Friday, March 23, 2007


If you want peace, stop funding the war. If you want peace, stand for the truth."--Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Oh.), who will probably be one of the few left-standing in Congress in 2009.

Washington D.C.--The exact name of the bill is "The U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Health, and Iraq Accountability Act." The president will veto the bill, though it's going to hurt him a lot more than congressional Democrats. It's a lousy bill anyway, and House Speaker Pelosi knew this, which is why this is just a step-forward. This is how politics normally works. At a vote of 218-212 (along almost purely partisan lines), a veto would be successful. Big deal. Bush and Cheney cannot stand this attention or oversight, they're simply not adept at politics. They were barely-functional under the former GOP majority that gave them a free-pass. Yes, please do, veto this bill, nobody wants it anyway. Bush is now stammering against this backdrop:

A sharply divided House voted Friday to order President Bush to bring combat troops home from Iraq next year, a victory for Democrats in an epic war-powers struggle and Congress' boldest challenge yet to the administration's policy. Just over an hour later, an angry Bush accused Democrats of staging nothing more than political theater and said that if the spending bill is not approved and signed into law by April 15, troops and their families "will face significant disruptions." (AP, 03.23.2007)

In-other-words, he's holding our troops hostage, which is nothing new. Congress could earmark appropriations to offset these so-called "Disruptions", while not funding the war any further. It would take Bush misusing earmarked-appropriations for the "disruptions" to occur. And of course, we know this has never happened in Iraq--except for the $9 billion that disappeared after Viceroy Paul Bremer left Iraq. Peter Cushing will be returning--from the dead--to Iraq as Grand Mof Tarkin (cue imperial march).

Bush has no new threats, inducements, or even very-many options left. The return of Furious George is nigh. Please, veto this bill. You seem strangely-intent on this war ending after you're out of office. Somehow, that seems assured no-matter-what, it's just that you and the GOP aren't going to like exactly how-and-when. And please, force Congress to have the Senate's Sergeant-at-arms to come rousting Harriet Miers, Sampson, Karl Rove, and others to testify before the House and Senate Judiciary committees. They have to by law, it's in the Constitution of the United States--you know, that document you said was "just a piece of paper," but swore an oath to uphold? An awful lot of damage was done to the Bush administration this-week, and it's not even over yet.

The president is calling the bill's provisions "an act of political theater." He should know, he's the worst-actor on the stage. He's accusing the supporters of the bill of "pork-spending," yet this was one of the reasons his GOP majority was voted-out in the November midterms. Even the normally credulous press noted how they were scrambling to pass as much pork as they could before the end of the do-nothing 109th Congress. The Republicans are used to this role: the boy who cried wolf who nobody listens-to anymore. We know what his fate is in the story, don't we?
What's the terror-threat color? Only Fox News knows (and on-occasion, CNN):

"They set rigid restrictions that would require an army of lawyers to interpret. They set an arbitrary date for withdrawal with no regard for conditions on the ground. And they tacked on billions in pet projects that have nothing to do with winning the war on terror," Bush said. "This bill has too much pork, too many conditions and an artificial timetable for withdrawal. As I've made clear for weeks I will veto it if it comes to my desk," Bush said. (Reuters, 03.23.2007)

The bill is coming to your desk, and we're probably going to see some subpoenas too. It's a good-thing your Vice President has experience in such an environment, but you all seem to have played all of your cards. You're sweating, and that's taboo in poker. The blustering does nothing but confirm the fears of most Americans that you and your administration are nothing but a cell of incompetent criminals and terrorists.

Indeed, please, veto this bill. Your little gambit in Shatt al-Arab river isn't going to work either, it's an obviously concocted media/propaganda event to drive the public towards another war, this time with Iran. It's not going to float, just as it didn't in your failed dry-run of June 21st, 2004. My favorite tactic of George W. Bush is his surrounding himself with a human-phalanx (Romanesque references abound with his patrician family) today.

In a brief appearance at the White House with veterans and members of military families standing in the background, Bush reiterated a standing veto threat and accused House Democrats of engaging in "political theater" that could short-change U.S. troops in the field as they seek to execute a build-up in personnel designed to contain rampant chaos and strife in Baghdad and elsewhere in the country. (, 03.23.2007)

Time is running-out for the Blair and Bush governments. We all know that no matter how much money and material get sent to Iraq, it isn't going to get any better. That would have required a genuine consensus of the community of nations with their full-participation, as well as a multi-national occupation that would have to last decades. Like other statist criminals who seize-power, the neocons will leave their destructive-mark on humanity, yet they and their ideas will hardly be remembered for much else. Their unorthodox, frail-ideologies will not survive them. Exterminate all rational thought.

AP Today:

Reuters Today:

Marketwatch Today: