Showing posts with label George W Bush. Show all posts
Showing posts with label George W Bush. Show all posts

Thursday, April 19, 2007

Impeach Pelosi? Why Not...

I just got an email about how Pelosi could be convicted of a felony for her little visit to Syria under the Logan Act and was gonna post on it, but in doing some research, it appears Hot Air beat me to the punch, you know, 13 days ago when the story was still relevant.

Don't blame me, I think I was taking a blogging break back then...

Anyway, here's the text of the email:

Pelosi arguably committed a FELONY when she traveled to Syria and whispered behind closed doors with Bashar al-Assad, Syria's terrorist-loving leader.
First, the U.S. Constitution implicitly gives the President the authority to conduct foreign policy.

In order to make that responsibility explicit, in 17[99] President John Adams initiated the Logan Act, which forbids any American -- "without authority of the United States" -- to communicate with a foreign government with the intent of influencing that government's actions in any "disputes or controversies with the United States."

VIOLATION OF THE LOGAN ACT IS A FELONY! Upon conviction, an offender can be sentenced to prison for up to three years. If she was just a regular person like you, Nancy Pelosi would be a prime candidate for a prison cell.

Why should Speaker Pelosi, third in the line of Presidential succession, get away with blatantly undermining U.S. Foreign policy by meeting with the leader of a country that supports terrorism? Why aren't our conservative leaders calling for a full investigation of her actions, or censure or even impeachment?
Allah seems to think it's a long shot, and he's probably right. In some 200+ years, no one's been prosecuted. But this might be a good card to keep up our sleeves in case those power-drunk, trigger-happy Dems try and impeach Bush (as they so want to do) or Cheney (which they're now threatening). And it all has even more importance with Madame Speaker planning a similar trip to Iran.

Wednesday, April 18, 2007

First Victory For Unborn Children Since 1973

Unborn children got their first major win before the US Supreme Court today, as the court decided to uphold the partial-abortion ban:

The Supreme Court's conservative majority handed anti-abortion forces a major victory Wednesday in a decision that bans a controversial abortion procedure and set the stage for further restrictions.

For the first time since the court established a woman's right to an abortion in 1973, the justices upheld a nationwide ban on a specific abortion method, labeled partial-birth abortion by its opponents.

While this is good news, millions of unborn children are still be slaughtered daily around the world. At the very least, this will further bring to the attention of the public how this horrible procedure works.

Justice Kennedy wrote the majority opinion (odd), in which he notes the law is not unconstitutional in that, "The law need not give abortion doctors unfettered choice in the course of their medical practice..." But curses! Do conservatives want women to die! The law doesn't include an exception for when the mother's life is at risk! This argument just shows that liberals are missing the argument conservatives make. We believe that abortion is murder; in what way does that make it sound like we'd make an exception for murder to save the mother's life?

President Bush says:
"I am pleased that the Supreme Court has upheld a law that prohibits the abhorrent procedure of partial birth abortion," he said. "Today's decision affirms that the Constitution does not stand in the way of the people's representatives enacting laws reflecting the compassion and humanity of America."
I don't know who decided that the Supreme Court has the right to define when life begins and ends, but I guess that's what happens when the court has the ability to tell us what their powers are. Checks and balances? More like Judicial rule with an iron fist.

It was a 5-4 decision, with Kennedy, Alito, Thomas, Roberts, and Scalia in the majority. All-in-all, great news.

***Update, 4:44pm***

Drudge rounded up the response of most of the Presidential candidates.

Hillary: "Erosion of our Constitutional rights..."
Obama: "I strongly disagree..."
Edwards: "I couldn't disagree more strongly..."
Romney: "A step forward..."
McCain: "I'm very happy about the decision..."
Giuliani: "The Supreme Court reached the correct conclusion..." (BS)
Brownback:
The ruling would result "in lives being saved."

Well, I guess Edwards will get the Democrat nomination. After all, he "couldn't disagree more strongly." Obama just disagreed.

Secret Service Agents Shot Each Other... Kind Of...

It appears that two Secret Service agents shot each other, er, kind of. This lead to a lock down at the White House. There was also mention of a suspicious package. GW was not at the White House, but in Virginia.

Jawa has the story.

This crap would never happen if they'd just do what conservatives have been calling for since late 2001: put Jack Bauer in charge of guarding the President! Then again, every President he's been around seems to have died... And he did almost kill Logan. So maybe that's a bad idea...

Blame-Game Begins In VTech Killings

The blame-game in the VTech killings has begun... Guh...

Liberal "heroes" like Olberman are blaming Bush for allowing the Assault Weapons Law of 1994 to expire therefore allowing Cho Seung-Hui to buy extended clips, when the ban didn't even cover them!

Meanwhile, some psycho over at Huffington Post is saying "I think it is also fair to place some of the blame on our political leaders who called for us to invade and occupy Iraq."

Guh. Get a grip on reality. There's one person to blame in this: the killer! He was a disturbed psycho who couldn't deal with his problems. Did a few extra bullets per clip allow him to kill all those people? I don't think so.

I don't want to argue the Second Amendment with regards to something so tragic, but let's be honest; the kid was already breaking gun laws by having a firearm on campus. Is anyone surprised the mass murder chose not to obey the law? If anything, greater Second Amendment rights may have saved lives, someone on campus may have been able to shoot back! Remember: when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

***Update, 1:47am***

Meanwhile, Obama seems to be blaming Imus' racist comments...

Saturday, March 17, 2007

CNN Called Clinton's Mass Attorney Firings A 'Clean Sweep'

News Busters has dug up a CNN report on Clinton's mass attorney firings, in which they show just how balanced their coverage is:

...an April 12, 1993 CNN special report where reporter Ken Bode called it a “one-day clean sweep.” Reno declared: “I have asked for their resignations at the request of the President…It’s important that we build a team that reflects our desire to have a Justice Department marked by excellence, marked by diversity, marked by professionalism, and integrity. I want teamwork where we’re both interested in achieving justice throughout America.”
It just so happens that in order to build diversity, Clinton had to fire every single hold-over attorney from a Republican President. The media ignores this story, Clinton firing every single Republican attorney at once (all 93 of them), but talks of how GW's firing 8 random attorneys calls for an investigation "all the way to the top?"

Here's the video from News Busters:

Wednesday, March 14, 2007

Dems Itching To Stop Corruption, Even If It's Made Up

This annoys me to no end.

