Lamar Alexander
Texas John Cornyn
Virginia John W. Warner

As you can see by the list and Republican defections up to this point, re-election is playing a big role in their attitude towards the troop deployment and how they feel about the war now.:)

What a difference an election can make.;)

That's an excellent post lipmonkey! I'm a little encouraged also. As the 08 election comes closer it will be interesting to see if all that Republican "principles & values" we hear so much about takes a back seat to getting re-elected by joining with the Democrats.

I think I know! ;)

As I listen to some of those guys like Chuck Hagel I think... just leave the pubbies all together... at least be an Independent. He's a war veteran that's knows what's going on and he's not afraid to say it. I give him great props for that!
 

USMC the Almighty

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2007
Messages
2,070
What I don't understand is why anyone thinks that the Democrats will end the war. That was their "platform" for the 2006 midterm elections and what do they do after they get elected? Rename federal buildings. No wonder Congress has a lower approval rating than the President.
 

lipmonkey

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 23, 2007
Messages
145
Location
Northeast zoo
They did more than rename federal buildings.:)

Their vote already shows they want to end the war. They can't get the number of votes to override a presidential veto but at least they are listening to the majority of Americans who want to get out of that sand trap.

Congress traditionally has low approval ratings.
 

USMC the Almighty

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2007
Messages
2,070
According to CNN, of the 383 pieces of legislation that were signed into law during the two-year 109th Congress, more than one-quarter dealt with naming or renaming federal buildings and structures -- primarily post offices.
 

lipmonkey

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 23, 2007
Messages
145
Location
Northeast zoo
The Democrats can't be held totally responsible for the failures of the 109th Congress. The Republicans controlled both houses and the presidency.

If bills got held back it was Republicans who get the blame for that.:)

Besides, 1/4 of the bills aren't exactly the only bills that were approved.

The Republicans get the credit for the failures of the 109th. IMO.

Who's "their" platform are you referring to USMC
 

USMC the Almighty

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2007
Messages
2,070
The Democrats can't be held totally responsible for the failures of the 109th Congress. The Republicans controlled both houses and the presidency.

If bills got held back it was Republicans who get the blame for that.:)

Besides, 1/4 of the bills aren't exactly the only bills that were approved.

The Republicans get the credit for the failures of the 109th. IMO.

Who's "their" platform are you referring to USMC

I'm sorry, I gave you the wrong numbers. That was for the 109th Congress. Here is the legislation of the 110th Congress:

"As of today, only 26 bills have been signed beyond the Iraq War Supplemental. The bold, 'new direction' Democrats promised during the campaign has turned into renaming federal property, extending a few existing laws, extending the Thomas Alva Edison Commemorative Coin Act, and other such issues vital to the Republic."

13 BILLS TO NAME FEDERAL PROPERTY & BUILD A ROAD
* H.R. 49 - To name the "Gerald R. Ford, Jr. Post Office Building"
* H.R. 335 - To name the "Gale W. McGee Post Office"
* H.R. 342 - To name the "Rush Hudson Limbaugh, Sr. United States Courthouse"
* H.R. 433 - To name the "Scipio A. Jones Post Office Building"
* H.R. 514 - To name the "Sergeant Lea Robert Mills Brooksville Aviation Branch Post Office"
* H.R. 521 - To name the "Lane Evans Post Office Building"
* H.R. 544 - To name the "Santiago E. Campos United States Courthouse"
* H.R. 577 - To name the "Sergeant Henry Ybarra III Post Office Building"
* H.R. 584 - To name the "Lyndon Baines Johnson Department of Education Building"
* H.R. 753 - To name the "Clifford Davis & Odell Horton Federal Building"
* H.R. 1129 - To build and maintain a road in St. Louis County, Missouri
* S.159 - To name the "Robert T. Stafford White Rocks National Recreation Area"
* S. 521 - To name the "Gerald W. Heaney Federal Building & United States Courthouse & Customhouse"

