Reid: Non-Partisan Budget Experts Confirm Bush is Misleading Public on War Funding Needs

[bigtree]

WASHINGTON, March 30 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Senate Majority Leader
Harry Reid made the following statement upon receipt of a Congressional
Research Service (CRS) analysis of the Army's ability to finance its
operational needs with existing funds well beyond the April 15th date
asserted by President Bush.

In a thorough review of Army data and the Defense Department's existing
legal authorities, non-partisan budget experts at CRS informed the Congress
that the Army could maintain its wartime operations well into July 2007
with funds the Army has already been provided.

"This study confirms that the President is once again attempting to
mislead the public and create an artificial atmosphere of anxiety. He is
using scare tactics to defeat bipartisan legislation that would change
course in Iraq. After waiting months for this Administration to send us its
funding requests, both houses of Congress worked quickly to pass the
emergency supplemental bill for our troops. Congress has acted in good
faith and will send the President a conference report for his signature
well ahead of the July 2007 date CRS identified. If the President vetoes
this bill, he is making the choice to continue down the same failed path in
Iraq.

"Instead of holding press events to score political points, I call upon
the President to tone down his rhetoric, stop the veto threats of a bill he
has not yet seen, and sit down with the congressional leadership to discuss
how our two co-equal branches of government can get an emergency spending
bill passed that funds our troops and makes America more secure."

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=ind_focus.story&STORY=/www/story/03-30-2007/0004556827&EDATE=FRI+Mar+30+2007,+01:10+PM

[Roland99]

1. Oh, SNAP!

[Why Syzygy]

2. K&R

:applause:

"Senate Majority Leader" I love it.

[understandinglife]

3. Harry and Nancy are the "parents" little georgie boy should have had ...

... a perhaps tens of thousands of wonderful human beings would still be alive and America would not be so vastly tarnished ....


Peace.

[Diane R]

11. They clearly have a strategy to 'frame' him as a little boy throwing a temper tantrum. I love it.

[understandinglife]

23. And ... they are succeeding ... because that is ALL HE IS ...

... apart from being a callous, cold-blooded, mass murdering war criminal ...

:hi:


Peace.

[sandnsea]

4. The Annual Emergency Supplemental

Since for-freaking-ever. That's how non-budgetary expenses MUST be dealt with.

Democrats remain HORRIBLE at framing.

[LynneSin]

5. Democrat Majority - this is the only way we could get the truth out

Seriously!

[underpants]

7. Why must you so distrust these people to not let them sends pallets of money over there

and just assume that they are doing so for the troops and national security and for God and country??? Seriously do you think there is some other reason they want all that money shipping to a wild west land of lawlessness???

:sarcasm:

[bdamomma]

6. bush will never stop with his tantrums he needs to be sent away

to the corner.

[Turbineguy]

8. Breaking News!

Bush tells the truth!

Nah, never happen. Never.

[whistle]

9. Is there really any reason now why the country should not stop funding

....George's war folly and just bring the troops home? Impeach this son-of-a-bitch and his thug gangster Dick Cheney right now!

[madhoosier]

10. I think we'll run out of money earlier...

I think the military will run out of money earlier...with the new war with Iran and all.

[19jet54]

12. Nevada

is so proud of him - Give 'em hell Harry!

[geardaddy]

13. * is a petulant child.

I can't remember who used this image, but they said "* is a walking middle finger."

How apt.

[jaybeat]

14. You go Harry!

Kick Bush's chicken-hawk ASS!

:toast:

[Disturbed]

15. Busholini "misleading"?

Why can't Reid just say that Busholini is lying?

[Martin Eden]

16. "emergency spending bill passed that funds our troops and makes America more secure"

I dispute that our continued presence in Iraq makes us more secure, and if you want to help the troops BRING THEM HOME.:mad:

[lizbitchwitchy]

21. THANK YOU MARTIN!

For saying it like it is! I have no idea what in the hell everyone else here, is talking about!

[LiberalFighter]

17. If they had enough funding to last to July then that means

they don't need as much as bushwad indicated.

[Canuckistanian]

18. So, in other words

Shrub has more than enough money to pursue his war until at least July of this year. By his own standards.

Now, he's retroactively pushing that date back to Apr. 15th?

What a.....

Sorry, I have no words.

[Maryland Liberal]

19. Mislead?

Come on man - why use the M-word? Can't we just come out and say "the Bushie Lied???"

[twaddler01]

20. sick and tired

of all the lies and the corruption.

IMPEACH BUSH!

[lizbitchwitchy]

22. First of all

The president is NOT going to veto this bill. I mean, COME ALONG - WHAT in this bill does the president oppose? Those withdrawl dates are non-binding (and even if they were binding - what binding thing has ever stopped him before - and what democratic majority has punished him for it?) - It entails all the money he requested - SO WHY WOULD HE VETO IT? He won't - trust me. It's just a little song and dance - a musical play - created to give you and me and everyone else in this country the illusion that there are two different parties with two different agendas - and like I have said before - there might well be two different agendas but NONE of them are OURS!

How long will it take before AMERICA sees this two party farce for what it is. It's not about democrats and republicans - it's about them and us. The politicians with few exceptions (and I mean very few - and the few that i mean are democrats but there aren't nearly enough of them to do anything to help us) are NOT on our side. They believe and we keep proving them right that we are dumbed down and will fall for this crap easily - LET"S NOT PROVE THEM RIGHT. We need to get a bit more pushy - like threaten our reps with a damned recall petition - and someone else needs to write the damned bills for them to introduce - ones without all the loop holes that the loopy americans keep overlooking just so they have some party to cheer on and on. Sorry people - but you have got to open your eyes! We either need a whole new slew of democrats and maybe those Progressive democrats of American can help or we need a whole new party - and I dont' mean the republicans either - they are definately worse - but WE NEED TO LOOK AT WHAT THEY DO - NOT WHAT THEY SAY.

Meanwhile back in Iraq.......KEEP YOUR EYE ON THE BLOODSPILL PEOPLE!

[Bucky]

24. Welcome to DU Lizbitchwitchy

I think you're wrong. I think he's gonna veto it. The Dems are in for a fight on this one. If you've ever potty trained an obstinate 2 year old, you'll know exactly what kind of fight they have on their hands.

This one looks like a "pincher"

[lizbitchwitchy]

25. Thanks for the welcome Bucky

I've never had the potty training experience from the trainer's perspective - George has not yet been potty trained - I can tell by the way he has shit all over this country and us - however, he just happens to be a foul creature with bad habits - I don't think he is doing anything more than putting on an act -However, I HOPE you are right. I hope he vetos that bill just like I hope he chokes on another pretzel - Then we will have EXACTLY what needs to be done - NO FUNDING FOR THE ILLEGAL WAR - He won't veto the bill - Just because he says he will - doesn't mean jack - when has the man ever done anything that he has said he would do? Why do you think he will veto it because there is a non-binding withdrawl date that will mean absolutely nothing if he doesn't comply? I need some good reasons why you think he will veto it - like what in it doesn't work for him?