Liberals and the mainstream media are whining and moaning that GW has fired a handful (8) of US attorneys while completely ignoring the fact that Clinton fired 93 of them!

And of course, ABC’s "justice correspondent" Pierre Thomas was quick to note:

Democrats suspect key White House advisor Karl Rove played a role in the firings and they want to investigate whether Republicans on Capitol Hill also were at play.
ABC is playing this as a scandal with the makings for "a trail that points straight to the top." However, no crime was committed here! Sound familiar (I'm looking at you, Ms. Plame!) Drudge today links to the very law that clearly states "United States Attorneys are subject to removal at the will of the President."

What is it liberals don't get about this! You waste people's time when you investigate things that aren't illegal! If the Democrats are so itching to take down corruption, they only need to look within their own party! Alcee Hastings, John Murtha, Harry Reid, William J. Jefferson, John Conyers, and Alan B. Mollohan, to name a few.

And now it looks like GW may have to throw a loyal staffer to the wolves. From Mexico (where he's busy promising Mexicans open borders), GW said "...mistakes were made and I'm frankly not happy about them.
" Of course, he's not referring to the firing of the attorneys, because absolutely nothing was wrong with that. He's referring to how the political "fallout" was handled.

Now, with Rummy gone, libs are itching for a new public enemy number one, and it looks like they may have found their man in Alberto Gonzalez. They've already started calling for his resignation. How long until he gets sick of the bitching and gives in like Rummy did?

Liberals are literally crippling our country's ability to defend its self. They pointlessly drag members of the Bush administration to court for hearings investigating events that aren't even crimes. They actually charge Scooter Libby for forgetting some dates while being investigated for an act that, surprise, wasn't a crime! They bitch and bitch until members of GW's cabinet resign. Can't they just let the government do its job; defend America? Apparently votes are more important to them than the lives of Americans.

Digg This!

Tuesday, March 06, 2007

Libby, Guilty

Story on the Libby trial I've been ignoring because in many ways it's a non-story:

Former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby was convicted Tuesday of obstruction, perjury and lying to the FBI in an investigation into the leak of a CIA operative's identity.

Libby, the former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, was accused of lying and obstructing the investigation into the 2003 leak of CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity to reporters.

He was acquitted of one count of lying to the FBI.

Ace notes that those three convictions seem to be the same damn thing, reworded. I'd have to agree. Was it not obvious to this jury that since it has been proven that Richard Armitage was the one who "leaked" Plame's name, and that it's now beyond a doubt that no crime was involved in the "leak" anyway that it's far more likely that Libby just forgot some details or was confused when he "perjured" himself?

Whether it was obvious or not it's quite evident that Fitzgerald stacked the jury with people who hate the Bush administration and anyone connected to it in anyway, so they probably would have said guilty regardless of the facts.

Oh well. This is just another poor soul whose name and reputation were destroyed in the name of politics as usual.


Digg This!

Friday, March 02, 2007

'Bush Crashes In Atlanta'

Reuters killed the President. Is anyone surprised? It was just a matter of time before some psycho in the liberal media decided to do him in.

Rusty over at Jawa suspects this could not have been a mere typo, more likely a prank. "So, a CNN intern bets a Reuters intern that he can get away with killing the President in the headlines?" That's what it looks like to me, after all, they're the MSM, they don't make mistakes!

***Update, 6:14pm***

Hot Air has CNN's "Bush Crash" video:







Tuesday, February 20, 2007

Al Gore and GW on Bin Laden

Hat tip to the Political Pit Bull who found a golden nugget in an extremely long and boring article about Ariel Sharon:

Speaking of George Bush, with whom Sharon developed a very close relationship, Uri Dan recalls that Sharon's delicacy made him reluctant to repeat what the president had told him when they discussed Osama bin Laden. Finally he relented. And here is what the leader of the Western world, valiant warrior in the battle of cultures, promised to do to bin Laden if he caught him: "I will screw him in the ass!"
Way to go GW. It's good to know that he's sincere in his hate for terrorists.

It's also good to know that Al Gore may have a little but of a human heart under that robot exterior, showing an unusual amount of sense for the man who now leads the environmental nuts:
Snatches, or more properly "extraordinary renditions," were operations to apprehend terrorists abroad, usually without the knowledge of and almost always without public acknowledgement of the host government.... The first time I proposed a snatch, in 1993, the White House Counsel, Lloyd Cutler, demanded a meeting with the President to explain how it violated international law. Clinton had seemed to be siding with Cutler until Al Gore belatedly joined the meeting, having just flown overnight from South Africa. Clinton recapped the arguments on both sides for Gore: Lloyd says this. Dick says that. Gore laughed and said, "That's a no-brainer. Of course it's a violation of international law, that's why it's a covert action. The guy is a terrorist. Go grab his ass." (pp. 143-144)
It's too damn bad he's unwilling to stand up for his private beliefs, when he would much rather kowtow to the peacenik left.

Friday, February 09, 2007

People Hate Congress More Than President Bush

Jawa points out that congress' approval rating is lower than President Bush's:

Bush - 36.2% (poor)
Congress - 36% (poorer)
Way to go Dems. My question: how will the media spin this one? Of course, they probably won't have to worry about that; they just won't report it.

How bad do you have to be at your job to get a lower approval rating than a guy who is under constant attack from a news media that reports everything he does wrong, and makes up even more stuff he supposedly did wrong. All while the Dems are having to deal with real hardball news stories about what great fashion sense Nancy Pelosi has? Pathetic.

Thursday, January 25, 2007

Video - 2007 State of The Union Highlights

Video highlights of the State of The Union, for those of you who missed it (thanks to Flopping Aces for uploading this to Google Video):



We also have the transript for those who are interested.

President Escallating War In Afghanistan!

Shortly after President Bush unveiled his "new way forward" strategy for Iraq, including sending an additional 21,500 U.S. troops, the White House says it will ask Congress to authorize more than $8 billion to help stabilize Afghanistan, as well as extend the deployments of 3,200 soldiers there.
When are the Democrats going to decry the escalation of the war in Afghanistan?

Wednesday, January 24, 2007

Rosie: Still Fat, Still Crazy

Hat tip to Hot Air for getting this horrendous video of the disgusting, bloated Rosie O'Donnell calling for GW's impeachment:



I like that zinger Barbara Walters throws in at the very end.

2007 State Of The Union: Good Stuff!

(Here's a full transcript of the speech)

Well, the State of the Union was far better than I thought it'd be. It definitely had some high points, which I'll mention while pretending the low points didn't exist (who needs a downer like hearing about more No Child Left Behind?)

