© copyright 2007 Betsy L. Angert
Murtha Slams Bush for Veto Threat
Please pardon the obligatory commercial prologue. Bush Renews Veto Threat
Dear President George W. Bush . . .
I was among the Americans willing to settle for some semblance of support for the troops. I was willing to say bring them home months from now; although it seems to me a time in 2008 is more than a year. Nevertheless, I called my Congressman and said please sign on to the silly Bill, the one setting an absurd and somewhat arbitrary time for bring the soldiers home. However, in each of my conversations with Congressional Aides, I added my truer feelings. I want the funds cut! It seems that now, you do as well.
I did not want the troops to travel abroad, to bomb innocent children and civilians. Placing servicemen and women in "harms way" never seemed wise to me!
The reason for this war and for the "rally 'round the flagpole" was always obvious to me. Ego and egocentric attitudes abound! America and its President arrogantly presumed to know what is best for people in the Middle East. Posturing and propaganda were produced to support this swaggering stance. If there was a battle to be had, my position was and is, let those that think there is reason to go to war go. I am not referring to the young and agile, those led into service for they need the funds just to survive, I am speaking of the nations leaders, those that posture that combat will protect us [and our interests.]
That is enough of my musings. I am writing to state, George, you have the funds for the troops now. Congress gave these to you!
The Senate today defied a White House veto threat and narrowly approved a $122 billion war spending billTo veto the Bill leaves you and our military forces, those that you placed is such a deadly and precarious situation without funds! Mister Bush, if I may be so bold, you are the person that is not "Supporting the soldiers!" Stop.
Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) shot back that Bush's vow to veto the spending bill carries its own cost. In a joint letter, they warned him against following "a political strategy that would needlessly delay funding for our troops."Mister Bush, please, acknowledge the funds were granted. It is your actions, or reactions, that will delay war efforts! President Bush, you declare we must stop this silliness. For the first time ever, we agree. We can cease and desist. Let us Stop the war! This "caldron of chaos" boggles the mind; it is madness. [However, I do submit my compliments to the speechwriter that created that phrase. I truly admire such a classic construction.]
George, you blame Congress for putting our boys and girls at risk, while ignoring the premise that your orders sent them to fight on false pretenses.
The Associated Press helpfully chronicles administration statements on WMD before and after the invasion of Iraq in March 2003. Among them:It seems finding fault with others is your habit. You blame "Intelligence" and Congress. Might we expect the American people are next in line to receive your wrath. After all, they did vote to end this war, to exit Iraq. Nonetheless you persist, you resist. Mister Bush you place the onus on the House and Senate, proclaiming these persons are not funding the feud."Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us." -- Vice President Cheney, Aug. 26, 2002. And:
"Saddam Hussein is a man who told the world he wouldn't have weapons of mass destruction, but he's got them." -- Bush, Nov. 3, 2002. And let's all remember that these comments came considerably before then-CIA Director George J. Tenet's assertion that the WMD case was a "slam dunk," in late December of 2002. By that point, Bush and Cheney had clearly already made up their minds.
In combative speech yesterday, Bush said "the American people will know who to hold responsible" if funding for the war stalls.Dear Commander-In-Chief, the legislative branch has given you billions to play with! Even this latest Bill finances this futile folly. It will be your rejection of the measure that leaves the Defense Department without dollars to provide for this military mission.
Bush ventured into sarcasm about the political battle Tuesday saying, "If Democrat leaders in Congress are bent on making a political statement, then they need to send me this unacceptable bill as quickly as possible when they come back. I'll veto it and then Congress can get down to the business of funding our troops without strings and without delay."Please, as you say, let us have no delay; cut the funds immediately! Who knew that your own antics would slash the cash? You Mister Bush are slicing your own allowance. I am fine with that. I only hope that Congress will realize, just as there will not be a win in this war, there is no triumph when battling with the Bushman.
Perhaps Congress will listen to the speech you delivered today and conclude, we must "Bring the troops home, now!" I would have preferred soldiers were never sent. Nevertheless, since military maneuvers I must be realistic. I can fantasize that the troops needed to be back in the states yesterday. However, they were not.
President Bush, since you are now planning to "cut the funds" with your own veto pen, I say, let us do it.
"If Congress fails to pass a bill that I can sign by mid-April, the Army will be forced to consider cutting back on equipment, equipment repair and quality of life initiatives for our Guard and Reserve forces," Bush saidSlice and dice as you will, as you are. Do not send cash or soldiers. The surge and the war need to end. There was never a valid reason to start this crusade. It is time; the hour, just as our young men and women, has long since passed!
