Democrats want Iraq pullout by fall 2008

[yurbud]

By DAVID ESPO, AP Special Correspondent 12 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - In a direct challenge to President Bush, House Democrats unveiled legislation Thursday requiring the withdrawal of U.S. combat troops from Iraq by the fall of next year.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (news, bio, voting record) said the deadline would be added to legislation providing nearly $100 billion the Bush administration has requested for fighting in Iraq and
Afghanistan.

She told reporters the measure would mark the first time the new Democratic-controlled Congress has established a "date certain" for the end of U.S. combat in the four-year-old war that has claimed the lives of more than 3,100 U.S. troops.

Rep. David Obey (news, bio, voting record), chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, said the proposal would bring an "orderly and responsible close" to American participation in what he called an Iraqi "civil war."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070308/ap_on_go_co/democrats_iraq_16;_ylt=AnjtXgudzSSbTZqWXIdXCDsUewgF

[HereSince1628]

1. T.O.O. L.A.T.E. ! If you know the occupation is wrong it's immoral to continue it.

We don't need the war and occupation to have something to campaign against.

END IT.

[mike_c]

2. piss on that....

It's ALWAYS a year or more into the future. If there is no reason to stay beyond fall of '08 then what reason is there to stay until then? Except political cowardice? Nothing will be accomplished by staying longer except more needless, wasted death and destruction.

America out of Iraq NOW!

[Jacobin]

3. And so the acknowledgment of abject failure begins

Sooner would be better than later, but I suppose its a start. I'm old enough to remember Viet Nam well, and it forever for us to admit defeat and come up with a slogan for retreat, like "Peace With Honor" or some such pablum.

[Sonicmedusa]

4. Too fucking late!

What happened to the congress we worked so hard to elect last November?

Attack of the body snatchers?

[superconnected]

19. tackled by greenbacks.

[Monkeyman]

5. NOW!!!!!

[yurbud]

12. yep--what will change between now and then except the body count?

[madfloridian]

6. Tossing anti-war activists a crumb.

That is all they are doing.

[dkofos]

7. Well, the people want out us out of Iraq by the fall of 2007

But who gives a shit what the people want!!

[PSPS]

8. Gee, what a surprise -- just in time for the next election

In other words, bush will get his wish and keep his crime spree going non-stop until he's out of office. We would have had this result even if the republicans would have gained seats in the last election. So what's the difference?

I guess this "new and improved congress" is a total writeoff.

[Purveyor]

9. Hell no this isn't soon enough! Time to tighten the screws on our newly elected

"Democratic Majority", indeed!

[still_one]

10. why not the end of 2007?

The blood is on their hands if they continue this B.S., and there will be no lame excuse like they gave when they voted for the IWR

[John Q. Citizen]

11. Why not 2108, since it's not really that pressing of an issue, anyway?

[w4rma]

13. They're still trying to give the GOP chances to make our foreign policy bipartisan.

I don't think the GOP want it bipartisan, however.

[rodeodance]

14. .........what he called an Iraqi "civil war." Why does AP still doubt this?

[rodeodance]

16. The "progressive" causus in the House Wants it 9 months earlier---nice

report on Lehrer Hour tonight.

There will be a showdown.
the pelosi plan vs the Progressive plan

[ProudDad]

15. It's sad that this is the best they can do...

It is a win-win though.

They'll put bushies phony timetable in the legislation.

bush vetos -- he vetos his evil supplemental and "doesn't support the troops" :rofl:

bush signs -- he's stuck with HIS timetable. :rofl:

Clever...

[yurbud]

17. Bush signs and does a signing statement--a new and very high profile impeachable offense

[superconnected]

18. I wan't them out now.

[truthisfreedom]

20. I'm 100% behind getting the troops home.

Any way, shape, or form.

[bemildred]

21. Pelosi says 'So what?' to Bush veto threat on Iraq funding

After a White House official issued a strongly-worded veto threat against the Iraq War funding proposal rolled out by Democratic leaders this morning, the office of Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Congressional Members should not be particularly concerned with what bills President George W. Bush will and won't sign.

"I say to my colleagues never confine your best work, your hopes, your dreams, the aspiration of the American people to what will be signed by George W. Bush because that is too limiting a factor," the Speaker said this morning in a press conference.

Pelosi's office pointed back to the remark, which was made hypothetically this morning, when RAW STORY inquired about her reaction to the actual veto threat issued this afternoon. She had also said that the deal was just a first step, and that it still must be passed out of Appropriations Committee and approved on both the House and Senate floors before being sent to the President's desk.

Raw Story

[Erika]

22. She's a tough lady

saying enough of the crap is enough.

[napi21]

23. I think we just might be able to get a super majority to support this

in the house. Granted, the Senate might be a lot more iffy,but I think it is possible.

I think we could get Hagel, Snow, Collins, Smith, for sure, and maybe Coleman, Spector, Warner, and thatonly leaves the need for 3 more. The public is gettingantsy, andevery Senator who is up for reelection in 08 knows he's vulnerable!

OH how I would LOVE to see the full Congress over-ride that veto!

[Vidar]

24. So she's finally standing up a little.

[MasonJar]

25. I have to compliment the dems in Congress. They have only been in

control for two months and they have already dome a yoeman's job of correcting and investigating. Let's help them with a letter (or calling) campaign to our reps and to the editorial pages.