Veto stands
The House vote was 222-203, 62 shy of the two-thirds majority needed to override a veto, according to the AP. Power Line has the roll call.
posted by wretchardthecat at 5/02/2007 08:38:00 PM
The Belmont Club
The Belmont Club will be moving on Monday, June 23 to this new site.
Wednesday, May 02, 2007
Mail Wretchard
Previous Posts
- Pinocchio's Field
- Fly Now, Pay Later
- "Kill All Americans"
- Ready For Love
- They gathered for the feast
- Sandmonkey the Model
- How to Make Friends and Influence People
- The Forgotten Hundred Million
- Al-Qaeda Chief in Iraq Killed? Maybe
- Looking for Harry Reid
Blogroll
Linkroll
Visitors since 12/26/2003
Contributors
6 Comments:
Limbaugh noted that San Fran Nan wasted no time, figuring there are some sane Dems telling her to get it over with and off the news.
That would be 62 shy of the number needed to override the veto in the House of Representatives. The Senate did not bother to schedule a vote to override.
What kind of deal is going to be made? Do we get a timetable? Or do the Dems wait and see what happens over the summer?
News reports about the negotiations between Congress and the WH are vague as to what is on the table.
The Democrats are expected to give up a lot, especially not getting a specific withdrawal date.
There will be some sort of compromise that has benchmarks, with the main debate about how they are enforced.
The wild card is that some "moderate" Republican Senators like John Warner are floating proposals. Warner says he thinks he can get 70 votes in the Senate, enough for an override.
The Democrats have been saying all along that's what they've been playing for, the 2/3 vote that lets them take control of the war and everything else. That would be 16 spinless Republican Senators, and the same 15% in the House.
www.orbat.com said it better than I ever could:
The compromise with President Bush that the Democrats said they want to discuss turns out to be an abject surrender. They will drop their insistence on a timeline for withdrawal, essentially giving the President the blank check he has insisted on for every aspect of the GWOT and Iraq since the start.
The Democrats say they have made their point. Let's applaud with one hand. The truth is Congress does not want to end this war. The President is congenitally unable to admit he has made a mistake on Iraq, and has convinced himself that blind stubbornness equates to a principled stand. He has a one point strategy: keep fighting and let the next administration deal with the mess.
For their part, the Democrats also have a one point strategy: keep verbally opposing the war without taking the responsibility for ending it by refusing money. This way they can continue to blame Mr. Bush.
Both sides ignore three small matters. First, the military has been committed to an unwinable war and subjected to a repeatedly-failed strategy. But who cares if a 1000 or 1500 Americans a year continue to die, to say nothing of the thousands more who return each year with horrific wounds that cripple them for life. Second, huge sums of money are being wasted, helping to reduce the economic strength on which depends American hegemony. Third, and most important, few seem to care that the insane and inane focus on Iraq is crippling the US ability to take on other threats that are far worse than that ever posed by Saddam.
A pox on both your houses!- Jim
Post a Comment
<< Home