First of all, GW mentioned what the MSM has refused to, the booming economy. Send this quote to all your friends who don't know the economy is booming:

A future of hope and opportunity begins with a growing economy -- and that is what we have. We're now in the 41st month of uninterrupted job growth, in a recovery that has created 7.2 million new jobs -- so far. Unemployment is low, inflation is low, and wages are rising. This economy is on the move, and our job is to keep it that way, not with more government, but with more enterprise. (Applause.)

Next week, I'll deliver a full report on the state of our economy. Tonight, I want to discuss three economic reforms that deserve to be priorities for this Congress.

First, we must balance the federal budget. (Applause.) We can do so without raising taxes. (Applause.) What we need is impose spending discipline in Washington, D.C. We set a goal of cutting the deficit in half by 2009, and met that goal three years ahead of schedule. (Applause.) Now let us take the next step. In the coming weeks, I will submit a budget that eliminates the federal deficit within the next five years. (Applause.) I ask you to make the same commitment. Together, we can restrain the spending appetite of the federal government, and we can balance the federal budget. (Applause.)

Next, I loved this line about health care:
In all we do, we must remember that the best health care decisions are made not by government and insurance companies, but by patients and their doctors.
Take that Hillary, with your "universal health care!" You make me sick...

GW's whole part about Islamofascism was great! Here's a large chunk of it:

For all of us in this room, there is no higher responsibility than to protect the people of this country from danger. Five years have come and gone since we saw the scenes and felt the sorrow that the terrorists can cause. We've had time to take stock of our situation. We've added many critical protections to guard the homeland. We know with certainty that the horrors of that September morning were just a glimpse of what the terrorists intend for us -- unless we stop them.

With the distance of time, we find ourselves debating the causes of conflict and the course we have followed. Such debates are essential when a great democracy faces great questions. Yet one question has surely been settled: that to win the war on terror we must take the fight to the enemy. (Applause.)

From the start, America and our allies have protected our people by staying on the offense. The enemy knows that the days of comfortable sanctuary, easy movement, steady financing, and free flowing communications are long over. For the terrorists, life since 9/11 has never been the same.

Our success in this war is often measured by the things that did not happen. We cannot know the full extent of the attacks that we and our allies have prevented, but here is some of what we do know: We stopped an al Qaeda plot to fly a hijacked airplane into the tallest building on the West Coast. We broke up a Southeast Asian terror cell grooming operatives for attacks inside the United States. We uncovered an al Qaeda cell developing anthrax to be used in attacks against America. And just last August, British authorities uncovered a plot to blow up passenger planes bound for America over the Atlantic Ocean. For each life saved, we owe a debt of gratitude to the brave public servants who devote their lives to finding the terrorists and stopping them. (Applause.)

Every success against the terrorists is a reminder of the shoreless ambitions of this enemy. The evil that inspired and rejoiced in 9/11 is still at work in the world. And so long as that's the case, America is still a nation at war.

In the mind of the terrorist, this war began well before September the 11th, and will not end until their radical vision is fulfilled. And these past five years have given us a much clearer view of the nature of this enemy. Al Qaeda and its followers are Sunni extremists, possessed by hatred and commanded by a harsh and narrow ideology. Take almost any principle of civilization, and their goal is the opposite. They preach with threats, instruct with bullets and bombs, and promise paradise for the murder of the innocent.

Our enemies are quite explicit about their intentions. They want to overthrow moderate governments, and establish safe havens from which to plan and carry out new attacks on our country. By killing and terrorizing Americans, they want to force our country to retreat from the world and abandon the cause of liberty. They would then be free to impose their will and spread their totalitarian ideology. Listen to this warning from the late terrorist Zarqawi: "We will sacrifice our blood and bodies to put an end to your dreams, and what is coming is even worse." Osama bin Laden declared: "Death is better than living on this Earth with the unbelievers among us."

These men are not given to idle words, and they are just one camp in the Islamist radical movement. In recent times, it has also become clear that we face an escalating danger from Shia extremists who are just as hostile to America, and are also determined to dominate the Middle East. Many are known to take direction from the regime in Iran, which is funding and arming terrorists like Hezbollah -- a group second only to al Qaeda in the American lives it has taken.

The Shia and Sunni extremists are different faces of the same totalitarian threat. Whatever slogans they chant, when they slaughter the innocent they have the same wicked purposes. They want to kill Americans, kill democracy in the Middle East, and gain the weapons to kill on an even more horrific scale.

In the sixth year since our nation was attacked, I wish I could report to you that the dangers had ended. They have not. And so it remains the policy of this government to use every lawful and proper tool of intelligence, diplomacy, law enforcement, and military action to do our duty, to find these enemies, and to protect the American people. (Applause.)

This war is more than a clash of arms -- it is a decisive ideological struggle, and the security of our nation is in the balance. To prevail, we must remove the conditions that inspire blind hatred, and drove 19 men to get onto airplanes and to come and kill us. What every terrorist fears most is human freedom...

Good stuff! One of my favorite lines: "They preach with threats, instruct with bullets and bombs, and promise paradise for the murder of the innocent."

And as a final note, one part that made me sick to my stomach was when GW delivered this great line:
Ladies and gentlemen, nothing is more important at this moment in our history than for America to succeed in the Middle East, to succeed in Iraq and to spare the American people from this danger.
And the Dems actually didn't applaud! I mean, WTF is wrong with these people? They practically (and finally) admitted that they don't want America to succeed in Iraq!

And the speech ended with a definite high point, with GW introducing us to several people who show how great America is.

All in all, a great speech (with the exception of having to look at Nancy Pelosi the whole time) with some definite high points! I'll post video once it's on Youtube, until then, it can be viewed at Whitehouse.gov.

2007 State of the Union Transcirpt

200th post of the month, and it's something as great as a full transcript of GW's 2007 State of the Union adress (via Whitehous.gov, which also has video) I'll post my commentary on it briefly.

2007 State of the Union

Thank you very much. And tonight, I have a high privilege and distinct honor of my own -- as the first President to begin the State of the Union message with these words: Madam Speaker. (Applause.)

In his day, the late Congressman Thomas D'Alesandro, Jr. from Baltimore, Maryland, saw Presidents Roosevelt and Truman at this rostrum. But nothing could compare with the sight of his only daughter, Nancy, presiding tonight as Speaker of the House of Representatives. (Applause.) Congratulations, Madam Speaker. (Applause.)

