The headlines prove otherwise

[DainBramaged]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17750825/
House approves 2008 deadline for war pullout

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/03/23/iraq.funding/index.html
House passes spending bill with Iraq deadline

http://www.cbsnews.com/
Bush Blasts Dems After House OKs Bill Setting Withdrawal Deadline


http://abcnews.go.com/

Bush Says 'No Chance' for 'Political Theater', Vows Iraq Bill Veto


Bush promises to veto a bill that many here completely disagree with (to the point of physical revulsion). Yet, knowing he may veto it after it goes through the Senate and then committee, it simply makes an important point, he is on notice, and the people who AREN'T members of DU will understand SOMETHING is being done, and he is the bad guy here for denying funding for the troops.

Without the support of enough Repugs to make ANY withdrawal bill veto proof (especially in the Senate), no matter how many bills we put out there, we won't get enough support from the other side of the aisle to put teeth in the bills.

Nap time, good luck

have fun storming the castle

[whistle]

1. What squealing pork is Poe referring to in the bill?

<snip>
“Approval of it means we vote to abandon Iraq at an arbitrary time no matter the situation, said Republican Rep. Ted Poe. It’s also “loaded with squealing pork that has nothing to do with our troops or the war,” added Poe, R-Texas, referring to the billions of dollars added to the bill to fund domestic programs and attract votes.

[rodeodance]

2. lots of this on the floor today: Popeye, Mr Peanut and tropical fish--from the

repugs.

[DainBramaged]

3. They squeal yet they put TRILLIONS in pork on all bills

The past 6 years and is one of the reasons the debt is out of control.

[juno jones]

4. Yes FULL of pork!

Like funding for the VA...What! a republican who doesn't support the troops, how novel!

[DainBramaged]

5. Less than a Billion from what I can understand (am I wrong?)