Pelosi promises vote on Iran war measure.
By on Mar 16th, 2007 at 3:57 pm
Pelosi promises vote on Iran war measure.
House members this week removed language from the Iraq spending bill (which was passed by committee yesterday) that would require President Bush to get congressional authorization for any war against Iran. But CQ reports:
On March 13, the same day House Appropriations Chairman David R. Obey, D-Wis., said he had removed the Iran provision from the draft war spending measure, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., quietly promised Appropriations Committee Democrats that she would soon bring the measure up as a stand-alone bill, said James P. Moran, D-Va., who attended the meeting in Pelosi’s suite.
MoveOn ran a full-page ad on Iran today in the Washington Post. See the full version (pdf) HERE.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
Reports
In depth studies on select topics
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bailout
Big Oil
Bolton
Bush
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Earmarks
Economy
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Global Warming
Guantanamo
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Iran
Iraq
Justice
Kristol
LGBT
Lieberman
McCain
McClellan
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Rice
RNC Convention
Rove
Terrorism
Third Bush Term
Torture
Veterans
Wiretapping
Women's Rights
ArchivesBlog Roll
How about the only important vote, Pelosi?
Without that, nothing else can be accomplished.
Put it back ‘on the table’, Pelosi…it’s why you’re Speaker right now.
March 16th, 2007 at 4:00 pmAs long as Impeachment is still off the table ; )
March 16th, 2007 at 4:03 pmLOL TripMaster Monkey — great minds think alike . . .
March 16th, 2007 at 4:04 pmJake sez:
Don’t flatter yourself, Jake (even if no one else will).
March 16th, 2007 at 4:08 pmLOL TripMaster Monkey — great minds think alike . . .
Comment by Jake
Ouch. Trip, I think you just got dissed.
March 16th, 2007 at 4:09 pmOMG - Nancy keeps baiting the Republics… and the fools keep falling for it.
Off to Office of the Clerk, Roll Call to see who voted against the Iraq spending bill, the one that Bush said he would veto. later….
March 16th, 2007 at 4:11 pmImpeachment is not off the table… it’s just at the end of the file, the file that contains all the evidence which is now becoming part of the record.
March 16th, 2007 at 4:13 pmWhile I feel it is important for the President to get permissions, I don’t understand such a bill. The President has the authority to wage war for 90 days without approval unless I am wrong. Either way it doesn’t matter. Clinton, Obama, many other Dem, and most Repugs have all said they are more then comfortable attacking Iran if they don’t stop enrichment. I truly hope the terrorist leaders of Iran come to their senses but it currently looks bad. We certainly should go have talks with them but the “talks” are pretty nominal. They basically would include us saying “Please stop all enrichment right now or we will be forced to bomb all your facilities at a minimum and potentially invade full force”. The Iranians basically have to tell us if they want peace or not. THis is kinda a no brainer as no American and none of our allies will allow Iran to become a nuclear power. The Dems even realize this. In this light, we should hold a vote as most the Dems will vote for war with Iran if they fail to stop enrichment. Of course that depends on if they will vote like they speak which lately seems questionable.
They speak out against the Iraq war everynight yet vote to extend it and support it thoroughly with their votes. Baffling to say the least.
March 16th, 2007 at 4:13 pmImages of Iran
March 16th, 2007 at 4:16 pmWatch:
mainstream media:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/ id/ 17084975/ displaymode/ 1107/ s/ 2/
Internet:
http://lucasgray.com/video/peacetrain.html
what “liberal media”?
CoffinsDrapedWithFlags:
I’m surprised you never heard out of Pelosi’s own mouth that impeachment was off the table or that Bush would veto any spending bill with provisions recalling the troops or prohibiting an Iranian invasion?
March 16th, 2007 at 4:17 pmOops… apologies… the Iraq spending bill only passed the committee. It should be up for vote next week. Let’s see which Republics support out troops.
March 16th, 2007 at 4:19 pmJake, I heard what Nancy said. She’s a smart poker player and she is not going to show you her hand. I think it’s gutsy to challenge this president with the Iraq spending bill. Let boy Bush veto the bill and let the Republics vote against the bill. A “ney” vote will translate into not supporting the troops during the 08 election cycle. It’s a dangerous move for Republics to follow the boy Bush party line.
March 16th, 2007 at 4:23 pmRoger Roger,
The 90 days thing is only part of the law.
