Pelosi calls out Bush for 1999 statement on timetable.
Reacting to President Bush’s veto of the Iraq supplemental bill, Speaker Nancy Pelosi noted this evening that Bush once believed it was important for a president to lay out a timetable:
The president wants a blank check. The Congress is not going to give it to him. The president said, in his comments, he did not believe in timelines, and he spoke out very forcefully against them. Yet in 1999, on June 5th, then-Governor Bush said, about President Clinton, “I think it’s important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they would be withdrawn.” Despite his past statements, President Bush refuses to apply the same standard to his own activities. Standards — that’s the issue.
If the president thinks that what is happening on the ground in Iraq now is progress, as he said in his comments tonight, then it’s clear to see why we have a disagreement on policy with him. I agree with Leader Reid. We look forward to working with the president to find common ground, but there is great distance between us right now.
Watch it:
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
116 Responses to “Pelosi calls out Bush for 1999 statement on timetable.”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Bush the Liar
May 1st, 2007 at 6:53 pmI just emailed Reid, Pelosi and my Senators and Congresspersons…
…to let them know that I support:
NOT ONE MORE DIME for Halliburton…
…and the TRAITORS…
…TIME for WAR here at home…
May 1st, 2007 at 6:54 pmI don’t know what is going to happen with all this, but it sure is getting good. At long last somebody is calling the head bushie on hisincompetence, ineptitude, and disconnect. He doesn’t like it either.
May 1st, 2007 at 6:55 pmOh my we can’t wait to work with the President bla bla bla….
Why even bother at this point…
They are all carpet baggers including Pelosi. She is afraid of Bush or in on it!
May 1st, 2007 at 6:56 pmPelosi is getting better by the day! After ThinkProgress posted Bush’s statement on timetables in 1999, I thought no one in Washington would actually confront him on it. BUT SHE DID!!!!
May 1st, 2007 at 6:58 pmPelosi is getting better by the day! After ThinkProgress posted Bush’s statement on timetables in 1999, I thought no one in Washington would actually confront him on it. BUT SHE DID!!!!
Comment by Clare — May 1, 2007 @ 6:58 pm
She said, “IMPEACHMENT IS OFF THE TABLE”
May 1st, 2007 at 7:00 pmPelosi is not afraid of Bush. She’s just a tactful person which is something we haven’t seen in government in a long time. But maybe it’s time she pulled a “Cheney” on him and said, “F*ck you!”
May 1st, 2007 at 7:00 pmOh my… someone actually holding Bush accountible
this isn’t going to go over very well….
May 1st, 2007 at 7:01 pmSend him the same bill again!
May 1st, 2007 at 7:02 pmThe Democrats (and agreeable Republicans) in Congress have only two consistent, moral choices:
1. Do nothing. Pass no more funding bills for the occupation. If the troops don’t get the money already allocated, in the form of protection to withdraw, its on Bush.
2. Pass another funding bill, very short term, with other restrictions, such as earmarking the funds only for withdrawal, troop safety. Simultaneously, agree to pass NOTHING that Bush wants for the remainder of the time the occupation is in operation. Maybe even passing some “punitive” legislation such as specific taxes aimed at Bush’s wealthy supporters with the proceeds earmarked specifically for wounded veterans.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:04 pm“Blowjobs aren’t just for impeachment anymore”~anon. bumbersticker
May 1st, 2007 at 7:05 pmOk Nancy, time to put impeachment back on the table.
This country is coming apart at the seams. Believe me, it’s still going to be bad whether impeachment is out there or not.
Give the country some hope that there is a remedy for this madness.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:06 pmComment by Republicans are the Fear and Smear Party — May 1, 2007 @ 7:00 pm
OK have it your way. I didn’t think Pelosi was afrade I just offered that in antithisis to her being in on. My main point is that the whole thing is a show.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:07 pmHa Ha. Our Chimp gets punked by history like he does by rocks when he’s riding his bike.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:07 pm“Ha Ha. Our Chimp gets punked by history like he does by rocks when he’s riding his bike.”
or by pretzels when he’s drunk
May 1st, 2007 at 7:09 pmComment by PatrioticLiberalChristian(PLC) — May 1, 2007 @ 7:04 pm
Bush has the military start selling the OIL to self fund and create his own private dictatorship while abolishing congress here at home and making another dictatorship! As a third choice!