Two members of the House and Senate are not with us tonight, and we pray for the recovery and speedy return of Senator Tim Johnson and Congressman Charlie Norwood. (Applause.)

Madam Speaker, Vice President Cheney, members of Congress, distinguished guests, and fellow citizens:

The rite of custom brings us together at a defining hour -- when decisions are hard and courage is needed. We enter the year 2007 with large endeavors underway, and others that are ours to begin. In all of this, much is asked of us. We must have the will to face difficult challenges and determined enemies -- and the wisdom to face them together.

Some in this chamber are new to the House and the Senate -- and I congratulate the Democrat majority. (Applause.) Congress has changed, but not our responsibilities. Each of us is guided by our own convictions -- and to these we must stay faithful. Yet we're all held to the same standards, and called to serve the same good purposes: To extend this nation's prosperity; to spend the people's money wisely; to solve problems, not leave them to future generations; to guard America against all evil; and to keep faith with those we have sent forth to defend us. (Applause.)

We're not the first to come here with a government divided and uncertainty in the air. Like many before us, we can work through our differences, and achieve big things for the American people. Our citizens don't much care which side of the aisle we sit on -- as long as we're willing to cross that aisle when there is work to be done. (Applause.) Our job is to make life better for our fellow Americans, and to help them to build a future of hope and opportunity -- and this is the business before us tonight.

A future of hope and opportunity begins with a growing economy -- and that is what we have. We're now in the 41st month of uninterrupted job growth, in a recovery that has created 7.2 million new jobs -- so far. Unemployment is low, inflation is low, and wages are rising. This economy is on the move, and our job is to keep it that way, not with more government, but with more enterprise. (Applause.)

Next week, I'll deliver a full report on the state of our economy. Tonight, I want to discuss three economic reforms that deserve to be priorities for this Congress.

First, we must balance the federal budget. (Applause.) We can do so without raising taxes. (Applause.) What we need is impose spending discipline in Washington, D.C. We set a goal of cutting the deficit in half by 2009, and met that goal three years ahead of schedule. (Applause.) Now let us take the next step. In the coming weeks, I will submit a budget that eliminates the federal deficit within the next five years. (Applause.) I ask you to make the same commitment. Together, we can restrain the spending appetite of the federal government, and we can balance the federal budget. (Applause.)

Next, there is the matter of earmarks. These special interest items are often slipped into bills at the last hour -- when not even C-SPAN is watching. (Laughter.) In 2005 alone, the number of earmarks grew to over 13,000 and totaled nearly $18 billion. Even worse, over 90 percent of earmarks never make it to the floor of the House and Senate -- they are dropped into committee reports that are not even part of the bill that arrives on my desk. You didn't vote them into law. I didn't sign them into law. Yet, they're treated as if they have the force of law. The time has come to end this practice. So let us work together to reform the budget process, expose every earmark to the light of day and to a vote in Congress, and cut the number and cost of earmarks at least in half by the end of this session. (Applause.)

And, finally, to keep this economy strong we must take on the challenge of entitlements. Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid are commitments of conscience, and so it is our duty to keep them permanently sound. Yet, we're failing in that duty. And this failure will one day leave our children with three bad options: huge tax increases, huge deficits, or huge and immediate cuts in benefits. Everyone in this chamber knows this to be true -- yet somehow we have not found it in ourselves to act. So let us work together and do it now. With enough good sense and goodwill, you and I can fix Medicare and Medicaid -- and save Social Security. (Applause.)

Spreading opportunity and hope in America also requires public schools that give children the knowledge and character they need in life. Five years ago, we rose above partisan differences to pass the No Child Left Behind Act, preserving local control, raising standards, and holding those schools accountable for results. And because we acted, students are performing better in reading and math, and minority students are closing the achievement gap.

Now the task is to build on the success, without watering down standards, without taking control from local communities, and without backsliding and calling it reform. We can lift student achievement even higher by giving local leaders flexibility to turn around failing schools, and by giving families with children stuck in failing schools the right to choose someplace better. (Applause.) We must increase funds for students who struggle -- and make sure these children get the special help they need. (Applause.) And we can make sure our children are prepared for the jobs of the future and our country is more competitive by strengthening math and science skills. The No Child Left Behind Act has worked for America's children -- and I ask Congress to reauthorize this good law. (Applause.)

A future of hope and opportunity requires that all our citizens have affordable and available health care. (Applause.) When it comes to health care, government has an obligation to care for the elderly, the disabled, and poor children. And we will meet those responsibilities. For all other Americans, private health insurance is the best way to meet their needs. (Applause.) But many Americans cannot afford a health insurance policy.

And so tonight, I propose two new initiatives to help more Americans afford their own insurance. First, I propose a standard tax deduction for health insurance that will be like the standard tax deduction for dependents. Families with health insurance will pay no income on payroll tax -- or payroll taxes on $15,000 of their income. Single Americans with health insurance will pay no income or payroll taxes on $7,500 of their income. With this reform, more than 100 million men, women, and children who are now covered by employer-provided insurance will benefit from lower tax bills. At the same time, this reform will level the playing field for those who do not get health insurance through their job. For Americans who now purchase health insurance on their own, this proposal would mean a substantial tax savings -- $4,500 for a family of four making $60,000 a year. And for the millions of other Americans who have no health insurance at all, this deduction would help put a basic private health insurance plan within their reach. Changing the tax code is a vital and necessary step to making health care affordable for more Americans. (Applause.)

My second proposal is to help the states that are coming up with innovative ways to cover the uninsured. States that make basic private health insurance available to all their citizens should receive federal funds to help them provide this coverage to the poor and the sick. I have asked the Secretary of Health and Human Services to work with Congress to take existing federal funds and use them to create "Affordable Choices" grants. These grants would give our nation's governors more money and more flexibility to get private health insurance to those most in need.

There are many other ways that Congress can help. We need to expand Health Savings Accounts. (Applause.) We need to help small businesses through Association Health Plans. (Applause.) We need to reduce costs and medical errors with better information technology. (Applause.) We will encourage price transparency. And to protect good doctors from junk lawsuits, we passing medical liability reform. (Applause.) In all we do, we must remember that the best health care decisions are made not by government and insurance companies, but by patients and their doctors. (Applause.)

Extending hope and opportunity in our country requires an immigration system worthy of America -- with laws that are fair and borders that are secure. When laws and borders are routinely violated, this harms the interests of our country. To secure our border, we're doubling the size of the Border Patrol, and funding new infrastructure and technology.

