The Official Bush Vs. Congress Thread

"We are all in it together. This is a war. We take a few shots and it will be over. We will give them a few shots and it will be over." -- Richard Milhous Nixon

Y'know, the total abuse of power and disregard for all checks and balances is becoming so commonplace with this dickhead and his administration that I think from now on, until someone starts fighting him on this (REALLY fighting, not just the Dems going on about how they're thinking of maybe considering fighting him on this), I'm just gonna stick to this badly Photoshopped image that sums up where this guy is heading:



Excuse the poor aim of the lightning bolts. He still hasn't figured that part out yet. You should see the front of his pants after he takes a piss.

Agreed. Congress' impotence is so frustrating. Get out the heavy artillery already.

Agreed. That IS badly Photoshopped.

Is anyone watching this speech Bush is giving right now on the benchmark test results? His condescending demeanor is actually more grating than it usually is.

"I don't think Congress ought to be running the war," Bush said. "They ought to be funding the troops."

I don't think anybody out to be listening to this fuck-up's ideas about how the war should be run any more. You've had your four years to pull off your "6 week, maybe 6 month" operation; I'm all for letting Congress, or for that matter the guy who runs the porno theatre down the street, have their go.

Please tell me you actually saw him say that. As awful as that statement is, it's much, much worse, when you can hear his voice and see his demeanor. It's like he's talking about children to children.

I heard him say it. I wanted to puke.

Bush is mistaken. Congress should not fund the war.

What kind of heavy artillery are you talking about? Congress' impotence is based on it's own members not agreeing in big enough majorities to change Bush's policies.

Congress is making itself look weak by continually passing measures that they can't enforce to due small majorites that can't override a veto. If they really want to change things, the congressional leaders should be working behind the scenes to get more votes for a strong measure instead of going for the easy publicity of drawing veto threats. This is just a battle for public opinion, not actual change.

accidental double post....any way to delete these?

I didn't see it (no TV--heard on NPR) but I thought Bush sounded sad, tired and over.

I don't necessarily advocate going this direction, but Congress could move to fully cut-off funds. They could also start making noises about Impeachment.

As Mike Gravel says (and did with Vietnam), if Congress were to force votes on the war every day things would be moving a lot more quickly. Republicans who now block legislation behind the scenes or who vote against anit-war resolutions cite technicalities, etc. for why they still support the war. If they had to do so everyday, the public would nip at their heels incessantly until a lot of votes changed.

Instead, the Dems are pursuing a slow strategy--trying to build momentum towards '08. They don't want to get blamed for ending the war if doing so leads to genocide, etc. They also don't want to get blamed for impeachment or get bogged down in too many investigations.

I can't say whether that strategy of playing it safe is right or wrong...but Americans are getting really sick of the bueracracy and the partisanship and, if the strategy backfires, there could be some really fireworks in '08 (Bloomberg or Gore, etc...)