May 1st, 2007 at 7:10 pmbut “mission accomplished” wasn’t “just a show” ??
everything dubbie has done since who-knows-when has been a PR stunt.
the GOP has been one running PR stunt since lee atwater taught them how, and ronnie raygun showed them it would work (’cause, dumb as he was, he knew “the public” was dumber)
if Dems has been calling “bullshit” on the GOP for as long as they’ve been peddling it, Cspan’s broadcasts would be one continuous “bleeeep” sound
May 1st, 2007 at 7:13 pmWhy couldn’t that pretzel have done the job…
May 1st, 2007 at 7:16 pmComment by Saywho — May 1, 2007 @ 6:56 pm
Comment by Saywho — May 1, 2007 @ 7:07 pm
Comment by Saywho — May 1, 2007 @ 7:10 pm
Have you ever been diagnosed with a mental disorder? How about anyone to whom you are genetically related? Have you been asked these questions before? …by doctors?
May 1st, 2007 at 7:16 pmDONT GIVE IN.
That goes for all of us.
Dont support the democrats if they cant stand up for what makes America great and against what makes America like the old world killers.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:16 pmThere is no working with the president. A funding bill was provided, he elected to reject it. If he wants the funding, then he should ask Exxon, Haliburton, Blackwater or any of the other war for profit companies for the money.
Enough ALREADY! Put impeachment back on the table.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:17 pmWhy is it only the blogosphere that can turn up this kind of info?
The conventional Media hacks must feel awfully embarrassed every time they are shown up by that uppity Internet.
We have got to find a way to get someone in the DC press corps to ask the President about that comment in 1999.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:17 pmKeep saying the simple truth into the cameras.
“Bush had the funds to fully fund and support our troops, but he tore the check up. Because he never wants to hold the Iraqi government responsible for securing their own country.”
“Bush had the funds to fully fund and support our troops, but he tore the check up.”
“Bush had the funds to fully fund and support our troops, but he tore the check up. Because he never wants to hold the Iraqi government responsible for securing their own country.”
“Bush had the funds to fully fund and support our troops, but he tore the check up.”
“Bush had the funds to fully fund and support our troops, but he tore the check up. Because he never wants to hold the Iraqi government responsible for securing their own country.”
“Bush had the funds to fully fund and support our troops, but he tore the check up.”
May 1st, 2007 at 7:17 pmIt would be helpful if the Democrats would stop using the Republican phrase “Funding the troops.” This is one simple issue…whether or not we should continue funding this war. That’s the real pardigm.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:19 pmhmmm…afrade…
May 1st, 2007 at 7:20 pmwere you appointed by Gooling and Sampson, Saypoo?
Excellent move, quoting Chimpy and throwing it in his face.
Chimpy not only supported timetables but an exit strategy in 1999.
Now he thinks he doesn’t have to do either.
And Pelosi’s remark about Chimpy thinking there is progress in Iraq…excellent.
Good Job, Nancy!!
May 1st, 2007 at 7:20 pmBravo, Ms Pelosi, thank you for saying these things. The nation is so desperate for this kind of leadership, for we are so far removed from any kind of reality-based governance. Please continue to draw these kinds of lines, and do it with the sure knowledge that you have the support of those who genuinely value and respect the Democratic Principles of this nation.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:21 pmImpeach, trials, imprison….simple. That is what should have happeded years ago with his war crimes.
Conyers released a
report “The Constitution in Crisis; The Downing Street Minutes and Deception, Manipulation, Torture, Retribution, and Coverups in the Iraq War.” This 273-page report covers many war-related crimes, including the use of white phosphorus.
The report states: “Finally, there is evidence that the U.S. Military used an incendiary weapon in combat known as White Phosphorus, even though the U.S. Battle Book states, ‘[i]t is against the Law of Land Warfare to employ WP against personnel targets,’ and which would be in contravention of the Geneva and Hague Conventions and the War Crimes Act.”
Heck just this one should have done the job.
Hating the Repukian Mafia and it’s trolls daily
May 1st, 2007 at 7:21 pmAgreed. Impeachment should ALWAYS be on the table, regardless of who is in the WH. It is intended, and should always be the metaphorical Sword of Damocles over any administration.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:21 pmI thought the “Cauldron of Chaos” remark was cute…way to go, George: once again stating the obvious before, during, and after it has happened!
May 1st, 2007 at 7:22 pm#24 Disagree. Turn there rhetorical knives back on them.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:22 pmDamn! Now history has a liberal bias as well?!
No wonder I love history.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:23 pmThat pretzel was a terrorist.
But don’t worry, it’s dead.
The Secret Service shot it 50 times.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:23 pmThe Democrats should air tv and radio commercials across the nation with the clip of him calling for timetables for withdrawing from Kosovo. Beat him to death with his OWN words. No quarter, no mercy.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:26 pmAs soon as I heard her say that, I wondered if she had been informed of the thread here on TP.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:27 pmSurely politicians don’t read blogs, but I bet their staffs do.
