Does anyone really buy the argument that a Bush veto is the Democrats fault?

Question

I am not sure how anybody could buy this. Even my Republican friend thinks this is ridiculous and will end up backfiring on Bush. He is concerned that Bush is severely damaging the Republican party by ignoring the Iraq Study Group and anyone else who does not agree with his plan. Do other Republicans see this?

Answer 1

I had to laugh out loud the other night when I was watching the news and Bush was shown as saying that the Democrats are only doing this to prove a political point.

What's HE doing, if not trying to prove a political point? A nonbinding resolution holds no penalty for missed withdrawal deadlines. So he could sign this bill with no negative ramifications, except that he doesn't want to compromise AT ALL.

Answer 2

I think sensible and intelligent Republicans see this however you have the ones that use Republican sound bites as facts and they will never get this. Talks with Iran and Syria?? While the Republicans spent months criticizing Pelosi for trying. Troop Surge is the most utmost misrepresentation of the number of troops needed in Iraq. You have the Bush administration lying and playing politics with the troops once again. First ask for a troop increase that is like a bucket of water in the sea, then slowly retain or deploy more troops then asked for and think people won't notice. If we are really serious about Iraq we need a draft, and this is from someone who will be drafted, anything else is just political games.

Answer 3

Well, after reading the Iraq Study Groups report you mentioned it appears we need to increase the number of troops and funds right now to maintain stability and THEN proceed with a responsible troop withdrawal.
If the Democrats had read that report they wouldn't be including a time-line so it's obvious that this is ALL political from the Dem party.

Quoting your Report as follows-The Iraqi government should accelerate responsibility for Iraqi security by increasing the number and quality of Iraqi Army Brigades. While this process is under way, and to facilitate it, the United States should significantly increase the number of U.S. military personnel, including combat troops, embedded in and supporting Iraqi Army units. As these actions proceed, U.S. combat forces could begin to move out of Iraq.

So it appears Bush is following the study group recommendations and the Democrats are causing a gridlock creating an atmosphere of failure. How politically motivating.
It is shameful.

Answer 4

I don't know if it's anyone's fault. It seems like it's a political move by the Democrats for electoral reasons. They did decline Bush's invitation to talk it over. After all the bipartisan talk during the last election season, I've seen none of that by the Democratic side. The measure didn't pass by much. I was suprised by how many Dems voted against it. It'll never go anywhere and seemed like a waste of time knowing it would be vetoed and never pass a veto vote. Hopefully both sides will come together and come up with a solid resolution.

Answer 5

the way I see it, it is the responsibility of congress to take this approach. As it is declared in the Constitution, there are three branches of Federal Government, and each has particular powers in order to create checks and balances...

IN this particular case, Congress is using the power of funding as a check against an executive branch that is out of control. This is as our fore-fathers intended.

It is now up to Bush to decide which he values more, the proper funding and support of troops he sent into combat vs. his party alliance.

Our system was designed so that the voice of the american people is reflected through the halls of congress. I will be the first to admit, this doesn't always work, but in this case I believe it is. The american people no longer want to see american soldiers dying in the middle of an inevitable iraqi civil war. And, whether or not that is the best course of action doesn't really matter. Because we live in a representative democracy, and our representatives are simply reflecting the will of hte people into law.

This is actually a great moment for political scientists to study and examine. This is how the three-tier system is supposed to work.

Now, its on Bush's shoulders. Does he support the troops he ordered into harm's way, or does he support the GOP? He's been put in a position where he can't have both, and its time to show his true colors...

Unfortunately, his true colors are GOP. He cares for nothing else appearantly...

Answer 6

if I can play from the other side Steve,
one reason for the upcoming veto Bush repeats is the attached pork in the bill. why can't they just send him a bill that funds the military, as this one does, and also addresses what to do next since Bush hasn't outlined what's next. a phased out withdrawal beginning Oct 1 is what the bill calls for I know, but it seems like both parties don't know what to do.

Answer 7

No, Bush could do a little negotiating before proclaiming a veto. He's being Arrogant, Stubborn and Shortsighted once again.

Answer 8

I'm a Libertarian and I think he's doing the right thing.

What else would he do? Agree to the surrender?

No, if Congress wants to surrender, they should do it without the President's permission.

Answer 9

Sorry but there is NO WHERE in the U.S. Constitution where it says that congress can tell the president when he has to pull troops out of a war. The only time congress can do this is if it is a police action like Vietnam. Congress said that the president could go to war and he is in charge of the military and not them.
They do not like it because for the most part they voted to give him the authority to do so and now are trying to say that they are the ones who should decide about the military.

Answer 10

It's nobodys fault. Bush doesn't like the bill and is going to veto it, which is the presidents right, and congress can make changes to it so he won't veto it. It's how the game is played, Clinton did it many times, more than Bush I might add during his administration.

Answer 11

I think I saw Laura attempt a frown upon hearing this so don't look good for geoergie-poo.