The Swamp
Text size:  A A A A A

« GOP en espanol: Radio Romney, Tancredo boycott | Main | Huckabee stands by '92 comments on AIDS, gays »

Reid, Pelosi: Bush veto threat "dangerous"

Email Print Link
Election 2008
[What is this?]
Posted December 9, 2007 7:00 AM
The Swamp

by Matthew Hay Brown

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi say it is reckless of the White House to issue a veto threat against the spending package being developed by congressional Democrats before the president has had seen it.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, meanwhile, joined the Bush administration in calling the deal described in press reports unacceptable.

The exchange Saturday suggests another rancorous week ahead on Capitol Hill – with lawmakers increasingly unlikely to break for the year next Friday, as they had hoped.

It began with White House Budget Director Jim Nussle saying President Bush would veto the “budget-busting” omnibus bill that includes $18 billion more than the president requested.

Reid and Pelosi responded with a joint statement:

“Although he admits he has not even seen the bipartisan legislation that would fund critical priorities such as border security, homeland security, and putting more police officers on the street, the president has recklessly threatened to veto it. For a president already lacking in credibility, it is dangerous to issue veto threats based on press reports alone.

“Unlike the president, congressional Democrats understand the need to fund critical priorities at home while we also correct the disastrous course the White House has set at home and abroad. This war already costs taxpayers $12 billion a month, and we learned this week that yet another billion dollars of military equipment has gone missing in Iraq. The last thing this Administration should do is preach about responsible management.

“Meanwhile, America expects this president to lead – that means working in a bipartisan way with Congress to responsibly address our country’s priorities rather than issuing veto threats without even knowing what he is threatening to veto.”

McConnell, however, remains on the same page as Bush:

“While it’s certainly encouraging to see congressional Democrats stand up to the anti-war fringe and start the process of living up to Congress’ commitment to fund the troops in harm’s way, the rest of their self-negotiated ‘deal’ described in today’s press reports remains unacceptable to dongressional Republicans. The funding levels they are reportedly prepared to offer for their 11 unfinished funding bills is too much to ask of the American taxpayer.

“Moreover, the funds they reportedly are prepared to provide the troops are insufficient to adequately provide for our troops in the field and they deserve better from Congress than that.

“Finally, while I appreciate the movement in the right direction on the part of congressional Democrats toward concluding this Congress, we must not overspend the taxpayer's money and we must protect our troops; the deal described in recent press reports falls short of that mark.

“We need to keep working together until we meet these two goals.”

Digg Delicious Facebook Fark Google Newsvine Reddit Yahoo


:For a President already lacking in credibility..."

ISn't that the pot calling the kettle black?

This is a typical Democrat ploy to push their agenda. Somehow they feel they had a mandate from the people on the Iraq war - I did not and do not believe this. I also feel that the people of our Country are fed up with the petty bickering and outright hatred (why, I have no idea) of George Bush. To dislike the policies of the man is one thing; to "hate" him is another thing completely. It is time to get on with their job and stop the politics.

Of course McConnell is echoing Bush's monkey logic. But the Democrats have the power here and they shouldn't fund anything at all until they get what the American people want - withdrawal from Iraq. Stay the course works both ways, say I.

bob crawford,

you are wrong, the American people want to prevail in iraq, you sound like a typical liberal democrat that wants to surrender. don't tell me that is what americans want, only ignorant fools want us to lose!

This president could do anything, spend any ammount and the blindly loyal republicans would support it. If 12 billion dollars a month on a foolish, ill-managed war hasn't stopped the blindly loyal republicans, nothing will. They are hopelessly, dangerously loyal to this incompetent, war monging presiden who has set the very lowest standard on how government money is being used in Iraq.


What is the definition of "prevail" when it comes to Iraq?

You don't know do you?

The surge has tamped down the inevitable resumption of the Iraq Civil War. We're just referees. The proof of that is the fact that despite the temporary lull in violence the Iraqi government will not reconcile.

The Iraq government isn't even talking about peace, much less doing it.

People always complain about the bickering in Washington. I for one think it's the way it should be! One side should not have carte blanche while the other side is incapable of retort or investigating the matter at hand. We had too much of that during Bush's years with a GOP majority! All we received was scandal after scandal, i.e. Abu Ghraib, Jack Abramhoff. We were lied too about Iraq, now Iran. We are told we can't tell our enemies whether we torture or not? I want the American government to be pressured into saying and more importantly enforcing the fact "Americans don't torture"! We as a nation need people to step away from "not" complaining and away from the credo of "If you are not for us, you are against us"! Like Lenny Bruce said of his defiance"You need people like me!".


A few problems with YOUR idea that the American public wants us to prevail in Iraq.

#1 - Every poll that I've seen in the last year shows that about 70 percent of Americans want the US OUT of Iraq. Either right away, or within the short term. So you want to explain how YOU come up with the idea that the public wants us to prevail in Iraq.