I can’t get the vid to work. Tried several times.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:29 pmOh Snap!
May 1st, 2007 at 7:31 pmMeh, you know how his response will go. “That was Pre-9/11, blah, blah, blah… You holding on to that is evidence you have a Pre-9/11 mind set, blah, blah, blah…
It could get interesting if he tries to draw a distinction between Somalia and Iraq… What the grand differences are I’d be interested in hearing his bumbling ass try to explain.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:32 pmSaywho, all of politics is a show. If you can’t sell your message you are sidelined. Just ask the libertarians.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:32 pmHave you ever been diagnosed with a mental disorder? How about anyone to whom you are genetically related? Have you been asked these questions before? …by doctors?
Comment by pete — May 1, 2007 @ 7:16 pm
Look idiot you cannot see the light through the BS. The war is about OIL/Resources so there is no way we are leaving there anytime soon. Congress already gave away the keys with the Patriot Act. Pelosi went on the books with a “Impeachment is off the table†She in fact knows that there is no way to get the 2/3rds needed and decided to drop the impeachment idea. Pretty much everyone I know wants this administration IMPEACHED.
The whole thing is a show!
May 1st, 2007 at 7:33 pmNancy!
DON’T…GIVE…AN…INCH.
Bush refuses to allow any accountability by either his administration or Maliki’s. You gave him everything he wanted, but with accountability. GIVE HIM NOTHING MORE! Let the bastard rage and stomp and beat his head on the floor. Don’t give an inch!
May 1st, 2007 at 7:33 pmChimpy’s “timetable” and “exit strategy” quotes were from his campaign and there should be video clips of them.
Those would be devastating. Especially interspersed with his comments today.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:34 pmSynapsis of Articles of Impeachment Against Vice President Richard B. Cheney
Articles of impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives of the United States of America in the name of itself and of the people of the United States of America, in maintenance and support of its impeachment against him for high crimes and misdemeanors.
Artice I
The Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, has purposely manipulated the intelligence process to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States by fabricating a threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction to justify the use of the U.S. Armed Forces against the nation of Iraq in a manner damaging to our national security interests.
(1) Despite all evidence to the contrary, the Vice President actively and systematically sought to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States about an alleged threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.
(2) Preceding the March 2003 invasion of Iraq the Vice President was fully informed that no legitimate evidence existed of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The Vice President pressured the intelligence community to change their findings to enable the deception of the citizens and Congress of the United States.
(3) The Vice President’s actions corrupted or attempted to corrupt the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate, an intelligence document issued on October 1, 2002 vote to autorize the use of force. The Vice President’s actions prevented the necessary reconciliation of facts for the National Intellgence Estimate which resulted in a high number of dissenting opinions from technical experts in two federal agencies.
The Vice President subverted the national security interests of the United States by setting the stage for the loss of more than 3,300 United States service members; the loss of 650,000 Iraqi citizens since the U.S. invasion; the loss of approximately $500 billion in war costs which has increased our federal debt; the loss of military readiness within the United States Armed Services due to overextension, lack of training and lack of equipment; the loss of United States credibility in world affairs; and the decares of likely blowback created by the invasion of Iraq.
EVIDENCE:
kucinich.house.gov/UploadedFiles/artI1A.pdf
May 1st, 2007 at 7:34 pmkucinich.house.gov/UploadedFiles/artI1B.pdf
kucinich.house.gov/UploadedFiles/artI1C.pdf
kucinich.house.gov/UploadedFiles/artI1D.pdf
kucinich.house.gov/UploadedFiles/artI1E.pdf
kucinich.house.gov/UploadedFiles/artI1FG.pdf
kucinich.house.gov/UploadedFiles/artI1H.pdf
kucinich.house.gov/UploadedFiles/artI2A.pdf
kucinich.house.gov/UploadedFiles/artI2B.pdf
kucinich.house.gov/UploadedFiles/artI3.pdf
kucinich.house.gov/UploadedFiles/artI3.pdf
kucinich.house.gov/UploadedFiles/artI3.pdf
kucinich.house.gov/UploadedFiles/clo1.pdf
kucinich.house.gov/UploadedFiles/clo2.pdf
kucinich.house.gov/UploadedFiles/clo3.pdf
kucinich.house.gov/UploadedFiles/clo4.pdf
I would hope that they have given him the only bill he is going to get. Otherwise, we must insist that congress is complicit in the war and acting against the wishes of we, the people.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:35 pmOH PLEASE SOMEONE AT THINKPROGRESS SEE THIS AND FIND CHUCK SCHUMER’S SPEECH HE JUST AVE ON THE SENATE FLOOR ON CSPAN!!!
geez Schumer is bold but smooth..