5 BILLS TO EXTEND PRE-EXISTING PUBLIC LAW OR PASSED LAST YEAR
* H.R. 137 - Animal Fighting Prohibition Enforcement Act (passed last year)
* H.R. 188 - To extend the Thomas Alva Edison Commemorative Coin Act
* H.R. 434 - To extend the Small Business Act and the Small business Investment Act of 1958
* H.R. 1003 - To extend the United States Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy
* H.J. Res. 20 - Revised Continuing Appropriations Resolution

8 BILLS CO-SPONSORED BY REPUBLICANS OR PASSED WITHOUT OPPOSITION
* H.R. 475 - House Page Board Revision Act
* H.R. 727 - Trauma Care Systems Planning & Development Act
* H.R. 742 - Antitrust Modernization Commission Extension Act
* H.R. 1130 - Judicial Disclosure Responsibility Act
* H.R. 1132 - National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program Reauthorization Act
* H.R. 1681 - American National Red Cross Governance Modernization Act
* S. 494 - NATO Freedom Consolidation Act
* S. 1002 - Older Americans Reauthorization Technical Corrections Act

http://www.lagop.org/PressReleases/index.cfm/ID/95.htm
 

Sgt Schultz

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
188
Location
The suburbs of St. Louis
I'm sorry, I gave you the wrong numbers. That was for the 109th Congress. Here is the legislation of the 110th Congress:

"As of today, only 26 bills have been signed beyond the Iraq War Supplemental. The bold, 'new direction' Democrats promised during the campaign has turned into renaming federal property, extending a few existing laws, extending the Thomas Alva Edison Commemorative Coin Act, and other such issues vital to the Republic."

Are these bills that have been signed by the President or just those that have passed in the house?
 

Beetle Bailey

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2007
Messages
131
What I don't understand is why anyone thinks that the Democrats will end the war. That was their "platform" for the 2006 midterm elections and what do they do after they get elected? Rename federal buildings. No wonder Congress has a lower approval rating than the President.

Sure looks like they voted to do something today.
 

top gun

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 15, 2007
Messages
4,940
Location
Ohio, USA
What I don't understand is why anyone thinks that the Democrats will end the war. That was their "platform" for the 2006 midterm elections and what do they do after they get elected? Rename federal buildings. No wonder Congress has a lower approval rating than the President.

The Dems will definitely end the occupation of Iraq!

You must have forgotten almost half of the Congress is still Republican. Of course their numbers are low. The last election showed 2 major things. #1) The American people want to swing the pendulum of power over to the Democrats and #2) they want a pullout from Iraq to stop more brave American lives from being lost in a conflict we can only sporadically contain but never win. As well as to stop the hemorrhaging of just OBSCENE amounts of hard earned taxpayer money being flushed down the drain... over $600,000,000,000 (six hundred BILLION) as we speak!

Of course Congress has low approval ratings. The way to bump that up... elect a veto override majority and watch those numbers go through the sky! Or elect a Democratic president so they can work together. Either way will work... just need the 08 election.
 
Werbung:

USMC the Almighty

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2007
Messages
2,070
The Dems will definitely end the occupation of Iraq!

You must have forgotten almost half of the Congress is still Republican. Of course their numbers are low. The last election showed 2 major things. #1) The American people want to swing the pendulum of power over to the Democrats and #2) they want a pullout from Iraq to stop more brave American lives from being lost in a conflict we can only sporadically contain but never win. As well as to stop the hemorrhaging of just OBSCENE amounts of hard earned taxpayer money being flushed down the drain... over $600,000,000,000 (six hundred BILLION) as we speak!

Of course Congress has low approval ratings. The way to bump that up... elect a veto override majority and watch those numbers go through the sky! Or elect a Democratic president so they can work together. Either way will work... just need the 08 election.

Why don't they just quit funding the war? They have the power of the purse but refuse to pull funding while simultaneously complaining that they don't have the votes to override a veto.

No vote is needed. All Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi need to do is not allow any funding bills come up for a vote. The only explanation is that they are spineless cowards who are using the war for political gain.
 
Top