#2 - More to the point. Bush and his apologists, of which you are apparently one, keep coming up with these cute little phrases such as us prevailing. Unfortunately "prevailing" doesn't mean anything specific. That's why this morass keeps continuing. Yes violence is down, for a variety of reasons. Unfortunately, the Iraqi government is no closer to meeting the eighteen goals that were set for them than they were in September when the surge started. Liberals don't want to surrender. They want an understandable goal to be met so the troops can leave.

The Democrats have had control of congress for some time now, and have done nothing except try and spend more money. So Bush says no to runaway spending, and the Democrats immediate response is everything is Bush's fault. Okay it's Bush's fault to try and stop a Democratic congress from spending over reasonable limits.

This congress might be a bigger threat to national security and economic development than Islamic terrorism itself. Think about it--we are having a harder time co-opping the democratically controlled Congress today, than most of the terrorists in the field. We have met the enemy, and it is the narrow left wing US Congress, who seem more intent on temper tantrums of pork barreling than winning globally.

What an appropriate name for a blog about DC politics. "The Swamp."

Giving it serious thought, what would happen if this "do nothing" government did "shut down."

The people might be saved from having any additional liberties taken away, such as what happened with the Jane Harman bill in the House, now awaiting Senate action.

Democrats were elected in 2006 on promises to do two things (a) Drain the Swamp and (b) End the War, and bring the troops home.

They either lied to the people, or they lack the backbone to accomplish either one.

What we see in "The Swamp" is the same lobby money that bought Republican votes, is now buying Democrat votes.

The Constitution and the People suffer.

The President is an idiot but he (or his handlers) have backbone. Pelosi and Reid should take a lesson from the fanatical dedication to message/plan from the right wing.

Why should we not hate a man who rigged two elections, has killed almost 4000 of our young people for his own petty interests and who has destroyed our reputation throughout the world and has now caused Russia who was opening up to the world to retreat back to its cold war style. Are you really that blind to your Republican loyalty that you do not see any of this? What do you think of Bush and his cronies completely ignoring the generals on the ground in Iraq and making it a hell-hole that never should have been, what about the billions and billions of lost equipment and money, this was on his watch. What about the AMT bill they keep threatening to veto, you are right it is time to stop bickering and get bipartisan support back. However the fact remains the Democrats, as usual, have a a gigantic mess to clean up left by another horrific 8 years of Repbulican theivery. They don't trust the Republicans and can you blame them? and no I am not a Democrat, I am an independent, before anyone starts bashing me for that. It is COMPLETELY irresponsible for a President to threaten a veto on something he has not even seen yet, they is the very essence of NON-PARTISAN behavior.

Isn't everyone sick of hearing about the "surge"? The fact remains that we went into the Iraq war with 100K less troops then the generals who have experience with this requested. Rumsfeld ignored them and said we had enough, we did not and that has been proven out completely, now we send in what 50K more and suddenly things are better...Yeah you know why they are better, because we are finally closer to the amount of troops we needed to fullfill the job. Blind Repiblican loyalists think this is a win?? Are you kidding me, this war could have been over, oh wait it is over, Bush declared it was over years ago, if we would have sent the right number of troops. We have lost precious American lives and the Iraqi people have lost thousands and thousands because of the idiots in charge, with 0 war experience.

Odd thing is, the "anti-war fringe" represent the majority of americans sentiment. It's obvious whose interests McConnell serves.

Odd thing is, the "anti-war fringe" represent the majority of americans sentiment. It's obvious whose interests McConnell serves.

Dumbest effing people on earth. Pro war? Why are you reading this and not in Iraq?
Why make America work when you can bankrupt the country, torture people and declare anyone different than rich, white middle aged males as enemy combatants.
Worst president in history, hands down.
I still laugh thinking about monkey boy declaring 'Mission Accomplished' in his cod piece, so he could know what it feels like to have a penis.
That's right you fools, we already won in Iraq. Of course, tell that to the soldiers getting shot at every day.
Kill 'em all and let 'god' sort out the rest.
Religion is the most dangerous thing on the planet.
The framers of the Constitution are crying in their graves.
-Another crazy liberal who actually wants peace, actually understands that Iraq had ABSOLUTELY NOTTHING to do with 9/11 and wants the troops home and cared for.
Wake up you zealots!

"inevitable resumption of the Iraq Civil War"

Hey Doug Zook, can you use your clairvoyance to tell me if the Bears will win today? Or give me tomorrow's lottery numbers? These old democrat talking points have been proven wrong. Violence is down, civil participation is up and the Iraqi democracy is on its way to becoming only the second democracy in the Middle East.

And yes, that is what "prevail" is, a self-sustaining democracy in Iraq and hope for a better future for its people. I'm sorry if their lives aren't a part of Reid/Pelosi's political agenda, but the future of the region is a little more important than petty politics.

