President's Remarks: Iraq War Emergency Supplemental(Responds to Congress' Betrayal Live Thread)

White House ^ | March 23, 2007

[bd476]

Live now, President Bush is making a strong response.

---

Updated:

Remarks by the President on the Iraq War Emergency Supplemental



REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT ON THE IRAQ WAR EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL

Diplomatic Reception Room
2:00 P.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT: Today I'm joined here at the White House by veterans, family members of people serving in combat, family members of those who have sacrificed. I am honored that they have joined me here today.

Here in Washington, members of both parties recognize that our most solemn responsibility is to support our troops in the war on terror. Yet, today, a narrow majority in the House of Representatives abdictated its responsibility by passing a war spending bill that has no chance of becoming law, and brings us no closer to getting our troops the resources they need to do their job.

The purpose of the emergency war spending bill I requested was to provide our troops with vital funding. Instead, Democrats in the House, in an act of political theater, voted to substitute their judgment for that of our military commanders on the ground in Iraq. They set rigid restrictions that will require an army of lawyers to interpret. They set an arbitrary date for withdrawal without regard for conditions on the ground. And they tacked on billions for pet projects that have nothing to do with winning the war on terror. This bill has too much pork, too many conditions and an artificial timetable for withdrawal.

As I have made clear for weeks, I will veto it if it comes to my desk. And because the vote in the House was so close, it is clear that my veto would be sustained. Today's action in the House does only one thing: it delays the delivering of vital resources for our troops. A narrow majority has decided to take this course, just as General Petraeus and his troops are carrying out a new strategy to help the Iraqis secure their capital city.

Amid the real challenges in Iraq, we're beginning to see some signs of progress. Yet, to score political points, the Democratic majority in the House has shown it is willing to undermine the gains our troops are making on the ground.

Democrats want to make clear that they oppose the war in Iraq. They have made their point. For some, that is not enough. These Democrats believe that the longer they can delay funding for our troops, the more likely they are to force me to accept restrictions on our commanders, an artificial timetable for withdrawal, and their pet spending projects. This is not going to happen. Our men and women in uniform need these emergency war funds. The Secretary of Defense has warned that if Congress does not approve the emergency funding for our troops by April the 15th, our men and women in uniform will face significant disruptions, and so would their families.

The Democrats have sent their message, now it's time to send their money. This is an important moment -- a decision for the new leaders in Congress. Our men in women in uniform should not have to worry that politicians in Washington will deny them the funds and the flexibility they need to win. Congress needs to send me a clean bill that I can sign without delay. I expect Congress to do its duty and to fund our troops, and so do the American people -- and so do the good men and women standing with me here today.

Thank you for your time.

END 2:04 P.M. EDT

REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT ON THE IRAQ WAR EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL

[From One - Many]

ditto

[1COUNTER-MORTER-68]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The Secretary of Defense has warned that if Congress does not approve the emergency funding for our troops by April the 15th, our men and women in uniform will face significant disruptions, and so would their families."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hey There,,,Everybody Should Read This Part Again !!
The Libo-Kraps are playin' "Chickin'" with "W" with the lives of the Troops !! April 15th the "log-train" starts
to slow down,,,how much "buffer" is in there we don't know.
Ain't much whatever it is,,,then it's squeeze time...

Prayers Up for "W" and the Troops...

[From One - Many]

right on the money....

[HamiltonJay]

Sorry, but when you see someone getting a running start at the wall that you know is in front of them, and you don't point out their soon to be mistake you are no friend.

Your low brow name calling aside, you really do need to open your eyes. I won't sit by when I see a bad move being made, if you think that means I think GWB is Evil, then you are beyond dillusional.

Bush just made a HUGE political misstep here.. what should have been a huge positive for him, will now turn into a wholesale attack on him because all his opponents are going to have to do is point out his record on pork, and his record on that topic is very long and very consistent.

So, when you see all those news stories in the coming days about Bush's history on Pork, and you scream up and down its the unfair press... you can look in the mirror and maybe come to realize it was Bush's own missteps that allowed what is going to be the latest media/democratic salvo against him.

