Thursday, November 15, 2007

Hey Nancy!!!

Yeah, thanks for all your support for us.


House Democrats pushed through a $50 billion bill for the Iraq war Wednesday night that would require President Bush to start bringing troops home in coming weeks with a goal of ending combat by December 2008.

The legislation, passed 218-203, was largely a symbolic jab at Bush, who already has begun reducing force levels but opposes a congressionally mandated timetable on the war. And while the measure was unlikely to pass in the Senate—let alone overcome a presidential veto—Democrats said they wanted voters to know they weren’t giving up.

“The fact is, we can no longer sustain the military deployment in Iraq,” said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. “Staying there in the manner that we are there is no longer an option.”



Way ahead of you, ya dumb bitch.

"The US military confirmed yesterday that the roughly 3,000 soldiers in the 3rd Brigade, 1st Cavalry Division, will not be replaced when they leave the ethnically and religiously mixed province of Diyala, north of Baghdad. The bulk of the brigade will be back at Fort Hood, Texas, by Christmas and some have left already, officials said."

Not that the morons and mental midgets in the Dinorsaur Media would notice, but I checked and there might be a reason that these brave men and women are heading home;

  • Terrorist operations have decreased by 59%.
  • Second, the terrorist operations have decreased against innocent Iraqi people by 59% also.
  • A decrease in operations against Iraqi security forces by 62%.
  • A decrease in the assassination attempts for sectarian reasons by 72%.
  • Fifth, a decrease in car bombs by 65%.
  • Sixth, a decrease in the fatalities in the civilians killed by car bombs by 81%, including IEDs.
  • Seven, a decrease in human casualties of civilians resulting from car bombs and IEDs by 80%.

Haven't seen that on the front page of the NY Times, the San Francisco Chronicle or the LA Times have ya?

Rep. David Boehner had an e-mail out to supporters and others watching on how the other side (i.e. the people who are NOT members of the Surrender Lobby)

“By Christmas, some 3,000 American troops will return home from Iraq after achieving remarkable success in our fight against al Qaeda. And how is Congress welcoming them back? By passing yet another politically-motivated measure that cuts off funding for those continuing to serve our nation in Iraq and hamstrings the commanders who are leading them to victory. This measure will never be signed into law, and it represents yet another failure for Democratic leaders intent on putting politics before accomplishment.


“Congress would be better served by sending the President the long-overdue veterans and troops funding bill, which enjoys broad, bipartisan support in both the House and Senate. But the Majority leadership has played politics with this critical legislation, stalling its completion to take up today’s cynical proposal to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in Iraq. Consequently, returning troops and their families will face more hurdles and take more time to get the housing and health care benefits they deserve – all thanks to Congress.


“Under General Petraeus’ strategy, our troops are routing al Qaeda in Iraq, improving security for the Iraqi people, and laying the foundation for critical political reconciliation in that country. Congress should not undermine this success and risk having al Qaeda stand back up. Instead, Members of both parties should recognize that the Petraeus plan is working, continue to solidify our troops’ gains, and work to bring them home after victory, not defeat.”

The best comments were from Roy Blunt, the Minority Whip from Missouri:

“Today, if my calculations are right, we will have our 58th vote on trying to restrain the commanders in the field in Iraq,” The Democrats appear to never get tired of foregone conclusions, to never get tired of doing the same thing over and over again with the same result — the ultimate Groundhog Day of legislation that doesn’t get us anywhere.”

Isn't the definition of insanity doing the same thing over and over again, expecting the same result?

Oh, and thanks for your support in fighting the sheep buggering terrorists..

1 comment:

Rosemary said...

I humbly beg your pardon, oh Great Deebow, but the definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing and expecting a Different result, not the same one. Trust me on this one. It is true. lol.