Can Congress stand up to Bush?

Does Congress have the guts to stand up to President George W. Bush and withhold funding for his illegal and immoral war in Iraq?

Democratic leaders on Capitol Hill claim they do. Of course, they have claimed that before and then caved when Bush played the “support our troops” card.

Now Congressional leaders say they will withhold funding until after the first of the year and the propagandists at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue are cranking out talking points saying the party of the donkey is making an ass of itself by abandoning our troops in the field.

Democrats say they are merely carrying out the will of voters who put them into power in the 2006 midterm elections but those same voters have waited in vain for 11 months to see that promise kept.

Bush has made it clear time and time again that he doesn’t give a damn what the people think. He’s the decider and only he, in his mind, is smart enough to make the decision.

So a new standoff begins.

Reports The Associated Press:

Congress likely will hold off on sending President Bush money for Iraq until early next year, pushing the Pentagon to the brink of an accounting nightmare and deepening Democrats’ conflict with the White House on the war.

Democrats say the tough approach is needed.

“Everybody knows that the president is stuck in his place, a place where he wants a 10-year war,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said.

This week, the House passed, 218-203, a $50 billion bill that would pay for combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan — about one-fourth of the amount Bush wants — but require that troops start coming home. The measure sets a goal of ending combat by Dec. 15, 2008.

The Senate planned to vote as early as Friday on the measure, although it was not expected to pass. Democrats hold a narrow majority and 60 votes are needed for the measure to advance.

Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said Thursday that if Congress was unable to pass legislation that sets a timetable on the war — the most likely scenario — they would drop the issue until next year. In the meantime, Democrats say, the Pentagon can eat into its $471 billion annual budget without being forced to take drastic steps.

“The days of a free lunch are over,” said Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates said that unless Congress passes funding for the war within days, he will direct the Army and Marine Corps to begin developing plans to lay off employees and terminate contracts early next year.

Gates, who met with lawmakers on Wednesday, said he does not have the money or the flexibility to move funds around to adequately cover the costs of the continuing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

“There is a misperception that this department can continue funding our troops in the field for an indefinite period of time through accounting maneuvers, that we can shuffle money around the department. This is a serious misconception,” Gates told reporters at the Pentagon.

As a result, he said he is faced with the undesirable task of preparing to cease operations at Army bases by mid-February, and lay off about 100,000 defense department employees and an equal number of civilian contractors. A month later, he said, similar moves would have to be made by the Marines.

Some members of Congress believe the Pentagon can switch enough money to cover the war accounts, Gates said. But he added that he only has the flexibility to transfer about $3.7 billion, which is just one week’s worth of war expenses. Lawmakers, he said, may not understand how complicated and restrictive the situation is.


  1. SEAL

    Off topic but I miss being able to see the amount of activity (posting) on the individual articles plus being able to click directly to the comments even when there were no “new” comments.

  2. yarply

    Bush and congress have got their heads stuck so far up each others ass that if one tripped they would all roll all the way from Washington to Florida. No the congress will not stand up to bush. Why should they? They are all on the same side, when behind closed doors. They just act like they are against him in public.

  3. yarply

    Heard Bush had a new way of financing the war. Make rolls of toilet paper out of Dollar bills and selling them on the market as commemorative handy wipes.

  4. Klaus Hergeschimmer

    “We’ll never give in, never!” -Harry Reid

    “No more blank checks Mr. President” -Nancy Pelosi

    “HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA” -Klaus Hergeschimmer

  5. bryan mcclellan

    It’s tough to stand up to him because they are always bent over kissing his ass.In fact,I would not be surprised if they presented a bill asking him to rub chap stick on his hiney to protect their lips.

  6. Electric Bill

    If Congress doesn’t stand up to Bush, the Democrats may find themselves out of the majority again after the 2008 elections. It’s not hard to understand why the Republicans are so happy with the low congressional approval ratings. Their problem, along with the idiot Bush is they won’t acknowledge,even to themselves that Congress has low approval ratings because they won’t stand up to Bush, not because the aren’t playing nice with the resident and his bund.

  7. bryan mcclellan

    A good start Mr. Gates would be to layoff your mercenary forces and give the security concerns back to the military where they belong.Same goes for Halliburton,Bectal,etc.

  8. Caine

    What does it matter if the dems cave now or in January? They will cave just as they have in the past. If they were going to stand up to Bush, they would have done it the last time Bush asked for money for the illegal war. But they didn’t. If I recall correctly, they even tacked on several more billion to what Bush originally asked for. Hows that for standing up to Bush?!?? They are standing up to him alright: they are standing right beside him!

    Nothing will change!

  9. neveringham

    More fear tactics from the white-house, it is good to see the Bush Administration (via Gates) sticking to their over used strategy by making idle threats again. I think it speaks volumes how this administration would rather accelerate the recession of our economy by laying off 200,000+ government and privately contracted employees for the sake of keeping are friends and family in Iraq to protect “our” precious oil. Great to hear the Democrats are finally pinning this administration into a corner. Let-’em squirm!!! Just cross your fingers that the democrats hold true to their word.

  10. Donnat

    I want to believe the Dems are finally growing a spine, but they’ve let me down too many times before. We’re sick of this invasion, we want an end to it before we’re broke, and someone in WAshington had better start listening to us. This is absurd, Dems, hitch up your panties and do the job we sent you to do!

  11. neveringham

    HAHAHA. After doing a bit of research this $50 billion or 1/4 of what bush wants is…. you guessed it, enough money to fund the war for aprox. 4mo. So it seems like this posturing by the Demo’s is merely a publicity stunt. The only way the pentagon will pick up the tab is if this bill does not pass the Senate, which it isn’t supposed to pass but then again Bush wasn’t ever elected President either…. I still recommend only giving bush enough money to feed and keep our troops safe and set a side more funding for when Bush decides to start withdrawing members of the armed forces. I wonder what Bush wants to do with the extra $50 Billion dollars he’s requesting………?

  12. Ardie

    Maybe the crooks who run the Pentagon can find the 2 trillion dollars they misplaced. That should be enough to keep Bush’s Iraq crusade going.

  13. proudfootz

    Too many sticky fingers in the military-industrial complex: once money goes into that bottomless pit, it’s gone forever.

    Funny how Bush, who dumped our soldiers on false pretenses in inadequate numbers without armor and without a mission as ‘bait’ for a trap, now blames Democrats for his blunder.