:)
May 1st, 2007 at 7:37 pmAgain, if they can’t muster the votes to override a veto, they can’t get the votes for an impeachment. Once I see them overcome a veto, I’ll start thinking impeachment is something more than a pipedream.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:38 pmWhat’s weird is that Cheney is STILL insisting TODAY that Saddam was involved in 911 and with Osama.
Despite the fact that Chimpy has admitted no connection on both.
Cheney is a real hard-core Bizarro World type. He must be on drugs.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:38 pmgee, I wonder iF anyone at THINKPROGRESS could possibly compose a video of Bush contradicting himself on timelines…
OOH! Daily Show! they have to do this!!We should email DS and “redcommend” it to them!
:)
May 1st, 2007 at 7:40 pmBarak Obama is on the record as saying Congress should give in and give Chimpy his “clean” bill.
Obama is a chickenhawk, just like Hitlery.
We need to get rid of these two frontrunners or the Dems will be not much better than the Repukes in 2009.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:41 pmWhy does Speaker Pelosi hate america?
Why does Speaker Pelosi want the terrorists to win?
Clinton did it too.
That is all…
May 1st, 2007 at 7:42 pmOk Nancy, time to put impeachment back on the table.
This country is coming apart at the seams. Believe me, it’s still going to be bad whether impeachment is out there or not.
Give the country some hope that there is a remedy for this madness.
Comment by Zooey
Amen ( even though I am not religious)
May 1st, 2007 at 7:42 pmuh, rECommend..
May 1st, 2007 at 7:43 pmyeah, that’s it..
This is some very dangerous political rhetoric. Bush is a lying shitbag, no question, but it is politically unwise to dredge up old proclamations. This strategy can too easily backfire. Too many, I daresay all, national politicians can be run through the mud if an opponent takes the time to sift through their entire body of public discourse looking for contradictions and ingenuous statements.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:45 pmwow…harry reid sure can talk fast….
May 1st, 2007 at 7:45 pmPelosi and Reid need to tell Chimpy that he won’t get another supplemental.
Dems need to stand fast and not give in.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:48 pmBet you can’t find the video of the Dem response on Fox - because they refused TO AIR IT AT ALL!
May 1st, 2007 at 7:49 pm“What’s weird is that Cheney is STILL insisting TODAY that Saddam was involved in 911 and with Osama.”
Cheney, like all neocons, is a believer in Leo Strauss. Check out Strauss’ philosophy of the “Noble Lie” and his opinions about how it is necessary to continually lie to the public and you’ll understand all you need to about where Cheney’s coming from.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:50 pm#52 Kerry voted against the war before he voted for it, right? Republicans have been twisting Dems past words for decades. The difference here is the Dems are not twisting words. Do you really think politicians should not be accountable for their words?
May 1st, 2007 at 7:50 pmSNAP!
May 1st, 2007 at 7:50 pmI would suggest an emergency tax increase to raise the funds for the troops. Let’s put it to the American voters / taxpayers.
Let’s see who really supports troops.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:50 pmJust think if all the people thought at the time of the election to not vote for G W the election would have been different in 2000 and 2004. Even with the fix on… the ability to fix the election would have been somewhat difficult.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:50 pmChimpy will never leave Iraq if he can.
If US troops leave, then Big Oil can’t take all that oil.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:51 pmDid FOX News actually state that they were refusing to air the Pelosi quote?
I thought they were fair and balanced.
Silly me.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:52 pmI must say that asking for an answer to “Why was it so forcefully demanded then, and not needed now” (Withdrawl date) is an extremely important question.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:54 pm#
#24 Disagree. Turn there rhetorical knives back on them.
Comment by lestatdelc — May 1, 2007 @ 7:22 pm
The troops should not be pawns in this situation, and you are supporting the continuation of that. It doesn’t matter if it’s the Republicans or Democrats that do it…it’s wrong. These are human beings, who are being killed and injured and whose families must surely be going through hell. The “emergency funding” is NOT for the troops…it is to fund the “surge;”hence to continue funding the war. Which, ultimately, will help run out the clock for Bush so he can blame the next administration for what he created.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:55 pmMissing a few buttons on his remote control is the best I can say for the moron who continues to believe he should be allowed to continue on with his rubber stamp policies of the past six years. In six plus years we have seen two veto`s. First one telling the American public go to hell, I could care less about saving your life or anyone’s as long as I get the thumper vote, the second telling our troops to go to hell, and continue on being targets in the civil war, as long as I can maintain my legacy and not be exposed as a liar.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:55 pmuh, rECommend..
yeah, that’s it..
Comment by whiteyfresh
Heh. Wrong blog, whitey. :D
How’s the mouth?