Yet even with all these steps, we cannot fully secure the border unless we take pressure off the border -- and that requires a temporary worker program. We should establish a legal and orderly path for foreign workers to enter our country to work on a temporary basis. As a result, they won't have to try to sneak in, and that will leave Border Agents free to chase down drug smugglers and criminals and terrorists. (Applause.) We'll enforce our immigration laws at the work site and give employers the tools to verify the legal status of their workers, so there's no excuse left for violating the law. (Applause.)

We need to uphold the great tradition of the melting pot that welcomes and assimilates new arrivals. (Applause.) We need to resolve the status of the illegal immigrants who are already in our country without animosity and without amnesty. (Applause.) Convictions run deep in this Capitol when it comes to immigration. Let us have a serious, civil, and conclusive debate, so that you can pass, and I can sign, comprehensive immigration reform into law. (Applause.)

Extending hope and opportunity depends on a stable supply of energy that keeps America's economy running and America's environment clean. For too long our nation has been dependent on foreign oil. And this dependence leaves us more vulnerable to hostile regimes, and to terrorists -- who could cause huge disruptions of oil shipments, and raise the price of oil, and do great harm to our economy.

It's in our vital interest to diversify America's energy supply -- the way forward is through technology. We must continue changing the way America generates electric power, by even greater use of clean coal technology, solar and wind energy, and clean, safe nuclear power. (Applause.) We need to press on with battery research for plug-in and hybrid vehicles, and expand the use of clean diesel vehicles and biodiesel fuel. (Applause.) We must continue investing in new methods of producing ethanol -- (applause) -- using everything from wood chips to grasses, to agricultural wastes.

We made a lot of progress, thanks to good policies here in Washington and the strong response of the market. And now even more dramatic advances are within reach. Tonight, I ask Congress to join me in pursuing a great goal. Let us build on the work we've done and reduce gasoline usage in the United States by 20 percent in the next 10 years. (Applause.) When we do that we will have cut our total imports by the equivalent of three-quarters of all the oil we now import from the Middle East.

To reach this goal, we must increase the supply of alternative fuels, by setting a mandatory fuels standard to require 35 billion gallons of renewable and alternative fuels in 2017 -- and that is nearly five times the current target. (Applause.) At the same time, we need to reform and modernize fuel economy standards for cars the way we did for light trucks -- and conserve up to 8.5 billion more gallons of gasoline by 2017.

Achieving these ambitious goals will dramatically reduce our dependence on foreign oil, but it's not going to eliminate it. And so as we continue to diversify our fuel supply, we must step up domestic oil production in environmentally sensitive ways. (Applause.) And to further protect America against severe disruptions to our oil supply, I ask Congress to double the current capacity of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. (Applause.)

America is on the verge of technological breakthroughs that will enable us to live our lives less dependent on oil. And these technologies will help us be better stewards of the environment, and they will help us to confront the serious challenge of global climate change. (Applause.)

A future of hope and opportunity requires a fair, impartial system of justice. The lives of our citizens across our nation are affected by the outcome of cases pending in our federal courts. We have a shared obligation to ensure that the federal courts have enough judges to hear those cases and deliver timely rulings. As President, I have a duty to nominate qualified men and women to vacancies on the federal bench. And the United States Senate has a duty, as well, to give those nominees a fair hearing, and a prompt up-or-down vote on the Senate floor. (Applause.)

For all of us in this room, there is no higher responsibility than to protect the people of this country from danger. Five years have come and gone since we saw the scenes and felt the sorrow that the terrorists can cause. We've had time to take stock of our situation. We've added many critical protections to guard the homeland. We know with certainty that the horrors of that September morning were just a glimpse of what the terrorists intend for us -- unless we stop them.

With the distance of time, we find ourselves debating the causes of conflict and the course we have followed. Such debates are essential when a great democracy faces great questions. Yet one question has surely been settled: that to win the war on terror we must take the fight to the enemy. (Applause.)

From the start, America and our allies have protected our people by staying on the offense. The enemy knows that the days of comfortable sanctuary, easy movement, steady financing, and free flowing communications are long over. For the terrorists, life since 9/11 has never been the same.

Our success in this war is often measured by the things that did not happen. We cannot know the full extent of the attacks that we and our allies have prevented, but here is some of what we do know: We stopped an al Qaeda plot to fly a hijacked airplane into the tallest building on the West Coast. We broke up a Southeast Asian terror cell grooming operatives for attacks inside the United States. We uncovered an al Qaeda cell developing anthrax to be used in attacks against America. And just last August, British authorities uncovered a plot to blow up passenger planes bound for America over the Atlantic Ocean. For each life saved, we owe a debt of gratitude to the brave public servants who devote their lives to finding the terrorists and stopping them. (Applause.)

Every success against the terrorists is a reminder of the shoreless ambitions of this enemy. The evil that inspired and rejoiced in 9/11 is still at work in the world. And so long as that's the case, America is still a nation at war.

In the mind of the terrorist, this war began well before September the 11th, and will not end until their radical vision is fulfilled. And these past five years have given us a much clearer view of the nature of this enemy. Al Qaeda and its followers are Sunni extremists, possessed by hatred and commanded by a harsh and narrow ideology. Take almost any principle of civilization, and their goal is the opposite. They preach with threats, instruct with bullets and bombs, and promise paradise for the murder of the innocent.

Our enemies are quite explicit about their intentions. They want to overthrow moderate governments, and establish safe havens from which to plan and carry out new attacks on our country. By killing and terrorizing Americans, they want to force our country to retreat from the world and abandon the cause of liberty. They would then be free to impose their will and spread their totalitarian ideology. Listen to this warning from the late terrorist Zarqawi: "We will sacrifice our blood and bodies to put an end to your dreams, and what is coming is even worse." Osama bin Laden declared: "Death is better than living on this Earth with the unbelievers among us."

These men are not given to idle words, and they are just one camp in the Islamist radical movement. In recent times, it has also become clear that we face an escalating danger from Shia extremists who are just as hostile to America, and are also determined to dominate the Middle East. Many are known to take direction from the regime in Iran, which is funding and arming terrorists like Hezbollah -- a group second only to al Qaeda in the American lives it has taken.

The Shia and Sunni extremists are different faces of the same totalitarian threat. Whatever slogans they chant, when they slaughter the innocent they have the same wicked purposes. They want to kill Americans, kill democracy in the Middle East, and gain the weapons to kill on an even more horrific scale.

