2007-04-03 04:53:07 · 25 answers · asked by Darth Vader 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I think it is totally unacceptable that congress has approved the funding that President Bush has requested and now he wants to veto it.
2007-04-03 05:06:55 · answer #1 · answered by Feeling Mutual 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
This is an emergency spending bill specifically to provide for the troops in harms way. To stuff it with pork and attempt to grab power away from the Commander-in-Chief in an unconstitutional manner is an unpatriotic and unamerican thing for the congress to do.
As the Commander-in-Chief and as the Chief Executive of the United States the president would be derelict in his duty to sign this bill. It is his duty to veto it.
.
2007-04-03 12:10:55 · answer #2 · answered by Jacob W 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Grow up, the bill is nothing but politics emanating from the left. Why would he sign a bill that would basically turn Iraq over to Al Quaida and kill thousands of lives? You can't tell the enemy when you are pulling out troops. The dems know this, it's just a transparent attempt to stick it to GW before the approve the money he is asking for, which they will do as soon as they waste some more time grandstanding.
2007-04-03 12:00:36 · answer #3 · answered by Scott B 7 · 9⤊ 1⤋
No. The Dems knew before they drafted a Bill with a time-line that it would get Vetoed. They knew that and that is why they loaded it with pork to get it passed. They want a Veto so they can rant about how they were trying to do something and scream "balls in your court". The Dems need to quit using our Troops as political pawns. That is OUTRAGEOUS.
2007-04-03 11:56:40 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 1⤋
Some of the pork in the so-called Iraqi Timeline Bill was for extra bill-boards in certain states like Nevada and Florida and more money for the advertising companies who make them. So much for supporting the troops. Unless of course the bill boards were going to be erected to say "Support Our Troops", but I doubt it!
2007-04-03 12:03:36 · answer #5 · answered by Princess of the Realm 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It is acceptable because
1) the pork added.
2) The president is the Commander in Chief not Pelosi, Reid or anyone else in the house or the senate and this bill an attempt for the congress to dictate the actions of the war which IS NOT THEIR JOB.
2007-04-03 11:59:34 · answer #6 · answered by ken 6 · 6⤊ 1⤋
Is it "UNACCEPTABLE" for democrats to push through a measure that they knew beforehand would be vetoed thereby playing politics with our troops needs and safety?
2007-04-03 12:03:10 · answer #7 · answered by pepe32 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
The bill doesn't provide the troops with their needs. It provides plenty of pork for the politicians' districts, though.
2007-04-03 12:09:00 · answer #8 · answered by rustyshackleford001 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No. Pelosi and Reid and the other traitors to the US in the pay of Islamic terrorists want to tie the hands of our American fighting men, and cause the deaths of our servicemen and women in Iraq to become meaningless. It is unacceptable to betray the US the way Pelosi and Reid have.
2007-04-03 12:19:43 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
No, it is not. The fact is that the Dems are putting all sorts of "strings" on the bill such as a deadline for withdrawal that will endanger our troops and undermine our ability to fight the war. Also, the bill has millions upon millions of appropriations for items not related to the military. It is loaded with "pork" such as millions for peanut storage.
2007-04-03 11:57:50 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 10⤊ 1⤋