May 1st, 2007 at 7:58 pmThe only supplement chympie needs is a gigantic suppository.
May 1st, 2007 at 8:00 pmThere is “no common ground” to find with Bush. He thinks this is some kind of old western style show down. This is not the shoot out at the OK Corral. Every single day we keep hearing of the deaths of our young men & women who have been put into this quagmire. Not to mention all of the innocent Iraqi people who are dying by the hundreds every month.
I had some slight hope that at the last minute he would sign the bill. I figured he would slap on one of his famous signing statements. The only hope we have is to put his feet to the fire and start impeachment proceedings.
Personally, I don’t think Congress should even have any discussions with Bush. He was given the opportunity to have the funding he needed. If he wants to fund the troops, then he can go back and ask Congress to send him the original bill he vetoed.
May 1st, 2007 at 8:01 pmNancy, I love you. It gives me hope to see someone stand up for what is right, no matter how difficult!
May 1st, 2007 at 8:04 pmtoo bad that this whole thing is landing right in the heads of the troops.
I mean, they’re in a desert hell, and this is what they get for being there?
May 1st, 2007 at 8:05 pm#64 Wrong on all counts. The bill just vetoed called for phased redeployment and winding down our troops deployment, while simultaneously increasing veterans funding. This isn’t about us making the troops pawns, though Bush made them pawns form the beginning.
This is about turning Bush’s political rhetoric and short-hand spin back on him in order to actually support the troops by ending the occupation in Iraq while providing funding for veterans and re-deployment beginning later this year.
May 1st, 2007 at 8:09 pmContact your senators, congresspeople, governors, state representatives, and mayors and encourage them to support impeachment of Bush and Cheney. NOW.
Who’s getting rich off this war? You know the answer. They don’t give a shit about the troops, and probably don’t give a shit about the war, except to try to get their pals to control the oil.
Impeach the entire crooked administration, then put them all on trial for crimes against humanity. Hold the trial in Iraq, then have them serve their sentences in Abu Ghraib. Standing on a box with a black sheet over them and a black hood, and electrodes - REAL ONES - connected to their shriveled testicles.
May 1st, 2007 at 8:11 pmImpeachment. No question on that. I am tired of these fucking news reporters like meredith veira on the today show, acting so surprised and shocked when jack murtha said the “I” word. She said it in an accusatory manner to Murtha and not about all the friggin Lying. I guarantee you that reporters like veira made sure that clinton got impeached for lying about sex, but give this president a pass on lying about Iraq, our economy, katrina, 9/11, etc.
I hope CBS dont lower their standards and hire Meredith to replace Katie Couric. I dont like Katie, But Meredith is a closet conservative. I feel sorry for Matt Lauer. No wonder why he is in Ireland.
May 1st, 2007 at 8:14 pmIt’s clear to me that the Bush strategy is to Stall, hope for a miracle, and blame everyone but himself. How about tieing the funding to an New Iraqi Referendem. Should the United States have a Timetable for Withdrawel form Iraq.?? Let the Iraqi people Vote on it, and let democracy rule.
May 1st, 2007 at 8:22 pmI mean, they’re in a desert hell, and this is what they get for being there?
Comment by blooes #70
…maybe somebody should ’splain to the troops and their families…
…WHO’s trying to get them HOME…
…and WHO’s trying to get them…
…KILLED…
…listening to some of those MOTHERS, FATHER, and WIVES…
…of deployed/ soon to be deployed troops…
…call in to c-Span…
…one would think those troops had hefty life insurance policies on them…
May 1st, 2007 at 8:29 pmGet up to speed thinkpravda and Ms. Nancy. During the 2000 campaign Bush rejected Senate efforts (Republican) to impose a troop withdrawal, calling the plan “legislative overreach”. The same applies with the Iraq war. Nancy, shame on you for your ignorance.
May 1st, 2007 at 8:40 pmShe in fact knows that there is no way to get the 2/3rds needed and decided to drop the impeachment idea. Pretty much everyone I know wants this administration IMPEACHED.
The whole thing is a show!
Comment by Saywho — May 1, 2007 @ 7:33 pm
You did it again. There are at least two people living in your head. You say that Pelosi isn’t pursuing impeachment because she doesn’t have the votes. But, then you claim that she’s not pushing for impeachment because it’s all part of the show. How can both be true? Do you see the conflict? Do any of the other people in your head ask you these questions?
May 1st, 2007 at 8:41 pm#75 Oh, yeah, Steed, that proves your point. He was a candidate for president at the time. You know, the very office that would be affected by the bill. All it proves is Bush is a flip-flopper with no moral compass.