In the sixth year since our nation was attacked, I wish I could report to you that the dangers had ended. They have not. And so it remains the policy of this government to use every lawful and proper tool of intelligence, diplomacy, law enforcement, and military action to do our duty, to find these enemies, and to protect the American people. (Applause.)

This war is more than a clash of arms -- it is a decisive ideological struggle, and the security of our nation is in the balance. To prevail, we must remove the conditions that inspire blind hatred, and drove 19 men to get onto airplanes and to come and kill us. What every terrorist fears most is human freedom

-- societies where men and women make their own choices, answer to their own conscience, and live by their hopes instead of their resentments. Free people are not drawn to violent and malignant ideologies -- and most will choose a better way when they're given a chance. So we advance our own security interests by helping moderates and reformers and brave voices for democracy. The great question of our day is whether America will help men and women in the Middle East to build free societies and share in the rights of all humanity. And I say, for the sake of our own security, we must. (Applause.)

In the last two years, we've seen the desire for liberty in the broader Middle East -- and we have been sobered by the enemy's fierce reaction. In 2005, the world watched as the citizens of Lebanon raised the banner of the Cedar Revolution, they drove out the Syrian occupiers and chose new leaders in free elections. In 2005, the people of Afghanistan defied the terrorists and elected a democratic legislature. And in 2005, the Iraqi people held three national elections, choosing a transitional government, adopting the most progressive, democratic constitution in the Arab world, and then electing a government under that constitution. Despite endless threats from the killers in their midst, nearly 12 million Iraqi citizens came out to vote in a show of hope and solidarity that we should never forget. (Applause.)

A thinking enemy watched all of these scenes, adjusted their tactics, and in 2006 they struck back. In Lebanon, assassins took the life of Pierre Gemayel, a prominent participant in the Cedar Revolution. Hezbollah terrorists, with support from Syria and Iran, sowed conflict in the region and are seeking to undermine Lebanon's legitimately elected government. In Afghanistan, Taliban and al Qaeda fighters tried to regain power by regrouping and engaging Afghan and NATO forces. In Iraq, al Qaeda and other Sunni extremists blew up one of the most sacred places in Shia Islam -- the Golden Mosque of Samarra. This atrocity, directed at a Muslim house of prayer, was designed to provoke retaliation from Iraqi Shia -- and it succeeded. Radical Shia elements, some of whom receive support from Iran, formed death squads. The result was a tragic escalation of sectarian rage and reprisal that continues to this day.

This is not the fight we entered in Iraq, but it is the fight we're in. Every one of us wishes this war were over and won. Yet it would not be like us to leave our promises unkept, our friends abandoned, and our own security at risk. (Applause.) Ladies and gentlemen: On this day, at this hour, it is still within our power to shape the outcome of this battle. Let us find our resolve, and turn events toward victory. (Applause.)

We're carrying out a new strategy in Iraq -- a plan that demands more from Iraq's elected government, and gives our forces in Iraq the reinforcements they need to complete their mission. Our goal is a democratic Iraq that upholds the rule of law, respects the rights of its people, provides them security, and is an ally in the war on terror.

In order to make progress toward this goal, the Iraqi government must stop the sectarian violence in its capital. But the Iraqis are not yet ready to do this on their own. So we're deploying reinforcements of more than 20,000 additional soldiers and Marines to Iraq. The vast majority will go to Baghdad, where they will help Iraqi forces to clear and secure neighborhoods, and serve as advisers embedded in Iraqi Army units. With Iraqis in the lead, our forces will help secure the city by chasing down the terrorists, insurgents, and the roaming death squads. And in Anbar Province, where al Qaeda terrorists have gathered and local forces have begun showing a willingness to fight them, we're sending an additional 4,000 United States Marines, with orders to find the terrorists and clear them out. (Applause.) We didn't drive al Qaeda out of their safe haven in Afghanistan only to let them set up a new safe haven in a free Iraq.

The people of Iraq want to live in peace, and now it's time for their government to act. Iraq's leaders know that our commitment is not open-ended. They have promised to deploy more of their own troops to secure Baghdad -- and they must do so. They pledged that they will confront violent radicals of any faction or political party -- and they need to follow through, and lift needless restrictions on Iraqi and coalition forces, so these troops can achieve their mission of bringing security to all of the people of Baghdad. Iraq's leaders have committed themselves to a series of benchmarks -- to achieve reconciliation, to share oil revenues among all of Iraq's citizens, to put the wealth of Iraq into the rebuilding of Iraq, to allow more Iraqis to re-enter their nation's civic life, to hold local elections, and to take responsibility for security in every Iraqi province. But for all of this to happen, Baghdad must be secure. And our plan will help the Iraqi government take back its capital and make good on its commitments.

My fellow citizens, our military commanders and I have carefully weighed the options. We discussed every possible approach. In the end, I chose this course of action because it provides the best chance for success. Many in this chamber understand that America must not fail in Iraq, because you understand that the consequences of failure would be grievous and far-reaching.

If American forces step back before Baghdad is secure, the Iraqi government would be overrun by extremists on all sides. We could expect an epic battle between Shia extremists backed by Iran, and Sunni extremists aided by al Qaeda and supporters of the old regime. A contagion of violence could spill out across the country -- and in time, the entire region could be drawn into the conflict.

For America, this is a nightmare scenario. For the enemy, this is the objective. Chaos is the greatest ally -- their greatest ally in this struggle. And out of chaos in Iraq would emerge an emboldened enemy with new safe havens, new recruits, new resources, and an even greater determination to harm America. To allow this to happen would be to ignore the lessons of September the 11th and invite tragedy. Ladies and gentlemen, nothing is more important at this moment in our history than for America to succeed in the Middle East, to succeed in Iraq and to spare the American people from this danger. (Applause.)

This is where matters stand tonight, in the here and now. I have spoken with many of you in person. I respect you and the arguments you've made. We went into this largely united, in our assumptions and in our convictions. And whatever you voted for, you did not vote for failure. Our country is pursuing a new strategy in Iraq, and I ask you to give it a chance to work. And I ask you to support our troops in the field, and those on their way. (Applause.)

The war on terror we fight today is a generational struggle that will continue long after you and I have turned our duties over to others. And that's why it's important to work together so our nation can see this great effort through. Both parties and both branches should work in close consultation. It's why I propose to establish a special advisory council on the war on terror, made up of leaders in Congress from both political parties. We will share ideas for how to position America to meet every challenge that confronts us. We'll show our enemies abroad that we are united in the goal of victory.

