Sen Webb: Congress Will Fund The Debacle In Iraq

I am watching Senator Webb's appearance on Meet the Press this morning and in response to Tim Russert's playing President George Bush's statement that Congress capitulate to his demand that the Iraq Debacle be funded without conditions, Senator Webb basically said that Congress will provide funds for Bush Iraq Debacle.

Senator Webb talks a good game, but as he has done all year, the bottom line is he will vote cede Congress' Constitutional Spending Power. He will not vote to stand up to Bush. In the next breath he is real strong on nonbinding resolutions about Iran.

When asked by Russert about Joe Biden's call to impeach Bush if he attacks Iran, Webb hems and haws and says that the SPENDING POWER is the way to stop Bush from attacking Iran.

Excuse me Senator Webb, IF Bush does attack Iran, basedon your statements on Iraq funding, I would expect that you will vote for funding there too.

Senator Webb is a real mess on these issues.

< Obama Leads In Latest Des Moines Register Iowa Poll | How America Lost the Drug War >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    A disappointment (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Maryb2004 on Sun Dec 02, 2007 at 09:18:57 AM EST
    but not a surprise.  

    I never did understand all the hype over Webb.  He was a way to pick up a seat, not the great Democratic hope to stop the Republicans.  

    As expected (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by jarober on Sun Dec 02, 2007 at 09:37:22 AM EST
    The Democrats are being stupider than Republicans, which is really hard.  Their current positioning: play games with funding, then give in.  That's bound to piss off every single group.  Moderate Republicans and Independents don't like the games, and the Democratic base doesn't like the concessions.  It's about as stupid a set of plays as I can remember seeing.

    Grand Strategy - March ... August ... (none / 0) (#3)
    by seabos84 on Sun Dec 02, 2007 at 10:05:01 AM EST

    the real question is how many of us chumps are going step up with our very hard earned very limited money, and with our VERY limited time


    once again,

    help a bunch of losers get re-elcted so they can go lose!

    cuz, remember, if we don't break our butts the thugs will ...

    ha ha ha ha ha

    get whatever they want!



    Nancy Pelosi, Nov 5, 2006: (4.50 / 2) (#8)
    by Compound F on Sun Dec 02, 2007 at 03:19:51 PM EST
    This election is about Iraq,'' said Pelosi, a consistent war opponent who has said her failure to prevent the United States from going to war in 2003 is her greatest disappointment in public life.

    If indeed it turns out the way that people expect it to turn out, the American people will have spoken, and they will have rejected the course of action the president is on.

    Acknowledging that Bush has previously rejected suggestions for scaling back U.S. involvement, Pelosi said a victory Tuesday would give "Democrats in Congress a great deal more leverage in the conversation with the president."

    This is a freak show, and it has to come to an end.


    Some people still think it's good politics to support Democrats.  I'm not one of them.  They have proved their duplicity.

    You're not alone Compound F... (none / 0) (#9)
    by ctrenta on Sun Dec 02, 2007 at 09:08:31 PM EST

    ... and this is one of the reasons why we should not turn to our elected officals to solve our problems. Howard Zinn hit the nail right on the head on this issue.

    "When a social movement adopts the compromises of legislators, it has forgotten its role, which is to push and challenge the politicians, not to fall in meekly behind them...Whatever politicians may do, let them first feel the full force of citizens who speak for what is right, not for what is winnable, in a shamefully timorous Congress." ~Howard Zinn, scholar and bestselling author of The People's History of the United States

    Excellent food for thought!


    Debacle? (none / 0) (#4)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Sun Dec 02, 2007 at 11:07:59 AM EST

    It seems that AQ is suffering the debacle.  The question seems to be should the Congress fund victory and liberation.

    Cave in again (none / 0) (#5)
    by orbiter on Sun Dec 02, 2007 at 11:19:05 AM EST
    I really am not surprised that the Democrats have caved again to Bush's propaganda and scare tactics.
    But after reading this story in the NYTimes,it makes me sick to see so many Billions of taxpayer dollars wasted on so much fraud and corruption with no end in sight and the soldiers used as a false front to continue the waste.


    Sen. Webb On Meet The Press (none / 0) (#6)
    by DallasNE on Sun Dec 02, 2007 at 02:10:48 PM EST
    I think you are taking your eye off the ball here. Just who is the enemy here, George W. Bush or Jim Webb. Bush is the one you should be turning your ire on, not Webb.

    Bush has dumped just about every mess imaginable into the lap of the next President. In order for that President to be successful we need 60 Democrats in the Senate to end the filibuster politics being ramrodded by the Republicans. Defeating Sen. McConnell would be a good starting place.

    What Webb understands (none / 0) (#7)
    by chemoelectric on Sun Dec 02, 2007 at 02:52:52 PM EST
    He's cowardly to succumb to this, but Webb knows in his gut that Bush will leave the lowly soldier to wither and die, unfunded, and will do it with anxious pleasure, unless Congress either gives in or quickly removes the sociopath. (BTW the paperback, expanded, of "Bush on the Couch" is now available.)