May 1st, 2007 at 8:46 pmBet you can’t find the video of the Dem response on Fox - because they refused TO AIR IT AT ALL!
Comment by Janie
Was wondering when she made this statement. I was watching Special Report and didn’t hear it there. Your explanation is no surprise I suppose.
May 1st, 2007 at 8:48 pmImpeachment is simply not enough.
May 1st, 2007 at 8:50 pmClinton was impeached for a bj so Bush should be taken straight out of the Whitehouse and lynched or handed over to the Iraqis with the other members of the cabal to the government of Iraqi. Let them do a Saddam on him.
Gooooooo Nancy! It’s nice to finally have a Democrat tell The Idiot where to stick his bullshit.
May 1st, 2007 at 8:53 pmPelosi for President.
May 1st, 2007 at 9:03 pmWHY DO I HATE THE TROOPS?
Because I am a TRAITOR coxucker PUNK and an AWOL COWARD.
Who uses the troops for POLITICAL TOOLS…
See you in hell my Nazi azzlicker supporters (cause I’LL be THERE),
May 1st, 2007 at 9:04 pmMr. Bush
MURDEROUS WAR CRIMINAL
AWOL COWARD TRAITOR TO THE USA (TM–BushCrimeCo, Inc.)
you go girl!
May 1st, 2007 at 9:05 pmGet up to speed thinkpravda and Ms. Nancy. During the 2000 campaign Bush rejected Senate efforts (Republican) to impose a troop withdrawal, calling the plan “legislative overreachâ€.
REALLY? I don’t find ANY reference at all of Bush saying THAT.
Do YOU have LINKS?
OR just more Rush Limbaugh-type BULLZHIT??
See YOU in hell steed (cause I’LL be THERE),
May 1st, 2007 at 9:10 pmMr. Bush
MURDEROUS WAR CRIMINAL
COWARDLY TRAITOR TO THE USA (TM–BushCrimeCo, Inc.)
#84 This is from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. He did oppose it in 2000, less than a year before he supported it. Flippity-floppity.
“When Republicans in Congress were considering legislation to impose a date for withdrawal of U.S. forces from Kosovo, Bush was quick to oppose it. The message was that no president wants his hands tied and, not incidentally, these Republicans on Capitol Hill should keep in mind that he fully intends to become the president.”
May 1st, 2007 at 9:20 pmF*ck you George. You betray the soldiers to their deaths because you’re too much of a chickensh*t to acknowledge a mistake. People will die every Goddamn day for the ego of a psychopath. The rapture is for you and your coward thirty-percenters and the direction you’ll be floating is DOWNWARDS. Burn in Hell, traitors.
May 1st, 2007 at 9:23 pmInteresting. So Bush never said during the 2000 campaign:
And on the specific need for a timetable when troops are deployed overseas in combat:
So he never said those things, and both the Houston Chronicle and the Seattle Post-Intelligencer just made that up? Or would you care to retract your fraudulent assertion or not?
May 1st, 2007 at 9:26 pmClipped from the Daily Kos:
May 1, 2007
President George W. Bush
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President,
Today, in your veto message regarding the bipartisan legislation just passed on Operation Iraqi Freedom, you asserted that you so decided because you listen to your commanders on the ground.
Respectfully, as your former commander on the ground, your administration did not listen to our best advice. In fact, a number of my fellow Generals were forced out of their jobs, because they did not tell you what you wanted to hear — most notably General Eric Shinseki, whose foresight regarding troop levels was advice you rejected, at our troops’ peril.
[…]
As someone who served this nation for decades, I have the utmost respect for the office you hold. However, as a man of conscience, I could not sit idly by as you told the American people today that your veto was based on the recommendations of military men. Your administration ignored the advice of our military’s finest minds before, and I see no evidence that you are listening to them now.
I urge you to reconsider your position, and work with Congress to pass a bill that achieves the goals laid out above.
Respectfully,
Major General Paul D. Eaton, USA, Retired
May 1st, 2007 at 9:32 pmHey Pelosi: IMPEACH!
Hey Pelosi: IMPEACH!!
Hey Pelosi: IMPEACH!!!
Hey Pelosi: IMPEACH!!!!
Hey Pelosi: IMPEACH!!!!!
Hey Pelosi: IMPEACH!!!!!!
Thank you.
May 1st, 2007 at 9:38 pmInteresting. So Bush never said during the 2000 campaign:
“Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is.†— George W. Bush, 4/9/99, Houston Chronicle
No, actually he said:
“Vic’try meansh exshit shtratijry, and itsh import-unt for th’ preshidint to exshplain to ush what th’ shtratijry ish. [smirk] [bob][bob][bob]”
To avoid an inaccurate portrait of history, it’s important to include the correct mix of twang, smarm, and drunken slurring.
