Pelosi: ‘This Legislation Respects the Wishes of the American People to End the Iraq

[stephanie]

:puke3:
I truly can't stand this woman..

Washington, D.C. – In an enrollment ceremony, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid joined in signing the Iraq Supplemental bill to be delivered to the White House today. Below are her opening remarks:

“Good afternoon. Welcome back to the House side, Mr. Leader.

“Mindful of our responsibility to the Constitution and to the American people, I’m pleased to join in signing this Iraq legislation, which is so important to our national security. For the strong commitment to support our troops and to fill our promises to our veterans, this legislation honors the sacrifice of our men and women in uniform with benchmarks that hold the Iraqi government accountable. This legislation respects the wishes of the American people to end the Iraq war.

“I’m pleased to sign this legislation, which passed both Houses of Congress, with bipartisan support. I urge the President to sign the global war on terror supplemental, so that we can focus on fighting terrorism.”wtf??
http://speaker.house.gov/newsroom/pressreleases?id=0160

[typomaniac]

Face it, you lost in November because of Iraq. Now you're paying the penalty.

[stephanie]

Face it, you lost in November because of Iraq. Now you're paying the penalty.

Ugh...:poke:

[manu1959]

Face it, you lost in November because of Iraq. Now you're paying the penalty.

nobody voted to quit and be a loooooooser.....nancy and harry are on their own on that one...

[Hagbard Celine]

nobody voted to quit and be a loooooooser.....nancy and harry are on their own on that one...

Actually, I think the Dems were voted in based almost solely on this issue. Most Americans don't support the war in Iraq.

[manu1959]

Actually, I think the Dems were voted in based almost solely on this issue. Most Americans don't support the war in Iraq.

so you voted to quit? then why fund it ... just quit .... don't fund the war then say you are against it ....

[Pale Rider]

Actually, I think the Dems were voted in based almost solely on this issue. Most Americans don't support the war in Iraq.

Bold statement... can you prove it?

:edit: Don't know how credible this "Rasmussen" poll is but, here's the numbers...


You would think this would be a slam-dunk for the Democrats. With approval ratings in the 30s, Bush is deeply unpopular. So is his war. According to a Rasmussen poll last week, 57% of Americans support either an immediate withdrawal (37%) or a deadline for withdrawal (20%), while 60% believe that his "surge" has either made things worse in Iraq or has made no difference. As though that were not enough, he will most likely sign the veto tomorrow, on the fourth anniversary of his "mission accomplished" speech.

http://www.trinicenter.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1673

:edit: Of course here's another poll indicating quite the opposite. Shows how polls can be manipulated...


The Online Poll question was: Who do you support in the war funding bill debate, President Bush or Congress?

There were a total of 965 responses to the question. Of those, 531 — 55 percent — indicated they support Mr. Bush. Forty-five percent, 434, indicated they support Congress.

http://www.baxterbulletin.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070501/OPINION01/705010308/1014/OPINION



And by the way, this wacky combo of dingy harry and little miss commie pelosi are two of the rottenest pieces of liberal filth this country has seen in decades.

[lily]

nobody voted to quit and be a loooooooser.....nancy and harry are on their own on that one...

Well, you know actually they aren't and after the veto, I'm sure more than these Republicans will be signing on.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/30/AR2007043001527.html?referrer=email



Republicans Buck Bush On Iraq Benchmarks

By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, May 1, 2007; Page A05

Brushing aside White House opposition, Republican leaders in Congress said
yesterday that negotiations on a second war spending bill should begin with
benchmarks of success for the Iraqi government, and possible consequences if
those benchmarks are not met.

Democratic leaders will send a $124 billion war funding bill to President
Bush today that would establish such benchmarks and tie them to troop
withdrawals, which would begin as early as July 1 if they are not met. The
bill will arrive at the White House on the fourth anniversary of Bush's
speech aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln, when he declared an end to major
combat operations in Iraq before a banner that proclaimed "Mission
Accomplished."


The administration dispatched Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Sunday
to try to slam shut bipartisan talk of punishing the Iraqi government for
not meeting benchmarks. Bush took the same uncompromising tone yesterday
when he reiterated his veto promise.

"That's not to say I'm not interested in their opinions. I am," he said of
congressional leaders. "I look forward to working with members of both
parties to get a bill that doesn't set artificial timetables and doesn't
micromanage and gets the money to our troops."

