US News
Bush seeks to break stalemate over Iraq funding
May 2, 2007, 20:19 GMT
US President George W. Bush (C) talks with US Speaker of the House Democrat Nancy Pelosi of California (2-L) and US Senate Majority Leader Democrat Harry Reed of Nevada (R) during a meeting on Iraq War funding in the Cabinet Room of the White House in Washington, D.C., United States, 02 May 2007. EPA/GARY FABIANO - POOL
Washington - US President George W Bush met with Democratic lawmakers on Wednesday hoping to end a stalemate over a spending measure for the war in Iraq that includes a timeframe for withdrawing US troops.
The meeting came one day after Bush vetoed the 124-billion-dollar spending bill, following through on his refusal to accept any deadlines for pulling troops out of Iraq and setting up a major confrontation with the Democratic-controlled Congress.
Shortly before the meeting began, Bush said the Democrats had their a chance to express their differences over his policy and now was the time to work together to end the dispute and provide troops with the funding.
'I think it's very important we do this as quickly as we possibly can,' Bush said. 'I'm confident that we can reach agreement.'
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi left the White House characterizing the talks as 'positive' but would not say whether they would remove deadlines from a new bill.
'We're not going to go into that right now,' Pelosi said. Reid said the Democrats will continued seeking a plan that 'shows a reasonable way to end this war.'
The Democrats in the House of Representatives on Wednesday failed to override Bush's veto, falling well short of the two-thirds majority needed to defeat the president.
The bill Bush sent back would have required the beginning of a withdrawal from Iraq by October and set a goal for a complete pullout by April.
© 2007 dpa - Deutsche Presse-AgenturCOMMENT
blog comments powered by DisqusLatest Headlines in US
- 1. Mitt Romney Addresses Tea Party Summit Pictures
- 2. Seven injured as US Navy plane crashes into apartments
- 3. At least three injured in US Navy plane crash
- 4. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, others to face death penalty trial
- 5. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, four others to face death penalty trial
Older Talkback
page: 1
so becasue she chooses to talk and offer an olive branch of communication you call her a traitor?
you are a piece of sh*t human. people like you belong on a battle field with your entrails hanging out of your body. then show me your faith in mr bush.
Seeing Pelosi and Reid in action has been a real political highlight for me. While I cannot label any politician a hero, as they apparently have done in the Middle East, I certainly applaud their actions. Bravo! The level of intolerance in the US for other cultures is mind-boggling - not only do we criticize the culture we criticize anyone who even attempts to understand the culture.
Bush has proved time and time again that he doesn't have the capacity to carry the office, he caters to the super rich and corporate elites. Chaney is just another corrupt corporate type criminal. Too bad those energy meeting consisted of a plan to acquire more oil fields through the use of force. Don't let the neocons brainwash you into thinking that this was a retaliation for 9/11. This was not a preemptive strike against Sadam, it was already planned in the energy meetings. the most likely fields to be aquired through military means is in Iraq.
I still don't believe we should pull out. We need to give the next administration a chance to clean up what the Bush Administration messed up.. There is hope, its just hopeless under Bush.. The last thing we need is another hot bed for terrorist like Afghanistan. Democrats need to be strong and be smart. Impeach Bush and Chaney and start on working on a resolution in Iraq. Or wait it out two more years and 2000 more deaths. I'm sorry to say that the alternative is not acceptable.
hats of to president prick
Understand this dude... 'Mrs. Pelosi, 67' IS A T_R_A_I_T_O_R_! If you dont believe it, then that's just too damn bad. Perhaps you should grow a brain larger than her birdbrain.
When you have to use crude language to get your point across - you don't come off as very intelligent - no one will listen!
Bush's opinion is a minority one. He should respect the democratic process, and take his medicine.
That's exactly what he will do: put this issue in play for 08. I cannot think of a more democratic method than that. He will let the people decide who should run things, the capitulators or the stand up guys.
I can't wait.
the american soilders
are wimps anyway . they are afraid of the bad guys and run away like litte sissys..
comeon people we all know bush and chaney wants to destroy america .
so what all the hoopla about.he was sent by God ..
then where would they live dummy?
@to hell with you May 2nd, 2007 - 21:20:11
'so becasue[sic] she chooses to talk and offer an olive branch of communication you call her a traitor?'
When it is with a bunch of terrorist thugs who support Hizbollah and the Iraqi insurgency that is killing our troops, yes.