Exit Iraq! Eliminate all Funding! The reasons and rationale . . .
The Text. The Transcript. George W. Bush Tells it his way. . .
President Bush Makes Remarks on the Emergency SupplementalLet the Battle begin or end. Again I plead, Exit Iraq Now!
April 3, 2007 10:09 A.M. EDTTHE PRESIDENT: Good morning. I've just had a good meeting with Secretary of Defense Bob Gates, and General Pete Pace, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Secretary Gates and General Pace updated me on the deployment of American reinforcements to Iraq.
At this moment, two of the five additional U.S. Army brigades we are sending for this mission are operating in Baghdad. A third brigade is now moving from Kuwait, and will be fully operational in Baghdad in the coming weeks. And the remaining two brigades will deploy in April and May. It will be early June before all U.S. forces dedicated to the operation are in place. So this operation is still in its beginning stages.
The reinforcements we've sent to Baghdad are having a impact. They're making a difference. And as more of those reinforcements arrive in the months ahead, their impact will continue to grow. But to succeed in their mission, our troops need Congress to provide the resources, funds, and equipment they need to fight our enemies.
It has now been 57 days since I requested that Congress pass emergency funds for our troops. Instead of passing clean bills that fund our troops on the front lines, the House and Senate have spent this time debating bills that undercut the troops, by substituting the judgment of politicians in Washington for the judgment of our commanders on the ground, setting an arbitrary deadline for withdrawal from Iraq, and spending billions of dollars on pork barrel projects completely unrelated to the war.
I made it clear for weeks that if either the House or Senate version of this bill comes to my desk, I will veto it. And it is also clear from the strong support for this position in both Houses that the veto would be sustained. The only way the Democrats were able to pass their bill in the first place was to load the bill with pork and other spending that has nothing to do with the war.
There was -- one leading Democrat in the House said, "A lot of things had to go into that bill that certainly those of us who respect great legislation did not want there." That's an honest appraisal of the process that we just witnessed. Still, the Democrats in Congress continue to pursue their bills, and now they have left Washington for spring recess without finishing the work.
Democrat leaders in Congress seem more interested in fighting political battles in Washington than in providing our troops what they need to fight the battles in Iraq. If Democrat leaders in Congress are bent on making a political statement, then they need to send me this unacceptable bill as quickly as possible when they come back. I'll veto it, and then Congress can get down to the business of funding our troops without strings and without delay.
If Congress fails to act in the next few weeks, it will have significant consequences for our men and women in the Armed Forces. As the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Pace, recently stated during his testimony before a House subcommittee, if Congress fails to pass a bill I can sign by mid-April, the Army will be forced to consider cutting back on equipment, equipment repair, and quality of life initiatives for our Guard and reserve forces. These cuts would be necessary because the money will have to be shifted to support the troops on the front lines.
The Army also would be forced to consider curtailing some training for Guard and reserve units here at home. This would reduce their readiness and could delay their availability to mobilize for missions in Afghanistan and Iraq. If Congress fails to pass a bill I can sign by mid-May, the problems grow even more acute. The Army would be forced to consider slowing or even freezing funding for its depots, where the equipment our troops depend on is repaired. They will also have to consider delaying or curtailing the training of some active duty forces, reducing the availability of these forces to deploy overseas. If this happens, some of the forces now deployed in Afghanistan and Iraq may need to be extended because other units are not ready to take their places.
If Congress does not act, the Army may also have to delay the formation of new brigade combat teams, preventing us from getting those troops into the pool of forces that are available to deploy. If these new teams are unavailable, we would have to ask other units to extend into the theater.
In a letter to Congress, Army Chief of Staff General Pete Schoomaker put it this way: "Without approval of the supplemental funds in April, we will be forced to take increasingly draconian measures, which will impact Army readiness and impose hardships on our soldiers and their families."
In a time of war, it's irresponsible for the Democrat leadership -- Democratic leadership in Congress to delay for months on end while our troops in combat are waiting for the funds. The bottom line is this: Congress's failure to fund our troops on the front lines will mean that some of our military families could wait longer for their loved ones to return from the front lines. And others could see their loved ones headed back to the war sooner than they need to. That is unacceptable to me, and I believe it is unacceptable to the American people.
Members of Congress say they support the troops. Now they need to show that support in deed, as well as in word. Members of Congress are entitled to their views and should express them. Yet debating these differences should not come at the expense of funding our troops.
Congress's most basic responsibility is to give our troops the equipment and training they need to fight our enemies and protect our nation. They're now failing in that responsibility, and if they do not change course in the coming weeks, the price of that failure will be paid by our troops and their loved ones.
Recent Comments