Under the new law, a President who orders troops into action abroad or “substantially” increases the number of foreign-based U.S. troops equipped for combat must report the reason for his action to Congress within 48 hours. Congress could then rescind his order at any time by passing resolutions, which are not subject to White House veto, in both houses. Even if such resolutions are not forthcoming, the President must halt the operation after 60 days unless it has been approved by Congress, though he could prolong it another 30 days by certifying that the additional time is necessary for the safe withdrawal of the troops.
March 16th, 2007 at 4:24 pmdlet - The law that you quote, was it a law created by the Republic controlled Congress to keep Clinton from sending troops off to war? Did the Republics shoot themselves in the foot with this law?
March 16th, 2007 at 4:27 pmInsanity. Investigate. Impeach. Incarcerate.
March 16th, 2007 at 4:29 pmThis would be political suicide for the 21? R senators
and the House in ‘08 if they dared to vote against this stand alone bill.
It appears every 6 years Sen Smith worms his way into the news pretending to be ‘for the people’ while his voting record shows the opposite. He is making the news again and I would love to see how he and others would vote on this bill.
March 16th, 2007 at 4:30 pmPelosi’s Betrayal
“Top House Democrats retreated Monday from an attempt to limit President Bush’s authority for taking military action against Iran as the leadership concentrated on a looming confrontation with the White House over Iraq. Officials said Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other members of the leadership had decided to strip from a major military spending bill a requirement for Bush to gain approval from Congress before moving against Iran. Conservative Democrats as well as lawmakers concerned about the possible impact on Israel had argued for the change in strategy.”
This settles at least three matters once and for all: To begin with, the president has been given the green light to attack Iran. Withdrawing this provision from the spending bill is an act not just of complicity, but of open collaboration with the Bush administration’s war plans. When the bombs begin to fall, and the Democrats rise up in a yowl of righteous indignation, the president will be quite justified in doing this.
Secondly, the Democrats are either being dishonest or they lack fundamental knowledge of geography, because Pelosi is attacking the president for his Iraq “surge” even as she gives him the go-ahead for a super-surge right across the border in Iran.
The Republicans, no matter what their particular views on the war, seem to understand that this is a regional struggle and requires a comprehensive, overarching solution. They just don’t agree on what that solution ought to be. Someone along the lines of, say, Rudy Giuliani, wants to extend the war to include the entire region, while Chuck Hagel, on the other hand, envisions a regional diplomatic and political architecture to serve as the framework for a comprehensive Middle East peace initiative.
Addressing the recent AIPAC conference, Scooter Libby’s boss, AKA the Father of Lies, spoke the unvarnished truth:
“It is simply not consistent for anyone to demand aggressive action against the menace posed by the Iranian regime while at the same time acquiescing in a retreat from Iraq that would leave our worst enemies dramatically emboldened and Israel’s best friend, the United States, dangerously weakened.”
What an easy target the “antiwar” Democrats make!
Third, one has to wonder how those who claim that recognizing the Israel Lobby’s decisive impact on U.S. foreign policy is a hate crime are going to explain away this one. Those above-mentioned “conservative Democrats” are natural warmongers (although it wasn’t always so), but exactly who, one wonders, are these other “lawmakers concerned about the possible impact on Israel”? I’ll bet Pelosi is one of them and Tom Lantos is another; no doubt the entire Democratic leadership belongs in that group.
No one is any longer pretending that Israel isn’t the 51st state. To hear Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-Nev.) tell it,
“There is widespread fear in Israel about Iran, which is believed to be seeking nuclear weapons and has expressed unremitting hostility about the Jewish state. ‘It would take away perhaps the most important negotiating tool that the U.S. has when it comes to Iran,’ she said of the now-abandoned provision.”
March 16th, 2007 at 4:32 pmThere was no vote on N.Korea making atomic bombs,which Koreans confessed they made.?!!
March 16th, 2007 at 4:33 pmTobey Tall:
Can you guys recall Pelosi, et al?
March 16th, 2007 at 4:35 pmWhat’s with TP? My comments are not always posted. Is it the “coffins” name that is offensive? It should be… it should offend everyone that supports this illegal war. If TP is going to withhold my comments, then I’ll just leave this site. TP allows foul mouthed trolls to post and yet will not post all my comment.