And one of the first steps we can take together is to add to the ranks of our military so that the American Armed Forces are ready for all the challenges ahead. (Applause.) Tonight I ask the Congress to authorize an increase in the size of our active Army and Marine Corps by 92,000 in the next five years. (Applause.) A second task we can take on together is to design and establish a volunteer Civilian Reserve Corps. Such a corps would function much like our military reserve. It would ease the burden on the Armed Forces by allowing us to hire civilians with critical skills to serve on missions abroad when America needs them. It would give people across America who do not wear the uniform a chance to serve in the defining struggle of our time.

Americans can have confidence in the outcome of this struggle because we're not in this struggle alone. We have a diplomatic strategy that is rallying the world to join in the fight against extremism. In Iraq, multinational forces are operating under a mandate from the United Nations. We're working with Jordan and Saudi Arabia and Egypt and the Gulf States to increase support for Iraq's government.

The United Nations has imposed sanctions on Iran, and made it clear that the world will not allow the regime in Tehran to acquire nuclear weapons. (Applause.) With the other members of the Quartet -- the U.N., the European Union, and Russia -- we're pursuing diplomacy to help bring peace to the Holy Land, and pursuing the establishment of a democratic Palestinian state living side-by-side with Israel in peace and security. (Applause.) In Afghanistan, NATO has taken the lead in turning back the Taliban and al Qaeda offensive -- the first time the Alliance has deployed forces outside the North Atlantic area. Together with our partners in China, Japan, Russia, and South Korea, we're pursuing intensive diplomacy to achieve a Korean Peninsula free of nuclear weapons. (Applause.)

We will continue to speak out for the cause of freedom in places like Cuba, Belarus, and Burma -- and continue to awaken the conscience of the world to save the people of Darfur. (Applause.)

American foreign policy is more than a matter of war and diplomacy. Our work in the world is also based on a timeless truth: To whom much is given, much is required. We hear the call to take on the challenges of hunger and poverty and disease -- and that is precisely what America is doing. We must continue to fight HIV/AIDS, especially on the continent of Africa. (Applause.) Because you funded our Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, the number of people receiving life-saving drugs has grown from 50,000 to more than 800,000 in three short years. I ask you to continue funding our efforts to fight HIV/AIDS. I ask you to provide $1.2 billion over five years so we can combat malaria in 15 African countries. (Applause.)

I ask that you fund the Millennium Challenge Account, so that American aid reaches the people who need it, in nations where democracy is on the rise and corruption is in retreat. And let us continue to support the expanded trade and debt relief that are the best hope for lifting lives and eliminating poverty. (Applause.)

When America serves others in this way, we show the strength and generosity of our country. These deeds reflect the character of our people. The greatest strength we have is the heroic kindness, courage, and self-sacrifice of the American people. You see this spirit often if you know where to look -- and tonight we need only look above to the gallery.

Dikembe Mutombo grew up in Africa, amid great poverty and disease. He came to Georgetown University on a scholarship to study medicine -- but Coach John Thompson got a look at Dikembe and had a different idea. (Laughter.) Dikembe became a star in the NBA, and a citizen of the United States. But he never forgot the land of his birth, or the duty to share his blessings with others. He built a brand new hospital in his old hometown. A friend has said of this good-hearted man: "Mutombo believes that God has given him this opportunity to do great things." And we are proud to call this son of the Congo a citizen of the United States of America. (Applause.)

After her daughter was born, Julie Aigner-Clark searched for ways to share her love of music and art with her child. So she borrowed some equipment, and began filming children's videos in her basement. The Baby Einstein Company was born, and in just five years her business grew to more than $20 million in sales. In November 2001, Julie sold Baby Einstein to the Walt Disney Company, and with her help Baby Einstein has grown into a $200 million business. Julie represents the great enterprising spirit of America. And she is using her success to help others -- producing child safety videos with John Walsh of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. Julie says of her new project: "I believe it's the most important thing that I have ever done. I believe that children have the right to live in a world that is safe." And so tonight, we are pleased to welcome this talented business entrepreneur and generous social entrepreneur -- Julie Aigner-Clark. (Applause.)

Three weeks ago, Wesley Autrey was waiting at a Harlem subway station with his two little girls, when he saw a man fall into the path of a train. With seconds to act, Wesley jumped onto the tracks, pulled the man into the space between the rails, and held him as the train passed right above their heads. He insists he's not a hero. He says: "We got guys and girls overseas dying for us to have our freedoms. We have got to show each other some love." There is something wonderful about a country that produces a brave and humble man like Wesley Autrey. (Applause.)

Tommy Rieman was a teenager pumping gas in Independence, Kentucky, when he enlisted in the United States Army. In December 2003, he was on a reconnaissance mission in Iraq when his team came under heavy enemy fire. From his Humvee, Sergeant Rieman returned fire; he used his body as a shield to protect his gunner. He was shot in the chest and arm, and received shrapnel wounds to his legs -- yet he refused medical attention, and stayed in the fight. He helped to repel a second attack, firing grenades at the enemy's position. For his exceptional courage, Sergeant Rieman was awarded the Silver Star. And like so many other Americans who have volunteered to defend us, he has earned the respect and the gratitude of our entire country. (Applause.)

In such courage and compassion, ladies and gentlemen, we see the spirit and character of America -- and these qualities are not in short supply. This is a decent and honorable country -- and resilient, too. We've been through a lot together. We've met challenges and faced dangers, and we know that more lie ahead. Yet we can go forward with confidence -- because the State of our Union is strong, our cause in the world is right, and tonight that cause goes on. God bless. (Applause.)

See you next year. Thank you for your prayers.

*** Update - January 25, 6:11 pm ***

Video higlights can be found here.

Tuesday, January 23, 2007

State Of The Union [Update With Excerpts Via Ace!]

The State of the Union is tonight, and frankly, I'm not sure I'll watch it. I mean, it's gonna be so boring. Not to mention, it pretty much sounds like a Clinton speech:

President George W. Bush was preparing Tuesday to use his State of the Union address to unveil a new initiative to reduce gasoline use and a new system of taxation to help Americans without medical insurance.

Facing a Democratically controlled Congress for the first time in his six years in the presidency, he planned to renew calls to re-authorize his education plan, No Child Left Behind, as well as to overhaul the nation's immigration system with a guest worker program and to balance the budget by 2012.