But GOP leaders did not take the benchmark issue off the table. House
Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) suggested last week that although
Republicans could not accept linking benchmarks to troop withdrawals, they
could tie them to $5.7 billion in nonmilitary assistance for the Iraqi
government.

Blunt spokeswoman Burson Snyder said yesterday that it would be "premature"
to rule out such a proposal, in spite of Rice's comments. "We haven't even
begun substantive conversations with the Democratic leadership, so how can
we start ruling in or out certain provisions?" she said.

House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) took a similar tack. Boehner
"believes members and the administration can and will discuss benchmarks as
a way of measuring progress and holding the Iraqi government accountable,
and that's where members need to start," said his spokesman Kevin Smith. He
added that "tying benchmarks to withdrawal dates or deadlines are a
non-starter," but he did not rule out consequences for Iraqi government
inaction.

Rep. Bob Inglis (R-S.C.) has suggested that benchmarks be tied to U.S. troop
positions within Iraq. If the benchmarks are not met, troops would remain in
the country but would be removed from combat zones.

Appearing on several Sunday talk shows, Rice said any compromise on
benchmarks would not give the Iraqi government and U.S. troops the
flexibility they need. Her comments left Democratic leaders convinced that
the White House is not ready to negotiate on a war funding bill that
includes policy changes for Iraq. Instead, Democrats will have to negotiate
with congressional Republicans, hoping a measure with broad, bipartisan
support would force Bush to the table.

House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) told reporters in New Hampshire
that he has already reached out to Boehner and Blunt, a statement that
Boehner denied yesterday. Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) and
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) held their second meeting on
Iraq yesterday.

House Democrats are beginning to coalesce around a $19 billion bill --
enough to fund the war for about 60 days -- without any withdrawal dates,
according to aides. The measure would include additional funds for military
health care; new standards for resting, training and equipping troops before
deployment; and prohibitions on torture and permanent bases in Iraq.
Benchmarks would be included, but with no punishments for failing to meet
them.

The idea would be to pass the measure quickly, as soon as early next week,
to deprive Bush of the argument that Democrats are withholding needed funds
from the troops. Then negotiations would begin immediately on yet another
bill.

[lily]

so you voted to quit? then why fund it ... just quit .... don't fund the war then say you are against it ....


Why are you so against the Iraqi government actually starting to govern and do the things they were voted in to do? Why should we keep funding them and sending our men and boys over while they sit and count their money?

[Gaffer]

:puke3:
I truly can't stand this woman..

Washington, D.C. – In an enrollment ceremony, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid joined in signing the Iraq Supplemental bill to be delivered to the White House today. Below are her opening remarks:

“Good afternoon. Welcome back to the House side, Mr. Leader.

“Mindful of our responsibility to the Constitution and to the American people, I’m pleased to join in signing this Iraq legislation, which is so important to our national security. For the strong commitment to support our troops and to fill our promises to our veterans, this legislation honors the sacrifice of our men and women in uniform with benchmarks that hold the Iraqi government accountable. This legislation respects the wishes of the American people to end the Iraq war.

“I’m pleased to sign this legislation, which passed both Houses of Congress, with bipartisan support. I urge the President to sign the global war on terror supplemental, so that we can focus on fighting terrorism.”wtf??
http://speaker.house.gov/newsroom/pressreleases?id=0160

I still don't see how 2 bribed repubs make it a bi-partisan bill. And its already been vetoed. So FUCK YOU pelosi.

[loosecannon]

nobody voted to quit and be a loooooooser.....nancy and harry are on their own on that one...

yup, all alone in a crowd of 200,000,000 Americans.

[loosecannon]

so you voted to quit? then why fund it ... just quit .... don't fund the war then say you are against it ....

Why not, Bush is gonna defund the war and say he is forit.

[loosecannon]

:edit: Of course here's another poll indicating quite the opposite. Shows how polls can be manipulated...



online polls are completely unscientific. I have seen online polls that favor impeachment with 95%.

[Gunny]

Actually, I think the Dems were voted in based almost solely on this issue. Most Americans don't support the war in Iraq.

The dems weren't voted in. The Republicans voted their own out.

[loosecannon]

I still don't see how 2 bribed repubs make it a bi-partisan bill. And its already been vetoed. So FUCK YOU pelosi.


Gaffe also wants to de fund the war and deprive the troops of the support they need.

Why are all the republicans voting to shortchange the troops and de fund the war they say they love so much?

[loosecannon]

The dems weren't voted in. The Republicans voted their own out.


That is heavy, I never heard anyone say that Gunny.

Why do you believe it?