March 16th, 2007 at 4:35 pm#12 Of course the fact that congress doesn’t have enough votes to stop an Iran war is probably lost on this crowd as well. If Iran doesn’t back down and stop enrichment, any congressmen voting against America stopping Iran and looking out for our safety and the safety of our allies would get crushed in the next election. Americans wouldn’t stand for congress not protecting America afterall. Either way, that is the extreme that isn’t important. The Dems have already gone on record as saying they have no problem attacking Iran to stop enirchment if Iran doesn’ stop themselves. At least both parties agree on the basics which is good.
March 16th, 2007 at 4:36 pmIf Iran doesn’t back down and stop enrichment, any congressmen voting against America stopping Iran and looking out for our safety and the safety of our allies would get crushed in the next election.
Comment by Roger_Roger
1) Please link any concrete info that Iran is enriching weapons grade nuclear material.
2) Is that why the Repubs got crushed last election because they were weak on N. Korea?
March 16th, 2007 at 4:42 pm#16 Tobey
Is this an article or your own writing?. If article, can you post the link? If your own then accept my congratulations; great piece.
March 16th, 2007 at 4:43 pm#15 I am still confused. Bush has the legal right to attack Iran. Congress has the legal right to stop the war anytime by voting against it. This vote requires the president to bring to troops home within 60 days or potentially 90 if he can prove it is for safety reasons.
One must ask:
1) This of course applies to Iraq and yet the Dems have yet to vote on it. They not only appear to be for the Iraq war, it is now obvious.
2) What is the purpose of this resolution pelosi wants? It is pointless as congress already has the power to stop any war they want. Bush will always retain the right to go to war when he wants. What would this bill accomplish other? It seems like another waste of time vote for poltical power. Hell, voting yes or no to this proposed Pelosi bill doesn’t matter as it doesn’t change a single thing. Congress will never have the authority to stop a war before it starts like that as any President has the legal authority to wage war when he wants. Either way, I highly doubt Pelosi would muster the needed votes even from within her own party as most already are Pro Iran war.
March 16th, 2007 at 4:43 pm#13
Coffins,
I tried to link some things but TP won’t let me link today for some reason. The item I posted was an explanation of the 1973 War Power Resolution.
March 16th, 2007 at 4:44 pm#9 kdoug
March 16th, 2007 at 4:49 pmLove the point you make. Liberal media my as*. MSM is so far right it turns itself in circles. The comparisons between the links were profound. Thank you.
#21 Are you suggesting that Iran is lying about enriching Uranium? It doesn’t matter if they are enriching Uranium for weapons or power. Both are illegal bsaed on the UN resolution banning Iran. I understand that there is a fringe group in this country with folks like you dlet that have no problem with our enemies threatening the safety of the USA and our allies. I understand that you and your fringe group have no problem with Iran advancing a nuclear program. What you don’t realize, maybe, is that your a fringe group. Most all Americans will not accept our government standing idle while terrorist countries like Iran arm themselves and threaten the USA and our Allies. Even the leaders of YOUR party agree here. Obama and Clinton both state we need to attack Iran if they fail to stop enrichment. Most Dems in congress share this idea which is understandable. No normal person is against the idea of protecting the USA and our Allies. Only people that don’t like America and our Allies and cheer for our destruction would be for inaction. Even the UN is voting this week to further enhance sanctions. Russia and China have even gone on record that this is a stepping stone. They both want to continually enhance and enlarge the UN opposition and both have said that the military option needs to be left on the table. Luckily, the Dems, Repugs, and the UN have sane folks that realize how unacceptable it is for the world to allow the terrorist leaders of Iran to develope WMD’s.
March 16th, 2007 at 4:50 pmPlease take a few minutes to sign the petition at Stop Iran War.
Using the tools there you can also write your congresspeople and local newspapers. At the “supplies” link you can print out posters, doorhangers, petitions and t-shirt transfers.
Let’s WAKE people up before it’s too late.
March 16th, 2007 at 4:54 pmI FEEL BETRAYED.
“Quietly Promised”; “soon” this sounds just like Repug bu*$sh#t.
How much more of our dearest blood and sweated for tax dollars must be “wasted†before we the people realize what we have in Washington is not worth keeping. We must rise like our forefathers did in Boston and toss those bastards (Dem. and Repug and otherwise) into the Potomac and start all over again with that blessed piece of parchment called the Constitution of the United States of America.
Government of the People, for the People and by the People should never perish.
