Today, the Democratic Senate will attempt to surrender to the terrorists again.
This is the second attempt to surrender. Bush vetoed the first attempt, and he promises to veto the second attempt. In the meantime, funding for the troops is being held hostage by defeatists that claim to “support the troops.” How they claim to support the troops while simulataneously withholding troop funding, attempting to surrender, and declaring the “war is lost” is beyond me.
Bush will win this battle. Democrats are so set on surrendering they will eventually surrender themselves and pass a funding bill Bush can sign. Instead of surrendering to terrorists, the Democrats will surrender to Bush.
It’s only a matter of time.
Update: We surrender!
Republicans said the vote amounted to little more than political theater because the bill would be dead on arrival after reaching the White House. Bush said he will veto the bill so long as it contains a timetable on Iraq, as well as $20 billion in spending added by Democrats.
“The solution is simple: Take out the surrender date, take out the pork, and get the funds to our troops,” said Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.
I haven’t looked into the 2008 Presidential season yet, it’s too early. Hillary makes me shudder, Obama doesn’t have any experience, and no republicans have really stepped forward.
Afterwards, while answering a question from a viewer on the program YOUR SHOW about why he chose not to run, Kerry said he had decided it wasn’t the right time.
“Could that change?” Kerry said. “It might. It may change over years. It may change over months. I can’t tell you, but I’ve said very clearly I don’t consider myself out of it forever.”
But today, John Kerry, who earlier ruled out a Presidential run, this weekend said he might change his mind. That’s too funny. Can you imagine all the “I decided not to run for President before I decided to run for President” jokes? I can’t imagine Kerry capturing the hearts of the Democrats who will see his reputation for flip-flopping on issues and previous Presidential loss as a liability. And then to “flip-flop” or waffle on whether even to run for President? That’s just going to be fun fodder for his opponents.
Hillary is thinking big again.
I thought she learned her lesson last time:
She also said Democrats would focus on improving the quality and affordability of health care _ a touchy matter for the former first lady, who in 1993 led her husband’s calamitous attempt to overhaul the nation’s health care system. The failure of that effort helped Republicans win control of both the Senate and House the following year.
“Health care is coming back,” Clinton warned, adding, “It may be a bad dream for some.”
Let’s do like those progressive leaders of out neighbors to the north, and regress to the neo-primitive practice of Midwifery, noble savages indeed, they are. Not by choice, mind you, but by government fiat.
Boldy regressing into the past with Hillary-care….blood-letting anyone?
While I expected the Democrats to make inroads, I’m shocked at how big they are. The Democrats didn’t have any real coherent position except “We’re against everything Bush.” It worked with the help of media – I saw one survey this week that said only 12% of news stories last week were favorable to Republicans.
Unlike the talking heads, I don’t think this was so much a referendum on Iraq. If it was, Leiberman wouldn’t have won. I think instead it was just watching the Republicans self-destruct and taking pictures. Conservatives are for a lot of, well, conservative things. Fiscal restraint, immigration control, social values, etc. Can we honestly say that the Republicans supported those values? I can’t. Throwing all the bums out and starting over sounds like a good idea.
I expect 2 years of nothing, then the 2008 elections will be interesting. I hope Michael Steele or Rick Santorum runs for President.
I’m fascinated when a poll turns up distinct differences between groups of people A UPI-Zogby poll asked participants to rank their top requirements in a candidate.
The interesting difference is that Republicans (63.2%) said that “values, morals and character” were the most important consideration in choosing a candidate. The Democrats? 42.3% said “opposition to the war in Iraq.” Values and morals were fifth on the list at 24%.
No wonder I vote Republican. I’m much likelier to support a person of good moral character. If he can artculate a response why he’s against the war in Iraq and maintain his values, I may disagree with him but still vote for him. This poll tells me that as long as the candidate is against the war, it doesn’t matter how crooked they are, they will still win the Democrat vote.
I’ve never seen so many news stories trumpeting the Democrats winning one or both seats of congress. Tonight, CNN was saying how great it was to have a divided Congress, or a President in one party and the Congress in another. The media is trying to brainwash the American people into believing this is a done deal. Pelosi is already Speaker of the house by all media accounts.
I’m not falling for it. I don’t believe it. I think the Democrats are falling for their own push-polls that say they’re going to win. Sure, there’s a lot of dissatisfaction among Republicans. Keeping up support for the troops is hard when the media blasts us daily that we’re a bunch of losers and we should quit. Republicans promised us smaller government and they ballooned it into something huge. The Republicans make no serious effort to stand up against the ACLU’s attack on Christianity, gay marriage, lower taxes, or any other conservative issue I can think of. The border is as porous as the underwear men are wearing to the gym (which, by the way, I almost but not quite feel compelled to give them a dollar to buy some new underwear).
But the Democrats offer nothing in the way of an alternative. Nothing. And they think somehow they’re going to win?
My prediction is that Democrats make minor itty bitty inroads, gain a couple of seats. Nothing more. And the media will blame it on faulty voting machines again.
Not enough of you called last night. Texas RINOs raised taxes last night.
Not satisfied with squeezing out homeowners or the $8 billion or more surplus, RINOs wanted more. What’s most disappointing is that Republicans said that it was a bipartisan bill. Yes, the RINOs needed the help of Democrats to raise taxes.
Do we have any party that is in favor of fiscal responsibility? Is there *any* possibility of lowering taxes and cutting spending?