[lily]

I still don't see how 2 bribed repubs make it a bi-partisan bill. And its already been vetoed. So FUCK YOU pelosi.

Yeah.....that'll show her!!!!:salute:

[Baron Von Esslingen]

The dems weren't voted in. The Republicans voted their own out.

The sad thing is that I believe you are totally serious when you say stuff like this. And you couldn't be more wrong. Republicans are NOT the majority party. According to the latest Pew poll, regulars and leaners to the GOP are at 35% and the Democrats are at 50%. That makes your statement false on it's head. Independents (the other 15%) provided the margin of victory just like they do is almost every election.

The issue of the war is what got the GOP their asses handed to them and cost them control of Congress. It was a Democratic issue and you lost because of it. If Chimpy keeps doing his Stay The Course routine, he'll hand the WH back to the Democrats in 2008. In fact, I'm counting on it.

link (http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=312)

[Birdzeye]

The sad thing is that I believe you are totally serious when you say stuff like this. And you couldn't be more wrong. Republicans are NOT the majority party. According to the latest Pew poll, regulars and leaners to the GOP are at 35% and the Democrats are at 50%. That makes your statement false on it's head. Independents (the other 15%) provided the margin of victory just like they do is almost every election.

The issue of the war is what got the GOP their asses handed to them and cost them control of Congress. It was a Democratic issue and you lost because of it. If Chimpy keeps doing his Stay The Course routine, he'll hand the WH back to the Democrats in 2008. In fact, I'm counting on it.

link (http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=312)

Pelosi was right; the legislation reflects the will of the people. Bush has given the people the finger.

[avatar4321]

Why are you so against the Iraqi government actually starting to govern and do the things they were voted in to do? Why should we keep funding them and sending our men and boys over while they sit and count their money?

Because that is the only responsibility that congress has in war time. The Commander in Chief runs the war, not Congress.

[KarlMarx]

Here's my prediction

1. We pull out of Iraq
2. Iran and Al Queda take over
3. Remember the Khmer Rouge and Pol Pot? That's the same thing that will happen in Iraq
4. Republicans and conservatives tell the anti-war zealots "we told you so"
5. Dems, libs and anti-war zealots go into spin, revisionism and finger pointing mode

The irony of it all will be that Hillary, if she becomes president, and Nancy Pelosi, if she reamins Speaker of the House, may have to preside over a redeployment of troops to Iraq, but this time, with far more casualties....
Who do you think will support such an effort? The Right!

And won't that be a fine how do you do, the irony will be surreal in its magnitude and scope, all that shall be needed is Rod Serling doing the narration...

[Gaffer]

Pelosi was right; the legislation reflects the will of the people. Bush has given the people the finger.

pelosi doesn't reflect MY will. Bush has given pelosi the finger.

[Birdzeye]

pelosi doesn't reflect MY will. Bush has given pelosi the finger.

You're in the minority. Maybe it's lucky for you, but not lucky for the majority, that Bush doesn't give a flying fuck about the will of the people.

[Pale Rider]

You're in the minority. Maybe it's lucky for you, but not lucky for the majority, that Bush doesn't give a flying fuck about the will of the people.

'Scuze me but, there is no clear minority or majority. You're pulling that out of your ass.

If we don't fight al qeada in Iraq, we'll end up fighting them here. I guess that's what the libs want. Another 9/11.

[Birdzeye]

'Scuze me but, there is no clear minority or majority. You're pulling that out of your ass

Oh, really? :laugh2:

Gallup Poll. April 23-26, 2007. N=1,007 adults nationwide, randomly drawn from Gallup's household panel, which was originally recruited through random selection methods. MoE ± 4.

"Still thinking about Iraq -- If you had to choose, which would you favor: the U.S. setting a timetable for removing its troops from Iraq and sticking to that timetable regardless of what is happening in Iraq, or the U.S. keeping troops in Iraq as long as necessary to secure the country, even if that takes many more years?" Options rotated

Setting a Timetable for Removing Troops: 57%
Keeping Troops As Long as Necessary: 39%
Unsure: 3%

CBS News/New York Times Poll. April 20-24, 2007. N=1,052 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3 (for all adults). RV = registered voters

"Do you think the United States should or should not set a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq sometime in 2008?"

Should: 64%
Should Not: 32%
Unsure: 4%

PollingReport.com - Public Opinion Online


If we don't fight al qeada in Iraq, we'll end up fighting them here. I guess that's what the libs want. Another 9/11.