The fact that the posturing and wasteful time of the democrats is unreal. They have not accomplished one thing except to act like school children. Bush is acting like the grown up with spoiled children.

I don't think Bush and the rest of the neo-cons know the definition of "Prevail" is let alone victory when it comes to Iraq. I still don't know why we are over there? Can the rest of you neo nuts explain? Oh, I almost forgot, it was the weapons of mass destruction, kind of like this Iran thingy?


Will someone tell me how to win a "War on Terror"? Terror doesn't have arms, hands or fingers, so terror can't sign a peace treaty. Terror is a tactic, not an entity. We cannot win a war against an idea. How will we know when we've "won"? The bleatings from the dead ender 26% that has so much invested in bu$h loving and everyone else hating never seem to be able to define what a win is. They just want to keep throwing money at Iraq, hoping that someday it will all be a bad dream. Guess what Terry, it is a nightmare, and it's going to get worse.

WOW - huge thanks to W for promising to be a "uniter." Once again he failed this too....just one more failure to add to his legacy.

It must drive poor pelosi and reid nutz to have President Bush continue to make them irrelevant. Not once, thankfully, have they been successful in getting their cooky ideas past the President.

Their latest threats are just more empty rhetoric from 2 windbags. So funny to see liberals huff and puff.

Don't call Iraq the war on terror. It's already been proven there was not connection before we invaded. It was Bush's invasion that allowed them to go in and recruit.

And when the President has to threaten Congress about a bill he that hasn't been finished, isn't it time to talk about impeachment?

Congress getting ready for another break? Did'nt they just get back from one? Why don't they just stay there until they can accomplish something?

"we must not overspend the taxpayer's money" Have you looked at the national debt lately?????

Some Guy-

Iraq would be only the second democracy in the Middle east?


Israel and Lebanon are both already Democracies. Sadly, Iran can claim to be as much of a Democracy as Iraq at this point.

But when are we going to invade Saudia Arabia and Kuwait to make them a Democracy?

Yes, impeach the President. I remember seeing in the Constitution that the President should be impeached for threatening a veto on a proposed piece of legislation. Then we would have President Cheney and everyone would be happy with that. After receiving a budget from the White House in February, and passing one of 12 bills 10 months later, I'm sure Congress could fast track an impeachment just in time for the elections next November.
Bi-partisan is code for do it my way just like revenue enhancement is code for tax increase. That is why Bush is threatening to veto AMT "reform" promulgated by the Democrats because it includes a $50 billion per year tax increase.
Rigged 2 elections? If the opposition would have put up viable candidates the people would have voted overwhelmingly against the hated Bush.

It's time for President Bush to veto the $22 billion dollar dream of tax and spend Jackasses led by Dingy Harry Reid, Dickie Durbin and Queen Nancy Pelosi.
The Democrats had a chance to govern and they squandered it by not passing a budget on time.
Not eliminating the AMT and wanting to raise taxes tp $1.3 trillion dollars all while some 700 investigations that have gone nowhere.
They deserve to lose in 08. Jerry White,Springfield, IL

Some Guy,

I can categorically tell you the Bears will not win today, they're not playing, and I'll get the lottery numbers to you tomorrow. Doug is simply doing one thing you and your ilk can not, stating the obvious.

Incurious George is My Monkey, Right or Wrong.

The new "fiscal conservative" Bush is hard to take seriously. For six years he signed every pork-stuffed, earmark-riddled bill the Republican congress sent him. He didn't know where his veto pen was until the Democrats gained the majority. Now he claims he wants to control spending? We're still blowing $12 billion every month in Iraq and suddenly Dubya is concerned about the budget? Who could possible believe that garbage?

Nothing but Lies from this administration,and what about the swarm of maggots that believe and back this idiot of a president.Republicans have really shined these past few years ,stealing tax payers money to support a corrupt foriegn government,American soldiers put in harms way over a lie about weapons of mass destruction ,give the American people osama bin laden if more money is to be given for dick and butchs war if not try them for the war criminals they have become over our dead soldiers bodies , oh yeah congratulations dick cheney on your colon cancer what did you expect from an asshole ...........

So sick of Bush and his corrupt cronies. Mitch McConnell is a pawn who can't even figure out 2 + 2 without Bush whispering in his ear. Republicans will pay dearly at the polls next year.....

Post a comment

(Anonymous comments will not be posted. Comments aren't posted immediately. They're screened for relevance to the topic, obscenity, spam and over-the-top personal attacks. We can't always get them up as soon as we'd like so please be patient. Thanks for visiting The Swamp.)

Please enter the letter "r" in the field below:


News, but funnier


Those were the days
More Handelsman
Editorial cartoons



Iraq War 5th anniversary


Campaign trail



Your Obama IQ