March 16th, 2007 at 4:59 pm#27 Jen
You need to re-post the link; it does not work
March 16th, 2007 at 5:00 pmdlet - thanks for the explanation about the 1973 war commissions act. good research. So I’m not the only one that’s getting comments withheld. At least at C & L, the sitemonitor makes reference to the deleted comment. It’s not like comments fly into some sort of black hole like here at TP.
March 16th, 2007 at 5:08 pmRoger, if the idiot in charge attacks Iran, all hell will break loose. And all the republicans and blue dogs who let him do it will be the ones who get crushed. The people are way ahead of the pols on this - we want out and we want out now - not one more dead child of any nationality so the criminal cabal can make a few more bucks.
March 16th, 2007 at 5:08 pm#26
RogerRoger,
You sure type a lot of words to get nowhere near a point. bla..blah…President more power…blah…blah dems weak…blah…blah….fringe group of terrorist lovers…blah…blah….bomb Iran….blah…blah….it’s their fault if we bomb them…blah…blah….
Love the strawmen though.
March 16th, 2007 at 5:09 pmRebel… no links allowed today.
March 16th, 2007 at 5:10 pmEverybody,
Jake’s career is what made him what he is today.
He worked as a crash dummy for the NASA Rocket Sled program.
After each run they would scrape his brains off of the base of the sled into a bucket, turn him upside down, put a funnel into each nostril and pour them back in.
He still sloshes when he nods or shakes his head.
Every once in a while, the air relief valve at the back of his head malfunctions and a little grey matter drips out. Of recent, no one notices any difference when that occurs.
March 16th, 2007 at 5:10 pmHeard an interview today on Bill Press on this subject. Legislators said the original proposal didn’t have teeth and worried that even if it passed, Bush would find a way around it and subsequent bills would not be able to get passed as a result, or it would be too late. Is this double talk or the truth? I’m not 100% sold, but he was adament about the separate bill being restrictive and without loopholes. I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt for a few weeks. I’d like to read the original language to see what he meant about it not being thorough enough. I’d also like to see the revised language that they think will be more thorough. If it is the truth, good for the Dems for not just throwing something worthless in there just to appease their base with some immediate gratification and working to do it right. I just hope and pray that’s the case…
March 16th, 2007 at 5:10 pmBush has the legal right to attack Iran.
Oh, God, My WTF-Incredulometer just embedded itself in my garage ceiling again after being exposed to R2DumbToo’s claim.
I must have the right to blow up my neighbor’s place, I think she’s got rabid dogs in her house.
March 16th, 2007 at 5:10 pmBetter bring the bill in quick as Bush’s previous plans were to attack Iran this spring and it’s mid March Pelosi. Besides what better way to re-focus the American public from Walter Reed, Gonzales, Plame, the FBI illegal wiretaps, etc. War, National emergency…right after we nuke someone and blame Iran.
March 16th, 2007 at 5:11 pmI understand that there is a fringe group in this country with folks like you dlet that have no problem with our enemies threatening the safety of the USA and our allies
Would that fringe group include Guiliani and the Chicita bananas?
March 16th, 2007 at 5:13 pmRR,
March 16th, 2007 at 5:14 pmYour Resume is next.
Sigh… I had an awesome long post that got sucked into the ether of TP’s disappearing comments. So aggrivating. I didn’t have anything even remotely spammy either… No links, no questionable language… nothing! I wish TP had a holding pin where these posts could be recovered. Well it’s late and I’m not typing that out again! Time to go home!
March 16th, 2007 at 5:15 pmRoger_Roger
Only congress can declare war… if Bush proceeded as he would like to, we would have a constitutional crisis. It is really sad congress has to put the breaks on this lying, careless and apparently treasonous thug we have sitting in the oval office as he can not be trusted. ‘We the people’ want the invasion/massacre iin Iraq ended and do you really think ‘we the people’ want another mismanaged massacre with our military broken, our infrastructure crumbling and our economy, housing and needes of the people going south?
IRAN is NO threat.
A war with Iran would once again benefit Bush as a distraction from all the crap the 110th congress is uncovering and again, a cash crop for his ‘have mores.’
Bush is the terrorist. He is the real threat.
March 16th, 2007 at 5:18 pmWhile I feel it is important for the President to get permissions, I don’t understand such a bill. The President has the authority to wage war for 90 days without approval unless I am wrong.
Comment by Roger_Roger — March 16, 2007 @ 4:13 pm
The president cannot just invade any country for sixty days without any consequences from the legislative branch. If the president introduces US forces into hostilities without congressional approval, it must be clearly indicated that he would have gotten approval by the Congress in the absence of the War Powers Act.