'you are a piece of sh*t human. people like you belong on a battle field with your entrails hanging out of your body. then show me your faith in mr[sic] bush[sic]. '
Lol.. This is the loony oppositions idea of discourse.
calling the soldiers sissy's because they run away from the enemy isnt nothing than a cop out for ole Hank!!! That is the policy of the American Government right now as the rules of engagement...I know from personal experience that if the soldiers,sailors,airman and marines had there way, Iraq would probably not exist right now...
SO our Traitor politicians on both sides of the isle play the continuing game of chess...using rules for soldiers to play so that they dont offend anybody...The extension of arms won the war...our politicians are the ones who cant!!!...Trust just isnt there...and nobody wants to be told/dictated what to do..
SP4 - a more democratic arrangement for use when a leader has lost the goodwill of the people towards a mandate that has failed, is to go to the country before the expiry of his term of office. Failing that, if the constitution is too hide-bound, then a referendum should be held on the specific issue of concern. Such procedures are quite normal in more democaratic countries
yah if iraq was destroyed the oil would go with it .
and thats why were there....i guess
Yes, its all about oil to keep your gas guzzling society running, but you've been brainwashed into believing its all about terrorists - that's why the US is now suffering so much paranoia
Except for the glaring fact that we live in a republican democracy and that acceptance polls have less than zero to do with real government. The only poll that matters is the voting poll and Bush won both of them.
The dems miscalculated when they ran Gore, they miscalculated when they greenlighted this war and thought it would put Bush out in 2004, miscalculated when they picked Kerry, and miscalculated when they trumped up this vote on Iraq.
In every move, their lame philosophy has failed to work, endangered the thousands they purport to support, and, not once, ran on what they really believe. It's like 1967 all over again. The dems want you to beleive they voted against this war right after they voted for it, and their blind constituants have trollied along behind them, oblivious to the fact that they have been buttf--ked the whole way.
So, Jim, go find the worst shithead liberal and run him on one condition: They, just once, level with you.
Jim, which republican democracy has national referendums?
On various subjects at various times - off the top of my head - Ireland, France, Australia, Italy, Chile, Sweeden, Serbia, Switzerland, Netherlands, - even I beilieve, some of the American States. I'm sure your republicans would be against any such idea - they're clinging on to power far too desperately
SP4 - sorry, you seem to have missed the point of a referendum - it is to give a choice to people when one, or both, or many, political parties have failed. You really ought to think more deeply before launching into your tirades, which I suspect are simply mechanisms to keep the debate going rather than any genuine understanding or real views on the subjectsspluttering into your
Popular does not equal correct, especially when the media is so slanted Jim. The founding fathers recognized that and that is why we have a republic, not a parliament.
They must have been very clever to spot media bias so long ago
...just tell everyone you don't know what you're talking about. Don't be shy.
We don't live in a pure democracy. We never have. You'd know this if you didn't live in your Mommy's basement. Now take off the tinfoil hat, put down the koolaid, and go get out more often.
Another sad SP4 diatribe - can't face the facts so make personal attacks on the messenger
But Jim, SP4 has just show, again, what he is: a little fascist, for whom the Leader is God. For him what the Fuhrer decides is law, and democracy something to forget. He's the kind of person who don't have any ideas at all, just recites what listens in Fox and others like that. Funny part is, he is writing all this in his comfort, but don't offer himself to go fight the 'terrorists'. Of course not, it's always better send the others and call all those who don't agree with him as traitors. For what I know of this personage, you'll never have a discussion with him. Just despise him and let the pour kid continue to stand with is right arm, shouting Heil meine Fuhrer.
Your country, since you elected GWB to be your president, is becoming more and more a police state. Like in Nazi Germany, they call traitors to all that have different ideas. It's sad but, really, it's your problem, I really don't care. But stay there and leave the rest of the world alone. You'll be welcome back, when you've decided you are a democracy, and not a fascist empire.
Thank you Zawaia - I think you describe SP4 remarkably well. I am learning that the best thing with SP4 is to ignore him
One minor mis-conception in your last paragraph - I'm not an American nor, fortunately, am I in America, so I can view their attitudes from a more rational and less bigoted perspective. Nevertheless it is tempting to occasionally poke a stick into the wasp's nest and observe paranioa coming to the surface - with a hope that a little commonsense will eventually filter into their consciousness (without much success unfortunately)
Unlike you, I represent myself. If poofter boy thinks I'm a Nazi, so be it. That does not make me wrong. I don't need a nanny to speak for me. When you get a set of onions, just try to answer the question, in whatever century that will be. It was simple question, and I, truly, do not know what the answer is.