Why does this guy make me feel like Ned Beatty in Deliverance?
May 1st, 2007 at 9:44 pmyes I’m sure Bush suffered greatly when he signed that veto because everyone knows heaven bestowed upon him the duty to carry the burdens of others. What next? He’s a Christ figure now because of his suffering? Was that what Laura was trying to say in her interview?
May 1st, 2007 at 9:53 pmDO NOT GIVE IN TO THE WAR CRIMINAL WAR MONGERS !!!
SEND THE SAME BILL BACK !!!!
AND KEEP SENDING THE SAME BILL BACK !!!
UNTIL THE EVIL REPUKES CAPITULATE !!!!
USA TROOPS AND MERCENARIES OUT OF IRAQ NOW !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
May 1st, 2007 at 10:26 pmI love it when Pelosi spanks little Georgie.
You know he’s just one or two more of those humiliating speeches away from an aneurysm,
May 1st, 2007 at 10:36 pmWell. . . it is about time that BUSH is held ACCOUNTABLE by someone. If it has to be a LADY let it be! She must be TACTFUL and ASSERTIVE. We need that in these days. MEN don’t RUN everything. Bush thinks that he is doing a big thing by vetoing. Well. . . I think we need a Woman President to run this country.
BUSH may think he knows what is best for our country and other countries. Action Speaks Louder than Words.
Start thinking about WHO you are going to VOTE for this coming election. Give it some SERIOUS THOUGHT and MEDITATION.
May 1st, 2007 at 11:06 pm‘Bout damn time. All the Dems have to do is use these people’s own words against them.
May 1st, 2007 at 11:37 pmIf no one but the extreme conservative support Bush and most think the war would be better run by Congress, why isn’t it a (to quote use the famous quote) a slam dunk that Congress just pull the funds and set an end date?
May 2nd, 2007 at 12:39 am#96 Excellent question. I think it is because the DLC believes that stringing things along is in their electoral interests. They can use the war in ‘08. It is not the way the progressives (which most of us here) would have it. We have honor.
May 2nd, 2007 at 12:47 amI know that in the first official presidential debate in 2000, Bush said that Clinton had our military overextended and he should bring the troops home. I’ve got it on tape somewhere. In the two military actions in Haiti and former-Yugoslavia there was either zero deaths or one suicide, I believe.
I remember when cruise missiles were fired at al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan under Clinton. Every single Republican in the US said “wag the dog—you’re trying to distract us from Monica”.
May 2nd, 2007 at 12:59 am#98 Yup, they like to have it both ways. Clinton was wagging the dog when he went after bin Laden. Clinton didn’t do anything about bin Laden. I don’t think you can humanly have both views. But they do.
May 2nd, 2007 at 1:02 amSpeaker is taking tally for IMPEACHMENT
http://www.dailykos.com/ storyonly/ 2007/ 4/ 30/ 2328/ 10797
202-225-0100
May 2nd, 2007 at 3:31 am800-828-0498
800-459-1887
800-614-2803
866-340-9281
866-338-1015
877-851-6437
The Democrats should include in the next war-funding bill they send Bush the following stipulation: as soon as the Iraq legislature passes the Iraqi Oil Law, within six months from that date, all U.S. forces must be out of Iraq. Also, at the same time all U.S. “official” forces are out of Iraq, all taxpayer money going to contractors and subcontractors inside Iraq will cease, thus stopping anymore taxpayer money going to private contract mercenary units.
1) Bush and Cheney really, really want that Iraqi Oil Law in place.
2) Many Iraqis really, really want all U.S. (and other foreign) forces to leave Iraq.
3) Democrats want to stop the bloodshed (and the utter waste of taxpayer dollars) brought on by Bush preemptively invading Iraq.
Ergo, give Bush and Cheney what they so desperately desire (for their Western oil company crony pals), but with the condition that once the Iraq legislature passes the Iraqi Oil Law then all U.S. forces will exit Iraq within six months, which will give a majority of Iraqis what they want, as well as the Democrats what they want.
I figure that all of our troops should be home with their families by Christmas. A win-win-win for everyone, except maybe the war-profiteering private merc companies.
May 2nd, 2007 at 3:55 amThe Democrats should include in the next war-funding bill they send Bush the following stipulation: as soon as the Iraq legislature passes the Iraqi Oil Law, within six months from that date, all U.S. forces must be out of Iraq. Also, at the same time all U.S. “official” forces are out of Iraq, all taxpayer money going to contractors and subcontractors inside Iraq will cease, thus stopping anymore taxpayer money going to private contract mercenary units.
