Not at all. They may be choosing the lesser of two evils, but not approving the actions that led us here.

If your kid spray paints your neighbor's house and you end up writing the checks for cleanup, you are hardly approving of his behavior, right? You are doing damage control, at best.

AGG

t's especially scary coming from someone who has been known to sing "bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran", while needing Lieberman to whisper in his ear to remind him that Iran is Shiite, not Sunni. More than once.

I can't tell if McCain is really that ignorant, or senile. Not sure which is worse.
******************************************************

That's why I felt his VP nomination was SO important.
And why I felt so uncomfortable after Sarah Palin's speech.

My step-son shot up the siding in our apartment complex last December with some other boys using airsoft pellet guns. His portion of the bill was approximately $350.

He is paying it, not us.

Why would anyone suggest a parent pay for what kids do? If the kids damages property, it's coming out of his funds.

Like LousyGolfer said above, if Pelosi thinks the troops should be out, then she needs to do that, and not write checks with one hand while bashing the president for being there with the other.

THAT's what I have a hard time with. Bashing someone, while funding what you don't agree with.

After all, if she is so much smarter than President Bush, why is she, or any other Democrat unable to both support the troops AND get them out of Iraq?

As long as she's complaining but writing the checks, she's the one who doesn't appear to be so smart. Or at the very least, she too is being outsmarted by one her party if not her personally claims isn't so bright.

How bright is it to fund something you don't agree with?

Instead of complaining about him, what is she doing to achieve her stated goal?

OH MY, LG !!

He blew me straight away!!

Maybe it was a GENDER FACTOR!!

And what if he had no money or was 5 years old? No sense trying to punch holes in my analogy (no analogy is perfect) - my point was that sometimes we do things we do not want to, but we do them because they are the lesser of two evils.


Er, because she cannot get the troops out of Iraq, she is not the CINC. All Congress can do is cut off the funding, which is not the best way to end a war.

AGG

***************************************

LOL.
Well, not in my case.....I watched and was mesmerized by both of them.... and I think they were the ONLY speeches I ever watched from beginning to end.
It will be interesting to see how I react to McCain's speech tonight.

What if it's BOTH..which is likely at his age..SCARY...

Then if we decide to do something, then we should be the adult and do it without blaming another person.

If Pelosi and Reid think that funding the action is the right thing to do, then let them do it.

But they are adults, so if they decide to do this, then what good does it do anyone for them to do what they think it right, but then say it's wrong in order to blame someone else.

They certainly have the right to speak. I'm not saying they don't. But they certainly lose credibility in my mind when they say the war is bad, but keep sending the president money for the war.


And the president can't keep the troops there if he doesn't have the money. She may not be the CINC, but she writes his checks.

If she really feels the war is a bad idea, then any way we bring the troops home is good, from her perspective.

If she keeps funding it, she is sending the message that on some level,the war is still "good"

Which means that all her talk about it being a bad idea means little, since she's still writing the checks.

Let her yes be yes and her no be no, if that is what she believes. That's all I'm saying.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this. I don't see any loss of credibility in this. If Pelosi had the power to control funds and control troop movements, then I would agree with you. But she does not, which means that she can only play with half of the puzzle, which leaves her with a crappy choice (continue war) or a crappier choice (continue the war without funding the troops).


Of course he can. He is the CINC.

AGG

What if it's BOTH..which is likely at his age..SCARY...
*********************************

It seems to be politically incorrect to discuss McCain's age or Sarah Palin's inexperience and priorities right now, but it does concern me. He may have a ton of energy but I have my doubts about his health.
I really hope that the media and the McCain campaign will work together to let the voting public get to know Sarah Palin better because I think there is a good chance she will become president if he is elected.

HOW SCARY IS THAT?????? :MrEEk:

I didn't want to believe this but the more I read, the war in Iraq most definitely about the oil. Apparently the oil fields in Iraq are among the (richest? largest? can't remember right now exactly what I read) in the world, and we needed to get SH out of there before we could get our hands on it and Bush's oil cronie hands on it.

It hasn't happened yet because we don't have any of the contracts which just went up for bid. But China does! Just got one, we couldn't get the first one because it would look to suspicious and tick off too many other nations.

Oh yes, China got the first one. I wonder if that is because we are bankrupt and China is the one who has lent us enormous amounts of many to keep the war going. One the perks of lending I suppose, that and being able to host the Olympics.

I am beginning to wonder if it matters at all who we vote for, it's all starting to seem so corrupt, and more and more like we will in the not to distant future be no more than house pets with no rights and no property (us, not the president).