March 16th, 2007 at 5:18 pmParrotlover77 - The Democrats are being very cautious because they know that the Senate doesn’t have the numbers to pass the House bills and boy Bush will veto anyways. All the Democrats can do is get the votes on record… smart move. We need to hold onto the numbers in the House and vote out the 21 Republics that are up for re-election in 2008.
March 16th, 2007 at 5:18 pmTP has a big black hole that is sucking up comments today.
March 16th, 2007 at 5:20 pmDo whatever it takes to bring charges up on Chimpy, the monkey-boy. I’m trying to be patient. Impeachment, war crimes and crimes against humanity are all neat little considerations for rewarding our own, dear dick-tater-head.
March 16th, 2007 at 5:23 pm#21 Are you suggesting that Iran is lying about enriching Uranium? It doesn’t matter if they are enriching Uranium for weapons or power. Both are illegal bsaed on the UN resolution banning Iran.
Comment by Roger_Roger — March 16, 2007 @ 4:50 pm
It is not illegal for them to enrich uranium for power or weapons.
March 16th, 2007 at 5:24 pmIMPEACHMENT IS THE ONLY ANSWER!
March 16th, 2007 at 5:49 pmWAR WITH IRAN WOULD BE ABOUT THE SAME THING WHICH WAR IN IRAQ IS ALL ABOUT - BIG OIL! So much for the spreading democracy bullcrap! We don’t have a democracy here to spread around - we’ve had a major “coup” on our democracy and it’s now become textbook “Fascism”. Everyone knows it now.
It’s all about the oil money - Texas Tea - Black Gold - and the blood of thousands of our youngest and finest on George W. Bush’s hands.
March 16th, 2007 at 5:52 pm#47- Not the only answer- VIVA LA GUILLATINE!
March 16th, 2007 at 5:53 pmBesides, with respect to uranium enrichment, isn’t it a moot point when we are not in compliance with our very own treaties with regard to weapons of mass destruction??? Aren’t we quite the hypocrites on the planet when we’ve been the only ones in the history of the world to ever “use” a nuclear bomb to nuke people??
March 16th, 2007 at 5:53 pmThis latest round of hearings on the pretext for the war and Joe Wilson’s “outing” of the bogus claims of the administration in it’s run up to this war has solidified one fact in the minds and hearts of the american people — THE ENEMY IS WITHIN!
Now we know this is fact and have the opportunity to do something about it by taking back the reins of this country or taking cover ourselves because trusting people in government offices to uphold our rule of law and to protect our national security is not happening and will not happen as long as the abusers are in power.
March 16th, 2007 at 5:56 pmAs I understand it, they must use centrifuges to enrich uranium. Do it a liitle and you have fuel for a power plant. Do it much much longer and it gets purified enough for weapons. so there is a difference between Power and Weapons…much more difficult to purify it enough for weapons.. Hence Iran is YEARS away from possible Bomb Grade enrichment.
March 16th, 2007 at 5:57 pmI’ll say it AGAIN… IRAN is NOT MONOLITHIC. A sizeable majority of Iranians voted for PROGRESSIVE policies..only to be thwarted by the Mullahs. Attacking Iran would be pure FOLLY. It would just INCREASE the Mullahs Power over the country!!!
And, for the record, it’s beginning to look like a simple “impeachment” of Bush is not the justice he deserves. It’s beginning to look like prison time for Bush, Cheney, Rove, and Gonzales - maybe they can have a manage a cinqo together while there.
March 16th, 2007 at 5:58 pm#41 Who do you think is against attacking Iran again? The Dem leadership has said over and over that Iran needs to stop all enrichment or we should attack (at least bomb all potential nuke sites). The repugs are hand in hand with the Dems on this front. I understand that the fringe on sites like this make a big stink when congress wants to protect America and not allow the terrorist enemies of the USA and our Allies to build WMD’s and enrich Uranium but they simply don’t listen to you. You honestly think Clinton, Obama, or anyone that cares about getting reelected would come out and say we should allow the terrorist leaders of Iran the freedom to endanger the USA and Israel? Should think even the Dems will come out and say we should throw up our hands if the terrorist leaders of Iran decide to continue enriching Uranium? What members of congress think this way? Please enlighten me.