You believe all the right wing propaganda they feed you? :rolleyes:

[Baron Von Esslingen]

Here's my prediction

1. We pull out of Iraq
2. Iran and Al Queda take over
3. Remember the Khmer Rouge and Pol Pot? That's the same thing that will happen in Iraq
4. Republicans and conservatives tell the anti-war zealots "we told you so"
5. Dems, libs and anti-war zealots go into spin, revisionism and finger pointing mode

The irony of it all will be that Hillary, if she becomes president, and Nancy Pelosi, if she reamins Speaker of the House, may have to preside over a redeployment of troops to Iraq, but this time, with far more casualties....
Who do you think will support such an effort? The Right!

And won't that be a fine how do you do, the irony will be surreal in its magnitude and scope, all that shall be needed is Rod Serling doing the narration...

Here's my prediction:

1. Bush ignores the will of the people and continues the War In Iraq.
2. Democrats take over the White House and run up solid majorities in Congress
3. We pull out of Iraq and leave Iraq to the Iraqis.
4. With the help of the Arab League, Iraqi forces drive out al-qaeda
5. The next president finishes the war in Afghanistan and brings peace to the Middle East and the sub-continent
6. The next five presidents are Democrats because the country is reminded constantly how seriously they fucked things up while they were running the show.
7. Our reputation, good name, and honor are restored and we become the world leader again this time by example and not by force.

[Pale Rider]

Oh, really?

Yeah really... :laugh2:


The Online Poll question was: Who do you support in the war funding bill debate, President Bush or Congress?

There were a total of 965 responses to the question. Of those, 531 — 55 percent — indicated they support Mr. Bush. Forty-five percent, 434, indicated they support Congress.

All you have to do is ask the right question, and a poll can be totally manipulated.

[Birdzeye]

Yeah really... :laugh2:



All you have to do is ask the right question, and a poll can be totally manipulated.

And how was this poll manipulated?

[Pale Rider]

And how was this poll manipulated?

Didn't I already answer that? :dunno:

[Birdzeye]

Didn't I already answer that? :dunno:

Nice dodge. You spoke hypothetically about asking the "right" question in order to "manipulate" a poll. So please explain how the question in this case "manipulated" this particular poll.

[Hagbard Celine]

Here's my prediction:

1. Bush ignores the will of the people and continues the War In Iraq.
2. Democrats take over the White House and run up solid majorities in Congress
3. We pull out of Iraq and leave Iraq to the Iraqis.
4. With the help of the Arab League, Iraqi forces drive out al-qaeda
5. The next president finishes the war in Afghanistan and brings peace to the Middle East and the sub-continent
6. The next five presidents are Democrats because the country is reminded constantly how seriously they fucked things up while they were running the show.
7. Our reputation, good name, and honor are restored and we become the world leader again this time by example and not by force.

8. The Republican party works tirelessly to smear their counterparts on the opposite side of the aisle, digging up sex scandal after sex scandal until something sticks while simultaneously debating the important issues of flag burning and gay marriage in the house and senate.
9. The American people, grown fat and complacent under 20 years of peaceful, profitable democratic leadership come to their senses and vote a Republican candidate running on a "values" platform and backed by a closeted, junkie mega-church evangelical leader into office.
10. fear propaganda is pumped onto the airwaves while military spending bills are pumped into the house and senate.
11. Social programs are cut.
12. The universal healthcare system passed during the democratic golden age is retracted. GDP plummets alongside public health and infant mortality rates.
12.5. The president visits the Daytona 500 for a photo-op.
13. The fearless Republican CIC leads the pimple-faced, young military to some third-world country populated by brown people and then leaves them there for a decade to "police" the conflict created by the initial invasion.
14. The cycle continues...

[stephanie]

Nancy Pelosi was elected to represent the moonbats in San Francisco...

She does not.......REPRESENT ME..I didn't vote for her to speak for me...And I never would vote for her..

She needs to shut up with this......*the will of the people bullshit*...

All she can speak for is the will of the San Francisco people...

[Hagbard Celine]

Nancy Pelosi was elected to represent the moonbats in San Francisco...

She does not.......REPRESENT ME..I didn't vote for her to speak for me...And I never would vote for her..

She needs to shut up with this......*the will of the people bullshit*...

All she can speak for is the will of the San Francisco people...

Uh, I think she can speak for the house. :dunno:

[Pale Rider]

Nice dodge. You spoke hypothetically about asking the "right" question in order to "manipulate" a poll. So please explain how the question in this case "manipulated" this particular poll.