God, that sounds like a nightmare. In fact, I'm having "war" flashbacks to the Dems' "100 hour plan," or whatever the Hell it was called. Anyway, I'll probably watch the speech, and you probably should, too. After all, we should at least hear what our President has to say and all of the plans he has that the Dems will crush.

***Update, 7:05pm***

A HUGE hat tip to Ace, who got a hold of some excerpts from tonight's State of the Union. Here're my highlights:

“A future of hope and opportunity begins with a growing economy – and that is what we have…Unemployment is low, inflation is low, and wages are rising. This economy is on the move – and our job is to keep it that way, not with more government but with more enterprise.”

Nice, I was afraid he might not mention the booming economy!

“[I]n all we do, we must remember that the best healthcare decisions are made not by government and insurance companies, but by patients and their doctors.”
Take that Hillary! Seriously, burn!
“Extending hope and opportunity in our country requires an immigration system worthy of America – with laws that are fair and borders that are secure. When laws and borders are routinely violated, this harms the interests of our country… Yet…we cannot fully secure the border unless we take pressure off the border – and that requires a temporary worker program.”
Bullshit-alert!
"It is in our vital interest to diversify America’s energy supply – and the way forward is through technology.”
That and drilling oil in America, standardizing gas throughout the country, and increasing refining capabilities!
“For all of us in this room, there is no higher responsibility than to protect the people of this country from danger…"
I guess he forgot the Dems were there.

[T]o win the war on terror we must take the fight to the enemy. From the start, America and our allies have protected our people by staying on the offense. The enemy knows that the days of comfortable sanctuary, easy movement, steady financing, and free flowing communications are long over. For the terrorists, life since Nine-Eleven has never been the same.”
Not if the Dems do something about it!

"Many in this chamber understand that America must not fail in Iraq – because you understand that the consequences of failure would be grievous and far reaching.”

Nice one...

“Both parties and both branches should work in close consultation. And this is why I propose to establish a special advisory council on the war on terror, made up of leaders in Congress from both political parties. We will share ideas for how to position America to meet every challenge that confronts us. And we will show our enemies abroad that we are united in the goal of victory.”
That'll do it! A special advisory council!

Well, this all makes things look much more exciting. I'll probably watch now!

Sunday, January 21, 2007

Hugo - A Model Statesman

You know why the left hates George Bush? Because he's such a terrible statesman. He offends leaders of other countries and their people with his reckless and offensive comments. He should learn to communicate his feelings with eloquence that embraces other nations' peoples, and doesn't alienate them.

Hugo Chavez, on the other hand, is one of the left's favorite leaders, for the exact opposite reason. George Bush should take a lesson from him. How should you address the leader of another nation? Simple, refer to them as the Devil in front of a UN General Assembly. And a new lesson from Hugo. How should someone embrace the peoples of other nations? Simple: Call them a racial slur and tell them to "go to Hell."

President Hugo Chavez returned to his weekly radio and TV broadcast Sunday, extolling the ideals of socialist thinker Karl Marx and telling U.S. officials to "Go to hell!" for what he called unacceptable meddling in Venezuela's affairs.

Chavez defended his government's effort to establish a socialist model and rejected U.S. concerns over a measure to grant him broad lawmaking powers, saying: "Go to hell, gringos! Go home!"

Wow. What would the left say if GW told Venezuelans in America: "Go to hell, wet backs! Go home"? Mull that one over for a while you hypocrite liberals.

Friday, January 19, 2007

Democrats Try To Save a Failing Cuba

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. lawmakers, with an eye on reports of failing health of Cuban President Fidel Castro, said they intend in the new Democratic-led Congress to seek to ease restrictions on travel and trade with the communist island.

The new legislative push coincides with a moment of change in Cuba. Castro, 80, handed power provisionally to his brother, Raul, 75, after undergoing surgery in July. Recent reports suggest Castro suffered complications from the surgery and his recovery has been slow.

Why is that Democrats are vehemently opposed to trade with any country but the Communist ones? This is clearly some porpagandistic move to show the new Congess' support of Communist dictators like Castro, and the up-and-comer, Raul.
The first step would be to allow the 1.2 million Cubans living in the United States to travel to Cuba whenever they want, reversing the restriction to once every three years set by the Bush administration, said Rep. Bill Delahunt, a Democrat from Massachusetts.

"That's going to be my priority," Delahunt told Reuters in a telephone interview on Thursday. He said he was optimistic the legislation could pass this year.

The restrictions imposed by President George W. Bush also reduced the amount of money Cuban Americans could send to their relatives back home.

It's good to know that with Muslim madmen developing nuclear weapons left and right, and with a war going on, Delahunt's "priority" in Congress is to allow these now-ungrateful immigrants to pour their money into the failing Cuban economy in the hopes that it may stay afloat for another 40 years or so.

Thursday, January 18, 2007

Jury of His Peers - That Hate Him

Headline:

Leak Lawyer [Fitzgerald] Wants Bush Critics on Jury
That reminds me of a headline from the past:
OJ Simpson Prosecutor [Marcia Rachel Clark] Wants White Supremacists on Jury
I'd link to that second headline, because it doesn't exist due to the fact that - like Bush critics on the Libby jury - it would be ridiculous.

Congress Won't Not Fund Troop Surge (Great Double Negative, Huh?)

Pelosi's up to no good. How do I know? She's doing something "good":

There may be a growing battle between Congress and the president over the Iraq War strategy, but new House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said she won't block funding for additional troops.

Pelosi's position, revealed in an exclusive interview with ABC News' Diane Sawyer, came a day after a group of senators announced a bipartisan resolution condemning the Bush administration's plan to increase U.S. forces in Iraq by more than 20,000 troops.

While the Senate resolution would be non-binding, it would send a message to the president, and at least a dozen Republican senators have already offered their support.

Maybe I've forgotten how to read, but she seems to say that they will fund them, but will somehow try to stop it anyway:

Pelosi: Democrats will never cut off funding for our troops when they are in harm's way.

It is, I think, very difficult for the president to sustain a war of this magnitude without the support of the American people and without the support of the Congress of the United States. That's why Congress will vote to oppose the president's escalation, from the standpoint of policy. We will have our disagreement.

Sawyer: But short of that — questions posed, resolutions passed — short of that, are you acquiescing in the surge if the pocketbook is the only other control mechanism?

Pelosi: The president knows that because the troops are in harm's way, that we won't cut off the resources. That's why he's moving so quickly to put them in harm's way.

But we will hold the president accountable. He has to answer for his war.