March 16th, 2007 at 6:00 pm#51 It is hard not to laugh when I read these posts from folks like yourself. Who is on your side anyways? The Dems? They are the ones in charge right now and they clearly are focusing on extending the Iraq war and backing Bush’s langauge against Iran. Even your presidental canidates support the Iraq war and attacking Iran if they don’t stop enriching Uranium. So many on this site act all big and tough about “taking the country back”, “stopping the war”, “impeaching Bush based on our assumptions and opinions”, etc. Do you not ever open your eyes and see the Dems aren’t actually doing any of that? They are infact doing the opposite. They are extending the Iraq war instead of bringing the troops home. They are backing the idea of attacking Iran. Furthermore, outside of a few “show trials” they are doing nothing when it comes to impeaching Bush. Hell, Pelosi has said over and over that they won’t impeach Bush. These fantasy pipe dreams will come all crashing down for you one day once you open your eyes. It must be fun living in that world and “seeing” something that isn’t actually happening at all. Good luck with that. Your Dem leaders sure appreciate the fact you are blind to their hypocrisy and deceit.
March 16th, 2007 at 6:06 pm#46 Actually the UN voted to make it illegal for Iran to enrich Uranium for any reason. Either way, are you for the terrorist leaders of Iran to enrich Uranium?
March 16th, 2007 at 6:06 pmI understand that the fringe on sites like this make a big stink when congress wants to protect America and not allow the terrorist enemies of the USA and our Allies to build WMD’s and enrich Uranium but they simply don’t listen to you.
Comment by Roger_Roger — March 16, 2007 @ 6:00 pm
If you have any evidence of a nuclear weapons program, post it.
March 16th, 2007 at 6:08 pmOf recent, no one notices any difference when that occurs.
Comment by WaltTheMan
Wow, Walt. I had never expected that from you. I liked it.
About Roger and his delusional world:
I dont blame him. I blame the US government and the media for making him think that his country is a superpower that has all moral and legal authority to make preemptive wars, depose any regime it pereceives as a threat, kill thousands of civilians (poor people never mattered anyway) and use permanent military bases or secret prisons where its agents can roam easily with diplomatic immunity. I blame the UN for never forcefully punish any illegal action that the US has made against the poorest countries in the world for corporation interests. If the US is the palladin of justice and humanity (burp!), why those fancy jets and carriers havent bombed the WTO, IMF and WorldBank for allowing kids exploitation in Asian manufacturing plants?
I cant still understand why the people from the most powerful country is the most afraid.
March 16th, 2007 at 6:09 pm#46 Actually the UN voted to make it illegal for Iran to enrich Uranium for any reason. Either way, are you for the terrorist leaders of Iran to enrich Uranium?
Comment by Roger_Roger — March 16, 2007 @ 6:06 pm
-Which resolution was that?
-They can enrich uranium for peaceful purposes.
March 16th, 2007 at 6:10 pmThe Nuclear Non Poliferation allows signatories to enrich Uranium for Peacefull purposes (ie. Power Plants). The UN does not dispute Iran’s right to do this…But they Must PROVE that they aren’t enriching Uranium for Weapons…..by submitting to inspections etc. There’s the Rub….IRan won’t cooperate and is thus up for sanctions by the Security council.
March 16th, 2007 at 6:31 pmWhen and if impeachable offenses are uncovered during congressional hearings (and it looks as if a few of them are unfolding), Nancy Pelosi will put impeachment back on the table. I’d bet money on it.
Roger, why is it that all of you Bush cultists are lunging for the Tailgunner Joe approach right now? Nobody really believes that members of one or our major political parties want failure for America or want to appease terrorists. It’s just tired and pathetic. Maybe it worked for Joe back during the “red scare, ” but we have the benefit of hindsight here.
March 16th, 2007 at 6:34 pmRR
Don’t you think Russia and China are giving high 5’s watching our country deteriorate due to the cost of Bush’s massacres? The weaker our military and economy become the stronger they are. That, RR, is the real threat. Should we continue to go down economically over possible ‘lies’ AGAIN of WMD? Again, I see no threat from Iran and I am appalled that Bush can fool some of the people over and over …..
With all of our warmongering and Bush’s premption stike policy, we have created terrorists 10 fold maybe more.
No, I do not sit around worrying about Iran’s enriched uranium - instead the thousands actually dying from no health care, our outrageous debt, what horrific move is Bush going to make next, our economy and jobs going over seas.
I could care less about Israel. Who really does?
March 16th, 2007 at 6:45 pm22/ sorry its late the link http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=10674
March 16th, 2007 at 6:50 pmPhuck Isreal, we don’t need to go down defending them.
