I hear anger at the dems for voting to go to war in Iraq, and anger for them not stopping the troop surge, for not cutting off funding, and for not pulling our troops out. Are you one of the republicans angry at the dems for not stopping bad Bush policy?
2007-02-12 03:03:18 · 10 answers · asked by hichefheidi 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Carl Levin (d-MI) was against it from the beginning, and wqas charged with the responsibility fo finding a resolution (Iraq Sudy Group) I wish ALL reps (including Bush) had respect for those dems who are steadfast in their resolve, and have alternate plans
2007-02-12 03:25:06 · update #1
No, first because I don't consider Bush's policies wrt the War on Terror or Iraq to be bad, and second, because it isn't the Dems who were responsible for it.
But I find it amusing that so many Dems and a few Reps turned against it once the poll numbers turned against it. Dems like Kerry and Hillary, and Reps like Hagel.
I at least respect those that have always been against it, however much I disagree with them. But those whose support of the war efforts followed the polls? Bah, what moral cowards, what a spectacular lack of leadership or integrity.
I am also amused by the cowards who will support a non-binding resolution (aka: stupid and futile gesture) but will not step up and stop funding either the war or the troop surge. That's simple cowardice - they do not want to be held responsible for anything if cutting off funding results in an even worse catastrophe. Everybody should be jeering these craven ninnies for not putting their money where their mouths are.
2007-02-12 03:18:32 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
he's nice. What the President and the phone businesses did is violate the regulation and our structure. If the terrorists supposedly hate us for our freedoms, why are we eliminating what they hate us for? to boot, that is what the FISA regulation is for. they ought to ask for warrants, they actually have the availability that in the experience that they get actionable intelligence and they bounce on it on the on the spot, they have 40 8 hours in which to pass lower back to the court docket and get the necessary warrants. this regulation has been in position in view that 1978 and out of the 35,000 requests made,they have in trouble-free words been denied 2 circumstances. So it isn't as if they have not actually rubber stamp a warrant request. there is no jusfitication for violating the regulation. they have not been wiretapping terrorists, they have been wiretapping individuals. in the experience that they were no longer doing some thing incorrect as has been the President's rivalry, why is there the insistence on retroactive immunity? it is because they recognize they broke the regulation.
2016-11-27 03:55:57 · answer #2 · answered by sposato 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
With the exception that I believe the war is totally screwed up, I agree with Butterbar Bob.
I am annoyed with both sides of congress for not specifically saying what that resolution was supposed to mean. It should have specifically declared war on Iraq if they did not co-operate fully and completely with weapons inspectors immediatly, or specifically say it did not empower the president to wage war without a further resolution. As it is, they weaseled out of their constitutional obligation. As usual.
This idiot 'non-binding' resolution is just more of the same crap. 6 years and they still haven't learned. Vote get out, or vote what needs to be done to secure the place. Anything else is political butt covering, and this is NOT the time for that.
-Dio
2007-02-12 03:37:03 · answer #3 · answered by diogenese19348 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The hard right is led by anger and fear. All of their posts are about who to hate and why we all should be trembling in our boots.
The majority of False News channels spin is based on why to hate those who disagree with Bush and why to fear those who disagree with Bush.
2007-02-12 03:08:01 · answer #4 · answered by Chi Guy 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No, I'm angry at the Dem's for pretending to try and stop and causing more problems. If they got behind it we could finish it as one nation.
2007-02-12 03:10:31 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
I think they are angry at themselves for being republicans in the first place. They are just lashing out at the better people.
2007-02-12 03:10:35 · answer #6 · answered by paul 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Nope! Libbers are flip floppers,they'll have a different
take on things tomorrow,you'll see!
2007-02-12 03:07:57 · answer #7 · answered by babysoftfox 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
What in God's name are you rambling about?
2007-02-12 03:08:05 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Nope, next question...
2007-02-12 03:06:27 · answer #9 · answered by Cat'sPJs 1 · 3⤊ 2⤋
No, but thanks for asking.
2007-02-12 03:06:51 · answer #10 · answered by ItsJustMe 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