Kucinich - "What are we waiting for?"

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: Deudalus
So doesn't that basically mean you are "wasting lives and waging war for political gain" king hypocrite?

First, I would just like to say how thrilled I am to have another member join my fan club. Getting quoted in a signature is the highest form of flattery.

Congress already tried pulling the purse strings on Iraq; they got vetoed. So there is no guarantee Bush would even allow them to begin withdrawal without a long protracted battle that would continue past the election.

Withholding funds from troops in an active war zone is political suicide. You don't have to be a political genius to know that. Doing something like that would work against Democrats right now in an election year. And Bush could bypass Congress by dipping into White House emergency funds to fill the gap, keeping the war going.

Democrats know that they only need to wait until the election to have the political power needed to begin a withdrawal without any political obstacles.

Granted, you might need a high school diploma (or GED) to understand such concepts, but hopefully most Americans can figure that out.

 

[thraashman]

Seeing as how Bush has shown a willingness to veto funding bills if they don't have exactly what he wants in them, it's fairly obvious Bush would leave our troops there without funding just so he could blame it on the Dems. Bush would gladly kill of thousands or hundreds of thousands if it meant he got his way. He's proven this alot over the last 7+ years. Simply put, they're too afraid to cut funding as it wouldn't bring them home, it would get them killed faster. Once a responsible person is the president, then they can bring troops home.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Not so close to an election. Cutting funding to troops in an active war zone with a defiant President who will make a big media circus out of it is a bad idea.

Wait until after the elections, when the Democrats have sweeping majorities in Congress and control of the White House; then they can begin troop withdrawal.

In the meantime, they can let the war continue and lay the blame at the feet of McCain and Bush. It serves as great political fodder against them, since the war is so highly unpopular.

Yup, the first thing that jumped out at me about this post is that I can't think of a moral compass where allowing people to die for a partisan advantage wouldn't be wrong.

 

[Moonbeam]

These are mostly the same Democrats that voted to approve the war. They need also to be replaced. They are nothing but spineless worms.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
These are mostly the same Democrats that voted to approve the war. They need also to be replaced. They are nothing but spineless worms.

:thumbsup:

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Uhh... they are in office. Isn't that what the claim was in 2006? They had won based on the promise of ending the war?

I thought they won because they promised to lower gas prices?

How is that working out? Two campaign promises that have ended in complete failure.

They're finding out that it's easier said than done fixing the damage done to the country by the Republicans and President Shit for Brains

Sounds like you have all the excuses for the next 4 years of failure by the democrats.

Well they'll have the White House and the Majority in Congress so if they don't make inroads into correcting the extensive damage done by this current Administration there will be no excuses.