Yes, Zawaia, we noticed how you well ignore SP4. It seems that it requires at least 100 words to do so.
Jim should have just addressed the question. SP is proficient at filleting the Jim's of the world.
is responsible for the terror boiling across the globe. He would have been a hero had he won in Afghanistan. He would have done a lot better if he had matured a little bit since high school.
..their was never terror before GWB took office.
No Munich
No Arafat
No Hizbola
No Al Queda
No Iranian hostages
No Abu Nidal
No Lebanon
No IRA
No Ulster Militia
No Viet Cong
Yep, it all started in January 2001!
In 1972 a poll asked who started the Vietnam war.
30-some odd percent said 'Richard Nixon'
Dumbasses. Always with us.
It's funny ... I'd taken a break from this forum because I got really tired of people like SP4 and their constant efforts to instigate arguments, without having anything productive to contribute to the disccusion, only Rush Limbaughesque rhetoric (ad nauseum).
So I check back today and what's SP4 doing? same thing, only with others. Too funny.
OK SP4, we've read your list above ... Now answer me this ... How many suicide attacks per day were there in Iraq before Bush started his war there?
Saddam did all the killing. Why kill yourselves when he can do it all for you? Like mein Kampf why think when one person can do it for you?
As for suicides, I can't really say.
Is this a measure of the war? If we leave and they go away, will that be a victory and for whom?
That's why you left Real, because you were required to think, or, at least think for yourself.
Try that for a change and then, if you can, get right back to us with an original thought.
bush created this terrorist mess weather you can see it or not. Your voice, as mine, mean nothing in this matter. I just can't understand how you can possibly defend this mother---fucker. Only shows your ignorance. Good luck after bush.
Yes, I'd like to say 'oh, golly, I really admire your insight' but you don't have any. I'm sure is due to lack of trying.
You can also heap the blame on Bush. The thing I like about this guy is he's not dodging his actions. I can't help wonder why this guy is just not acting the part. The only conclusion I can come to, mother f--ker or not, is that he really thinks this is important, and I'm glad to see the repub candidates not running from it, either.
After all, no use voting against it after you voted for it, right? Try that on Hillary and see how it fits...
a genuine bone in bush's body. He is a fraud and he is certainly not a leader.
Re: your comment ... 'That's why you left Real, because you were required to think, or, at least think for yourself.'
Are you really that dense? (You consistently show yourself to be)
Look man, I clearly stated my reasons for leaving this forum ... and all you can do is come up with that lame response? ... I'll spell it slowly for you (again).
I simply got really, really tired of your mindless parroting of Rush Limbaugh, and his uninformed rheotric and partisan distortions. (And you accuse me of not being able to think for myself? Now that's comedy!!)
SP4, your absolute failure, and avoidance to answer my simple question about how many daily suicide bombings there were in Iraq before Bush started this war shows everyone here how 'you can't handle the truth'.
It's really a simple question. We all know the answer. But you choose to avoid it. You know the answer too. The answer is Zero. None.
Now they happen daily.
Yes, Bush has really improved the lives of the people in Iraq hasn't he? He's really brought security to that region hasn't he?
SP4, you always miss the obvious.
Because truth and reality doesn't fit your neo-con idealism, so you choose to avoid it.
You really are a waste of everyone's time.
page: 1
Pelosi/reid are traitorsMay 2nd, 2007 - 20:50:20
“Nancy Pelosi is good, yes?” asked a Damascus laborer who found himself sitting next to an American at a greasy gyro stand this week. “Nancy Pelosi, good American.”
Pictures of Mrs. Pelosi and Syrian President Bashar Assad — officially Syria’s most popular citizen — still turn up on the local news channels, especially during coverage of the dispute between President Bush and Congress over the Iraq war spending bill.
Mrs. Pelosi’s two-day visit to Damascus was a major news event here. Camera crews trailed her as she bought sweets in the ancient Hamadieh souk, made the sign of the cross at what is thought to be the tomb of John the Baptist and donned a black abaya to visit the historic Omayyad Mosque.
Mrs. Pelosi, 67, is praised as “a friend of Syria,” and that makes her more influential than Oprah Winfrey and more appealing than the old Hollywood movies shown on satellite television.
Many Damascus residents say her private visit with Mr. Assad and senior ministers shattered Washington’s attempt to isolate the regime.
“She was enormously popular here, a hero,” said one such resident, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “This is the best thing that has happened here, if it proves [Mr. Assad] was right not to give concessions.”
Report this comment