Yesterday I woke up to the news that Congress had passed the new Iraq spending bill and – surprise surprise – any mention of troop withdrawals had been redacted right out of it. Or, as the New York Times summarised it:
Approves $100 billion to pay for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan through Sept. Does not set a timetable for troop redeployment.
I am aware that the earlier version of the bill, passed by Congress and vetoed by Bush, called for troops to be out of Iraq by September 2008. From a definite date to no mention at all – what the hell? That move puts the Democrats on a level with the Vichy government of France. And this is what they had to offer as explanation for their capitulation:
- They didn’t have enough votes to override the veto, and
- They had to pass a spending bill or the troops would suffer.
Lame. So they could not override the veto and pass the original bill – fine. But that should not necessarily have led to erasing the issue of troop withdrawal completely from the legislation. I just checked my dictionary, and the words ‘negotiate’ and ‘compromise’ are both still in there.
According to the BBC, the Democrats did score a compromise for sacrificing more of our soldiers. And I am sure that the brave men and women of the US military will be relieved to know that while they are over in the Middle East fighting for oil, or whatever, back on the home front, the minimum wage is being raised. Well done, Mrs. Pelosi & Co. It’s good to see you’re making such a difference.
The second excuse is even stupider than the first, and my only response is a question. Why is it that Congress had to cave in and not that motherfucker in the White House?