I'm not a psychologist. But it's been proven. Ask different questions, you'll get different answers. Just look at the polls that have been posted here. Some have majority support of bush for war, some don't. Different questions, different answer. Is as simple as that. If you need a psychoanalysis, you'll have to ask a psychologist.

[Pale Rider]

8. The Republican party works tirelessly to smear their counterparts on the opposite side of the aisle, digging up sex scandal after sex scandal until something sticks while simultaneously debating the important issues of flag burning and gay marriage in the house and senate.
9. The American people, grown fat and complacent under 20 years of peaceful, profitable democratic leadership come to their senses and vote a Republican candidate running on a "values" platform and backed by a closeted, junkie mega-church evangelical leader into office.
10. fear propaganda is pumped onto the airwaves while military spending bills are pumped into the house and senate.
11. Social programs are cut.
12. The universal healthcare system passed during the democratic golden age is retracted. GDP plummets alongside public health and infant mortality rates.
12.5. The president visits the Daytona 500 for a photo-op.
13. The fearless Republican CIC leads the pimple-faced, young military to some third-world country populated by brown people and then leaves them there for a decade to "police" the conflict created by the initial invasion.
14. The cycle continues...


:lmao: :laugh: :lol:

[Pale Rider]

Nancy Pelosi was elected to represent the moonbats in San Francisco...

She does not.......REPRESENT ME..I didn't vote for her to speak for me...And I never would vote for her..

She needs to shut up with this......*the will of the people bullshit*...

All she can speak for is the will of the San Francisco people...

She doesn't speak for me either! She's a filthy old hippie, commie, from sanfranhomoco. That's all she knows. She's so far out of touch with the rest of the country it's laughable.

[Birdzeye]

I'm not a psychologist. But it's been proven. Ask different questions, you'll get different answers. Just look at the polls that have been posted here. Some have majority support of bush for war, some don't. Different questions, different answer. Is as simple as that. If you need a psychoanalysis, you'll have to ask a psychologist.

You're still dodging. Please explain how the question in the polls I mentioned "manipulated" them. A straightforward answer, for a change, would be most welcome.

[Birdzeye]

She doesn't speak for me either! She's a filthy old hippie, commie, from sanfranhomoco. That's all she knows. She's so far out of touch with the rest of the country it's laughable.

Care to back up those allegations with some reliable evidence? :link:

[Pale Rider]

You're still dodging. Please explain how the question in the polls I mentioned "manipulated" them. A straightforward answer, for a change, would be most welcome.

For Christ sake, I DID! If you don't like the answer, or can't understand it, that's now your problem. Sshheeeezzuz... :uhoh:

[Pale Rider]

Care to back up those allegations with some reliable evidence? :link:

She's a whack job, far left, liberal, and there's not a conservative in his/her right mind that agrees with her.

[Gaffer]

Care to back up those allegations with some reliable evidence? :link:

Look at her, listen to what she says, check her voting record. What more proof do you need?

[stephanie]

Look at her, listen to what she says, check her voting record. What more proof do you need?


I find it hard to look at her.....she's scary looking..:laugh2:

[lily]

Because that is the only responsibility that congress has in war time. The Commander in Chief runs the war, not Congress.


Well, then step back and let us do our job!

[lily]

If we don't fight al qeada in Iraq, we'll end up fighting them here. I guess that's what the libs want. Another 9/11.

I'm curious, how are they going to get here?

[lily]

Nancy Pelosi was elected to represent the moonbats in San Francisco...

She does not.......REPRESENT ME..I didn't vote for her to speak for me...And I never would vote for her..

She needs to shut up with this......*the will of the people bullshit*...

All she can speak for is the will of the San Francisco people...

Funny, that's how a lot of us felt about Hastert, especially during the Foley scandal.

[stephanie]

Funny, that's how a lot of us felt about Hastert, especially during the Foley scandal.

Hey....we got Foley who just sent emails, and If I recall......he stepped down

You all got Gerry Stubbs.......Barney Franks, who not only didn't step down, they got reelected???:slap:

[lily]

Um.......well.......my post wasn't about Foley, it was about Hastert, you know the speaker of the house, which was the discussion at hand?

If you want to discuss the others, I believe there is a thread already started just for that topic.

[stephanie]

Um.......well.......my post wasn't about Foley, it was about Hastert, you know the speaker of the house, which was the discussion at hand?

Aaaaa...But....you're the one who threw Foley in there...I couldn't just let that one slide..:laugh2: