Posted on 01/19/2007 12:51:42 PM PST by NormsRevenge
WASHINGTON - In a critique the White House labeled as "poisonous," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (news, bio, voting record) charged Friday that President Bush is wading too deeply into Iraq and said it should not be "an obligation of the American people in perpetuity."
Pelosi said Bush "has dug a hole so deep he can't even see the light on this. It's a tragedy. It's a stark blunder."
White House spokeswoman Dana Perino retorted that Pelosi's comments were "poisonous," referring to the portion of Pelosi's statement that asserted Bush is rushing new troops there and betting that Congress won't cut off funds once they're in battle.
"It's certainly not in keeping with the bipartisan spirit and civility that the Democrats pledged and that we looked forward to," Perino said. "Speaker Pelosi was arguing in essence that the president is putting young men and women in harm's way for tactical political reasons. She's questioning his motivations rather than questioning his policies."
Democratic support is building around a resolution that would rebuff Bush's plans for more troops to Iraq, and more Republicans are looking for ways to sign on to the measure.
As the White House scrambled to secure the dwindling backers of Bush's war policies on Capitol Hill, Republican Sen. Gordon Smith (news, bio, voting record) of Oregon signaled that a simple wording change could persuade him to join the Democrats.
Pelosi said House Democrats would back a Senate Democratic resolution declaring that the troop increase is "not in the national interest of the United States." Senate leaders expect to begin action on the nonbinding measure next Wednesday.
Senate Democrats, backed by two Republicans, unveiled legislation Wednesday that criticized Bush's decision. "It is not in the national interest of the United States to deepen its military involvement in Iraq, particularly by escalating the United States military force presence in Iraq," the nonbinding Senate measure states.
Smith said his reluctance to back the resolution hinged on the word "escalating," which he said is a partisan term that unnecessarily inflames the issue. He said he is working with Sens. Susan Collins (news, bio, voting record), R-Maine, and Ben Nelson (news, bio, voting record), D-Neb. on a "constructive, nonpartisan resolution that expresses the opposition of the Senate to the surge."
Pelosi's attack came as Lee Hamilton, the Democratic co-chairman of the Iraq Study Group, told a House panel that Bush's plan to deploy 21,500 additional troops to secure Baghdad and Anbar province would delay progress in training Iraqi security forces.
The bipartisan Iraq Study Group recommended removing U.S. combat troops by early next year, and changing the U.S. mission from security to training and logistical support of Iraqi troops.
"You delay the date of completion of the training mission. You delay the date of handing responsibility to the Iraqis. You delay the date of departure of U.S. troops" from the region, Hamilton told the House Foreign Affairs Committee about the buildup.
Bush and senior administration officials have been laboring to limit Republican defections.
"He said, 'If you can help us out, I really appreciate your help,'" Sen. Wayne Allard (news, bio, voting record), R-Colo., said after a White House meeting with the commander in chief.
Republican lawmakers in both houses are expected to draft alternative legislation, in part to give party members a measure to support rather than merely oppose what Democrats draft. Officials said one possibility under discussion is an alternative that supports the troop increase as long as the Iraqi government meets certain conditions.
Administration supporters have expressed concerns the president faces a bipartisan repudiation of significant proportions.
So far, Republican Sens. Chuck Hagel (news, bio, voting record) of Nebraska and Olympia Snowe (news, bio, voting record) of Maine have said they back the resolution.
Sen. Norm Coleman (news, bio, voting record), R-Minn., echoed Smith's opposition to the troop increase but also said "there are some things in the resolution I don't agree with, and so we're kind of looking at language."
Bush's meeting with lawmakers was his third session in as many days as he struggles to build support for an increase in troops for a war that is opposed by the public and played a role in Republican setbacks in last fall's elections. National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley traveled to the Capitol to meet with House Republicans.
___
Associated Press writers David Espo, Matthew Daly, Barry Schweid, Jennifer Talhelm and Fred Frommer contributed to this report.
So true. I can't believe she actually revelled in having a four day coronation. With her it's all 'me'.
Well, it can be exciting when you hear a word for the first time. Then you just want to keep using it.
Furthermore, it's my expectation that all office-holding Republicans everywhere have quietly surrendered into dhimmitude to the DemocRATS. The RNC has already decided that they lost the 2006 elections because they weren't DemocRATS.
At least they are revealing their true stance on the war - no surprise to any Freeper, but enlightening to the public in general.
I thought you were going to say the "2008" elections. Which, frankly, I'm very uneasy about.
"Your words are poison."
-Eowen, LOTR.
Yes, including the conservative sheeple who were "outraged" and refused to vote because of the so-called Foley "scandal".
Do you have a link to any polling data to back that statement up?
So Lee Hamilton is telling us the President is ignoring the ISG when he's following their advice????
Exactly so. Either push to cut off funding or STFU. Do (or try to do) what you think you were elected to do in the legislature, but skip the public comments.
Yes they did! Under the title of: MILITARY AND SECURITY FORCES. I have read it and they called for a troop increase.
All these pompous poops don't want us to win "Bush's War" cause the polls might trend back to him.
Pelosi Galore.
Nobody ever makes them back up what they say, That must mean they know she is an idiot mouthing empty pronouncements. Hillary, too. Please give me some evidence that her ideas are based on something, anything.
I for one will not be fighting for anyone who supported the preposterous positions expressed by Nancy Pelosi and her equally deluded fellow travelers that will lead to us having to fight terrorism in our own streets. I hope they are the first ones to be the recipients of the ministrations of the "religion of peace".
Question for Pelosi: Have you ever served? If not, why not? If she were to ask why I asked that question, my response would in indicate had she served, she would know what cost such an action takes in relation to her inaction.
SS
We should have Crocodile Dundee check 'er.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.