It seems that it is logical to believe that the last one to decide on an issue is the one who takes responsibility. I cannot understand how he blames congress for refusing to support the troops when it is he who refuses the money that congress appropriates. Seems like strange logic to me? Can anyone explain this? The analogy I think of is a parent refuses to innoculate their child for a desease because the innoculation material can be hazardous. When the child becomes ill the parent blames the doctor who gives the injection. It just does not make sense to me.
2007-05-20 13:59:15 · 18 answers · asked by carolcuevas 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I agree with that logic but not according to the lemmings who believe everything he says.
They will try to justify it by saying,
"He said he would veto a bill with timelines" ergo he wants to be accountable to no one yet when his predeccesor was in office Bush stated there should be an exit strategy with accountability- go figure.
Texas Governor George W. Bush told the Seattle Post-Intelligencer on June 5, 1999: "I think it's also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long (U.S. troops) will be involved and when they will be withdrawn."
Darn that selective amnesia again.
Some will tell you, " He vetoed it because it was laden with pork and he said he would do so."
This statement by them and the administration is a load of garbage. They, with the short term memory loss, fail to remember ALL the emergency military spending bills that passed through the Republican led Congress were ALSO laden with pork.
2007-05-20 14:02:06 · answer #1 · answered by thequeenreigns 7 · 6⤊ 7⤋
he's making an attempt to place off his mark on Iraq and additionally he's making an attempt to purpose the Democrats, that are all up in knots and perplexed suited now. suited now the genuine money drain is going to take place in July. The Democrats pays for the final defense force price. Bush will then cut back costs in some factors to fund the Iraqi conflict. He can save doing this till he leaves place of work in January 2009. Then possibilities are high the Democrats will win, they the U.S. defense force will pull out and Iraq will cave in. The Republicans will then blame the Democrats for pulling out too quickly, like they did in Vietnam and Somalia (the place George Bush Sr. pulled that trick on Clinton).
2016-12-11 15:21:53 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You don't know enough about this issue to be making any judgement on it! Simply put Congress is taking the elements the troops need to survive on in an effort to get their way with a cut and run withdrawl.
2007-05-20 14:16:01 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Bush vetoed the bill that had a clearly defined time frame for troop withdrawl, just as he said he would veto any bill that dictated a time frame. If the democrats have no confidence they should allocate no funding, not be an advocate of predetermined failure.
2007-05-20 14:10:14 · answer #4 · answered by xtowgrunt 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
I wouldn't expect you to understand something as complicated as that. If a president states he will veto any bill with a timeline in it months before congress sends him one, only certain types of people will blame the president.
2007-05-20 14:09:39 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
Republicans were ready to start disseminating that philosophy before Bush even THOUGHT about vetoing that bill...
It totally destroys the whole "Support Our Troops" battle hymn that they have been singing for 10 years... and shows America that no one in government gives a hoot about the troops...
Patriotism and Yellow Ribbons were how Bush packaged and sold himself to us... the democrats have simply opened the package to show us all what's inside.
2007-05-20 14:11:40 · answer #6 · answered by rabble rouser 6 · 3⤊ 3⤋
no, realistically its the fools you elected to congress that keep trying to make bogus political statements instead of doing their jobs. here is an analogy for you, you want your son (congress) to brush his teeth and go to bed, your son says OK I will brush my teeth, but before I go to bed I will have a candy bar. are you the parent (the prez) going to agree to that or will you veto it, so to speak?
2007-05-20 14:20:05 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Yes, he is. It doesn't matter what delusional rant the right wingers post, Bush is at fault and he never vetoed a republican passed Iraq war funding bill that was loaded with pork.
2007-05-20 14:13:39 · answer #8 · answered by Its Hero Dictatorship 5 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Logically? No. Lib Logical? Absolutely!
2007-05-20 14:02:21 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 3⤋
No. The funding is what is needed . The riders are what are being vetoed.
If I told you I was going to give you a million dollars but you had to kill your three year old child,would it be your fault you didn't get the million dollars. No the offer was bogus to begin with because their is no reasonable expectation that you would commit murder.
2007-05-20 14:05:48 · answer #10 · answered by ? 2 · 5⤊ 3⤋