1) Bush and Cheney really, really want that Iraqi Oil Law in place.
2) Many Iraqis really, really want all U.S. (and other foreign) forces to leave Iraq.
3) Democrats want to stop the bloodshed (and the utter waste of taxpayer dollars) brought on by Bush preemptively invading Iraq.
Ergo, give Bush and Cheney what they so desperately desire (for their Western oil company crony pals), but with the condition that once the Iraq legislature passes the Iraqi Oil Law then all U.S. forces will exit Iraq within six months, which will give a majority of Iraqis what they want, as well as the Democrats what they want.
I figure that all of our troops should be home with their families by Christmas. A win-win-win for everyone, except maybe the war-profiteering private merc companies..
May 2nd, 2007 at 3:56 amHaving a timeline for your plan is Management 101.
But there should be more than just a timeline. There should be plans for building international cooperation, spreading goodwill, making amends, getting neighbouring countries involved in a cooperative way for everybody’s benefit, etc.
Martin Gifford.
May 2nd, 2007 at 4:36 amGo Nancy !!!! Get us out of Bushs’ stupid war. War is over…
May 2nd, 2007 at 7:26 amCall out Pelosi on her plan for the first 100 days of congress. ROTFL. Talk about messed up time tables. And I thought she was going to get corruption out instead she surrounds herself with criminals.
ROTFL
May 2nd, 2007 at 8:04 am#105 - “And I thought she was going to get corruption out instead she surrounds herself with criminals.” Comment by Happy Guy — May 2, 2007 @ 8:04 am
Well, just because she stands next to Pres. bush is no reason to say she’s surronded by him.
Then again, there are still plenty or Republicans in the House and Senate, so I guess you could say she is surrounded by criminals.
May 2nd, 2007 at 8:21 ameverything dubbie has done since who-knows-when has been a PR stunt.
Comment by tom baker
And he still has the time to fake a thanks on American Idle (spelling intended) and be an idiot. Laura looks more and more stoned everytime I see her.
May 2nd, 2007 at 8:47 amI have the feeling Pelosi and the rest of the house may just get upset enough to put Impeachment on the table after all. Lots of grass roots pressure these days to do so. It would not surprise me to see it happen. It’s really the only solution.
May 2nd, 2007 at 9:06 amVideo:
May 2nd, 2007 at 10:00 am“Bush was on the Iraq/WMD warpath LONG before 9/11“
.
More and more people using the same tactic as Media Matters. Just show these idiots what they have said in the past.
May 2nd, 2007 at 10:04 amQuotes from three military men: “The President vetoed our troops and the American people. His stubborn commitment to a failed strategy in Iraq is incomprehensible.” - Maj. Gen. John Batiste, Ret.
“This administration and the previously Republican controlled legislature have been the most caustic agents against America’s Armed Forces in memory………the President of the United States is holding our soldiers hostage to his ego.” - Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton, Ret.
“I hope the president seizes this moment for a basic change in course and signs the bill Congress has sent him. The challenge we face today is not how to win in Iraq, it is how to recover from a strategic mistake: invading Iraq in the first place………He lets the United States fly further and further into trouble, squandering its influence, money and blood, facilitating the gains of our enemies.” - Lt. Gen. William Odom, Ret.
It’s really tragic that they didn’t speak up when this war was in the making.
May 2nd, 2007 at 10:41 am>>
It’s really tragic that they didn’t speak up when this war was in the making.
Comment by Audrey — May 2, 2007 @ 10:41 am
May 2nd, 2007 at 11:58 amoops…. part of my message (( #114 )) disappeared to to my inadvertent use of HTML code… So I’m going to try again…
**
It’s really tragic that they didn’t speak up when this war was in the making.
Comment by Audrey — May 2, 2007 @ 10:41 am
**
How do you know they *didn’t* speak up?
Every single general who disagreed with Bush during the run up to and execution of this ‘war’ was removed and replaced by Bush. Anyone who spoke up against the ‘plan’ was canned.
Sure, Bush “listens” to his Generals, just like he says he does. Trouble is, he only hears what he wants to hear, and if he isn’t hearing it, he replaces them with someone who WILL say what he wants to hear…
May 2nd, 2007 at 12:06 pmI go with Gov. Bill Richardson. He thinks that Congress should vote to rescind Bush’s war powers in Iraq. The vote in October 2002 would not be affected in Afghanistan because it has already been turned over to international occupation. The evidence that there were no WMD and that the Bush administration fixed the intelligence which was the only legal reason for invasion nullifies our legal right to continue occupation under our own existing law and treaties. Congress has both a legal and a moral responsibility to set this right immediately.
May 2nd, 2007 at 12:35 pm