Expansion of Middle East oil war is a bipartisan imperative
President Bush signed a bill Friday to pay for military operations in Iraq after a bitter struggle with Democrats in Congress who sought unsuccessfully to tie the money to U.S. troop withdrawals.
Congress approved $120 billion in emergency spending for military operations and domestic projects after dropping troop withdrawal timelines that drew a veto threat from President George W. Bush.
Following the House of Representatives, the Senate has passed the $100 billion Iraq war spending bill 80-14.
"American can expect more casualties in Iraq but U.S. troops will have the funds and the resources to prevail." Trace Gallagher said that was the message from President Bush today.
They claim that they don't have the votes to override a veto. But they do have the votes to keep passing a bill that Bush will veto, effectively bringing the war in Iraq to a close because funding will run out.
Congress is poised to vote on a funding bill for Iraq that offers no change of course. Those who vote for it will be undermining the troops and enabling a rogue President.
A new report from GreenPeace reveals what Exxon "didn't mention" to the public. According to its IRS reports, Exxon is still actively funding at least 14 organizations "for their climate change work."
The Democrats, in a meeting with Bush's top aides on Capitol Hill, said they would strip from a war spending bill billions of dollars in domestic spending that the White House had opposed. They also pledged to give Bush authority to waive compliance with a timetable to pull combat troops out of Iraq. But no agreement emerged.
Sponsors
More tags
research News Politics peace iraq war Science Money bush Afghanistan murtha congress military education oil business republicans cheney startup Senate Economy art scandal government Climate new child museum web2.0 pork democrats terror president NASA ideas congressional partisan smithsonian impeachment investment left Abstinence liberty Gonzales mandate bill study Political general expansion monitoring leadership york vc entrepreneurship stop dc public anti jon warming global clean us plans paul foreign change surge Escalates troop Divided Escalation cuts Feingold Kennedy veto no ron exxon john Courage Edward william pbs slashed Alberto Kucinich Lt. behind cpb Dennis withdrawal casualties GSA Demands complicity iraw kyl Odom
Congressional Democrats and President Bush's top aides are entering another round of high-stakes negotiations on funding for the Iraq war in what has become a test of wills.
Most Americans disagree with President Bush's decision last week to veto the war funding bill that contained a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq.
House Democratic leaders are indicating they are not ready to back down in their confrontation with President Bush on Iraq, even as pressure mounts to approve new funding for U.S. troops. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and other party leaders are considering a bill that would fund the war as Bush wants, but only guarantee the money through July.
The Washington Post reports today that House and Senate leaders have made "the first major concession" in the Iraq debate: "an agreement to drop their demand for a timeline to bring troops home from Iraq." It turns out the report is false.
The House plans to try to override the veto Wednesday but is expected to fall short of the required two-thirds majority. Formal compromise talks are expected to resume when Bush meets with congressional leaders at the White House, also on Wednesday.
On CBS's Face the Nation, John Murtha expressed frustration with the White House's public rhetoric about wanting to reach a compromise over Iraq funding. "They say we're willing to compromise," he said. "And then we don't get any compromise." "And we need to make this president understand, the public has spoken".
The story of how the U.S. has paid for its wars is only partially about money.
It's likely that America's military spending has surpassed $12 Trillion since the end of World War II. Add another $4 Trillion for interest on the national debt that has resulted from that military spending.
President Bush should sign legislation starting the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq on Oct. 1, retired Army Lt. Gen. William Odom said Saturday. "I hope the president seizes this moment for a basic change in course and signs the bill Congress has sent him," Odom said, delivering the Democrats' weekly radio address.
President Bush warned Democrats Fri. not to "test my will" by passing new legislation on a US troop pullout from Iraq after he vetoes a bill passed by Congress this week. Bush invited Congress to discuss a way out of the standoff soon after he strikes down the bill, which ties $124B in war funds to a withdrawal that would start on Oct. 1.
Senator Joe Lieberman (ID-CT) today addressed the Iraq withdrawal provision in the supplemental appropriations bill on the floor of the U.S. Senate. Below is the full text of Senator Lieberman's speech, as prepared for delivery:
An Iraqi government spokesman criticized the U.S. Senate vote to begin withdrawing U.S. troops by Oct. 1. "We see some negative signs in the decision because it sends wrong signals to some sides that might think of alternatives to the political process," Ali al-Dabbagh told The Associated Press.
Cuts in US government funding for NASA programs will dramatically weaken scientists' capacity to monitor and understand the planet's climate; at least, so says a major study from the National Research Council (NRC), published earlier this year.
President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney aggressively challenged the motives of Congressional Democrats on Tuesday, as the House and Senate prepared to consider a war spending bill that would order troops to be withdrawn from Iraq beginning later this year.
Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) attacked Congress' war funding bill today, claiming it was "the first time I know of ... that a country just announces that it's walking off the battlefield." Kyl didn't mention that on 2 occasions during the Clinton admin he voted in favor of setting a specific date for US troops to "walk off the battlefield"
Anti-war liberals worried about party unity are reluctant to mount opposition to war spending legislation in the House even if it does not set a firm date for troop withdrawal.
The Bush administration's plans to significantly boost the size of the Army and Marine Corps will cost $108 billion over the next seven years, according to a new Congressional Budget Office report.
A House Appropriations subcommittee chairman said Thursday that if the scandal surrounding the head of the General Services Administration is not cleaned up, the agency's funding bill will be amended "to shreds."
Today, in the fifth year of this civil war, U.S. forces are suffering losses at a rate not seen since the bloody battle of Fallujah over two years ago and there is no end in sight. Yet the President and the Vice President continue to desperately cling to their failed escalation strategy and attack those who disagree with them.
Bush has tried to justify his planned veto of Congress' Iraq legislation by complaining about the non-Iraq related funds in the bill. CLAIM: Bush opposes spending in the emergency supplemental that is "unrelated to the war." FACT: Bush's own supplemental request to Congress contained millions in non-war related funds.
A long-awaited national study has concluded that abstinence-only sex education, a cornerstone of the Bush administration's social agenda, does not keep teenagers from having sex. Neither does it increase or decrease the likelihood that if they do have sex, they will use a condom.









