Senate Dems fail to cut off war funds By DAVID ESPO, AP Special Correspondent
WASHINGTON - Anti-war Democrats in the Senate failed in an attempt to cut off funds for the Iraq war on Wednesday, a lopsided bipartisan vote that masked growing impatience within both political parties over President Bush's handling of the four-year conflict.
The 67-29 vote against the Democrats' measure left it far short of the 60 needed to advance.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070516/ap_on_go_co/us_iraq
*****************
Compare that vote to the latest poll numbers showing the lib-Congress at 29% support.
2007-05-16 10:32:23 · 10 answers · asked by Lavrenti Beria 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Fortunately, extreme al qaeda liberals completely control the democratic party. They won't be preaching 'the American people have spoke' in 2008.
2007-05-16 10:38:43 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
Very few want to cut off the funds for the war, even among democrats at this time. The only way Pelosi can get the ones who want to cut the funds to vote on other measures was to have this vote to prove to them that they won't be able to cut off the funds. Seems like a waste of time, but when you are dealing with an emotional, passionate problem, you gotta do what you gotta do. Now you should see some serious steps toward funding the war finally.
2007-05-16 10:59:40 · answer #2 · answered by BekindtoAnimals22 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If the Democrats had some courage., they would include a provision in the war fund bill requiring a phased roll back of Bush tax cuts to help pay for the war, instead of a provision requiring a phased withdrawal of troops. The longer the war lasts- the greater would be the roll back of the tax cuts.
Democrats could argue that it is not moral to pass the entire cost of a long war onto the next generation.
I wonder if Bush would veto such a bill, and if so, how he would explain why he did so.
2007-05-16 11:03:09 · answer #3 · answered by Franklin 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
29 % wow that's low !
about 49% of the politicians in the house are republican.
and bush's numbers are almost that low as well.
so that means the people hate both parties ! fun-fun.
2007-05-16 10:57:03 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Typical, the libs won't admit it but they are in a no win situation that will cost them dearly in 08'
2007-05-16 10:41:22 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Statistical coincidence.
2007-05-16 10:36:33 · answer #6 · answered by B.Kevorkian 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Just proves that it's not as democratic in our backyards as we'd like to make the countries we invade believe...
2007-05-16 10:37:52 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
So much for their "Mandate" from the voters.
2007-05-16 10:40:22 · answer #8 · answered by You Ask & I Answer!!! 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
hmm thats funny cause almost half of congress is republican. Even with that handicap they're still doing 2 points better than Bush.
silly conservative, do your homework.
2007-05-16 10:36:38 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 4⤋
what else is new.
2007-05-16 10:40:17 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