March 16th, 2007 at 7:22 pmResume
March 16th, 2007 at 7:42 pmRoger-Roger
Address – Mi sewer es si sewer. Alternate – Steam grate.
High School – Received highest honors in finger painting at 23 (After 18 years in that class).
Athletics – Could pick up towels after games. Occasionally correctly sorted the wash cloths from the towels – claimed color blindness (They were all white.).
College – Attended Seaton Hall Institute of Technology from 1954-1994 and learned to recognize that a part of his anatomy was different from a hole in the ground.
Employment History – Un.
Egads- I forgot Military Service - Fort Lewis, served at 11 Bars (Now you know what he meant by 11B.).
March 16th, 2007 at 7:51 pmIt is now public knowledge that President Bush denied security clearance to DOJ officials, effectively blocking an investigation of the warrantless wiretapping program, and protecting Gonzales from embarassment or worse. It has also become known that this is the first time EVER that a President of the United States has blocked an investigation by the DOJ.
Therefore, it is clear that this President has obstructed justice in an ongoing investigation. Bush is out. Gone. Over. Next. . . IMPEACH
March 16th, 2007 at 10:20 pmGood luck Madam Speaker…
…keep bringing it up…
…and let the Repulsivescum TRAITORS knock it down…
…(on the record)…
…just get GOOD videotapes of their TREASONOUS speeches in the wells of the House and Senate…
…that we can use in campaign ads against them in ‘08…
…one favor though…
…could you please disappear that lying, back-stabbing, TREASONOUS AIPAC agent…
…TRAITOR Joe LieVermin?
March 16th, 2007 at 11:45 pmCHIMPya MUST BE CHIMPEACHED–THAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT VOTE THAT AWAITS CONGRESS–AND DON’T FORGET THE BUCKET OF RUSTY BOLTS Torticola FrankenCheney!!!!! AND THE REST OF Bushland Uber Allies, THESE POISONOUS NAZI-FASCIST SCUM!!!!!
March 17th, 2007 at 1:28 am[…] had removed the Iran provision from the draft war spending measure, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., quietly promised Appropriations Committee Democrats that she would soon bring the measure up as a stand-alone bill, […]
March 17th, 2007 at 2:07 pm[…] Pelosi promises vote on Iran war measure. […]
March 17th, 2007 at 3:38 pm#62 You are not worried about Iran but you are worried about Health Care? We currently provide Health care to every single American already. The amount needed to give the uninsured medical services is LESS then the pork congress spends per year. Tell your Dem leaders the problem has a very simple fix. Tell them to stop wasting our money on pork for their rich corporate friends and use it to fund the ininsured. Poof, problem completely solved. So ask yourself when you see all that pork spent. DO the Dems really care about that problem or are they simply pandering to the TV camera?
Now how would Iran not concern you? It is a country controlled by terrorists that daily make threats against the USA and our Allies. It also is not following the UN mandate to stop all enrichment. The UN is currently stiffening the mandate to punish them even further. The entire world sees Iran as a threat as it is very easy to see. I simply don’t understand this mindset that some here have to simply allow terrorists to threaten us while enriching Uranium. The idea that we should wait and let them do this because they are 2-3 years away from building their bomb is nuts. You want to wait until they nuke someone before taking action?
WIll an attack on Iran be ok with this crowd if Obama or Clinton is president? Please go on record here stating you will feel the same way. Both of them are on record speaking very clearly that they have no problems with the military option if Iran doesn’t halt enrichment themselves. You speak like the repugs are the only ones pushing this but your wrong. Both parties are hand in hand on this one.
March 18th, 2007 at 12:33 amThe only way out of Iraq id to impeach bush an cheney. The republicans tried to impeach the sos clinton for lying. What make bush different? Other than clinton’s lies hurt nobody except ruffle some congressional feathers. Bush lied and thousands died. Bush will go down in mid east history with the likes of Hulagu Khan (who destroyed baghdad in 1258) along with destroying the united states in the early 21st century
March 18th, 2007 at 2:18 pm[…] 2 (March 16): Think Progress is reporting that Pelosi, who took a hammering upon removing the requirement for Bush to come to […]
March 18th, 2007 at 3:28 pmhttp://www.aipac.org/ Publications/ Pelosi-PC-2007.pdf
FOR YOUR INFO
March 31st, 2007 at 11:24 am