It WOULD matter if the president did his job which is to look out for the best interests of America and her people, but they keep wimping out to whoever is really pulling the strings.

What can we do? I'm trying to get informed but it is one of the most depressing things I have ever done. And it's infuriating to boot.

The more I read the more disturbing it is. Sitting it out seems like a cop out, but a lot of people are.

AGG:

Aboout this:


YES! He is the CinC. But, Congress can say, you asked for $100B, and we are only giving you $75B. And NEXT year, you get $50B, and so on. AND PASS THAT.

But THEY DON'T.

If the Prez asks for $100B, he will get that. Or MORE.

Remember, this Congress supported the "surge" with $ and votes.

This Congress was elected on the stance that they were going to, at least, scale back the war. But it was expanded. Talk about check-mate by the CinC.

If the Dems stood up and said that this is how we should get out of Iraq and this is the funding that we are going to support, and THEN MADE IT HAPPEN, I think thier moaning otherwise is just that, moaning. "Look what the Prez made us DO!"

I concur with John Kerry's statement from the early 70's. "Do you what to be the last man to die for a mistake?" I think we should draw down as quickly as possible. I believe that the Generals there are making good decisons about the timelines and needs to prosecute this war. But the prosecution of any war is a POLITICAL decision. And that is in Congress and the Pres's hands.

LG

You don't seem to know your history very well.

Congress brought Vietnam to a close by ending the funding. If Congress wants to end this war, they can do so anytime they see fit. They simply have to stop writing the checks.

They can also remove the declaration of war. It is congress that declares war, not the president. At any time, Congress can decide that there is no longer a state of war, and reverse their declaration of war.

They don't have the votes to override a presidential veto, but that's a Congress issue. There simply is not currently the will in Congress to end the war.

During Viet Nam,the congress had the will to both end the declaration of war, and no longer funded the war.

The current congress is not as resolved about ending the war, so it continues to write the checks, and whine about others instead of asking why they are not able to act upon what they believe.

Why? why is the will not there if what you are saying is correct?

Who's pulling the strings?

Mimi & Nia:

Really, I did fall asleep. I watched the entire night of the Dems Show, with Flamingo and DS15 on the couch with me. Watched BO come on the stage, listened to the start of the speech, and then snoozed. Woke up with about 15 minutes left.

It lacked....punch.

I thought that I was going to listen to oratory along the lines of "I have a dream" (wasn't it the 44th anniversary of that?). BO isn't MLK. And I haven't watched ANY of BO's speeches from end to end. But, with all the advance press about how skillful he was, I was really expecting more. HE had 65K listening and ready for...that?

I think they missed a real opportunity for BO. He didn't need to come out and Bash JM and the Repub's. He could have come out and talked about the world that he wanted to create. About all the possibilities that his election could foretell. But all we got was alot of bashing. I understand that he was going to have to do SOME of that. But, it just didn't seem to grab me.

LG

Lastly:

I leave with this:

Sarah with a GUN!

Please continue scrolling....

LG

*********************************************

What scares me is that both parties seem to agree that it's politically incorrect to discuss a woman's priorities when it comes to family vs. country. I am confident that that Sarah Palin can handle being a mom while governing Alaska and even being the VP very effectively.
But, the presidency is a different story.
I don't like the fact that we only have 2 months before the election and there is so little known about her. The American public has the right to get to know the candidate better before they vote.

It's so SAD here, Weaves, to see the wives with their BRAIN-INJURED spouses in the grocery store...trying to have them practice naming the items...

I see this ALL the TIME...

YUCK...

And they thought they married A SOLDIER BOY...

Who is running congress? Pelosi and Reid say they want to end the war, but are unable to lead their legislative bodies to stop funding the war.

It's no conspiracy. It's political. Everyone wants to be re-elected and no-one thinks they'll get re-elected if they pull the plug on funding the war.

Regardless of their personal views on the war, they have sold their souls for the upcoming election.

All of the House and 1/3rd of the Senate is up for election. So instead of voting what they think is right, which for many is to no longer fund the war, they vote for what they think will get them elected.

How is that leadership? How is that principled?

I say that about both Republicans AND Democrats, lest you think I'm picking on only the Democrats. It's just very obvious with the Democrats right now with respect to the war. Many pound the podium about how awful this war is, while voting for bills to continue to fund it.

If they really believe it's so bad, stop writing the checks!

That's the kind of bold leadership we need.

That's the kind of CHANGE we need.