He should have vetoed it, strongly and firmly and confidently purely on its attempts to influence the war... he didn't.. a huge political misstep on his part. You never play to your weaknesses, but to your strength. Bush's strength has been without question his steadfastness on the WOT... he should have played 100% to them. By bring up the word "Pork" he undermined his strength play, and played right to one of his biggest weaknesses.... Rubber stamping pork spending. So the Dems/Media can now just frame the entire veto as a "why now, after all he's approved more pork than anyone" story.... to make him look hypocritical and further weaken his support publicly.

Don't belive Bush is evil in the least, but I believe I just saw him make one of the biggest political mistakes/missteps I've seen by any president in a long time.

[Tx Angel]

I'm not attacking anyone, I'm just calling it as I see it. And I'm certainly no fan of moon bats.

Securing our borders is first and foremost in our fight against those that wish us harm. You are delusional if you think otherwise. And my POTUS has failed me miserably in that regard.

BTW, anyone hear any more regarding those 6 Chechnians that crossed the AZ border a few years ago? Gee, we have "extremists" applying to drive school buses, but no worries. Beslan? What's that?

[visitor]

Pres. Bush Reaction to House Vote on Additional Iraq Spending

2007 Pig Book Summary

[carton253]

He has always had a backbone. He has stood virtually alone on the issue of Iraq. Most other politicians would have fold their tent and gone home.

[TenthAmendmentChampion]

Who is your rep?

[Bernard Marx]

The White House is holding all the cards on this and both the RATS and the MSM know it. There is no need for the President to compromise on this in any fashion.

I certainly never urged any sort of compromise. Your scenario is interesting but I think it breaks down in the part where the President counters the impact of the MSM. The networks that allow him time (they increasingly won't) will later demagogue everything he says (remember Newt?)

I like your scenario better than mine but I don't yet know which is more accurate. I hope yours is.

[popdonnelly]

"14 smart and patriotic democrats (or maybe they just didn't get any pork)"

Nah, most of them were anti-war folks who didn't think the bill didn't go far enough. Just how many smart and patriotic Democrats do you think there are? ;)

[Mark-in-Kentucky]

No, recognizing a bad move doesn't help the dems... The veto was a good move, and to a certain extent blaming "pork" MAY prevent dems from trying again, as they had to bribe big time pork barrel stuff to bring the blue dogs big time to sign on to this ghastly bill.

Unfortunately though, by evening mentioning Pork as a reason, the Pres has set himself up for more criticism, because up until this bill he hasn't met a pork barrel he's hasn't liked.

Pointing out a possible political mistep is an honest assessment of the situation, and it is only through honest assesment of situations can any progress be made. Blind following does no good.

I'm inclined to agree. Given the President's history these past six years, I can't help but roll my eyes when he when he talks about the evils of pork spending.

I find it rather insulting that he would suddenly pretend to be Mr. Fiscal Conservative. His chance at that title is dead and buried. The same goes for many Republican members of Congress complaining about the pork, who likewise contributed to the spending spree in recent years.

By vetoing this bill, he would only be doing what he should have done since first setting foot in the White House. If the pork wasn't tied to war funding, I have serious doubts he would veto it this go around.

[Red Steel]

218-212 vote. This bill is not going anywhere.

[Tulsa Ramjet]

Unless you are sitting in a windowless igloo on Bear Island, his troops have imprisoned 15 british soldiers. But, I'm sure its all a misunderstanding:

Leftinent (sitting in cell looking at chart): "By Jove, Akmed, you are right. Bullocks! I thought we were off the coast of Ireland."

That's illegal incarceration and an international crime.

[popdonnelly]

Please excuse my lousy sentence.

[Christian4Bush]

Well, when you are President, you can not say the word pork.

AMEN brother!!! (or sister)

[Lucky9teen]

If....?

Don't you mean "when"?

I can't wait....

[sappy]

unfortunatly, most of the American people will only see the words "Bush vetoes funding for troops".

An above the fold headline in the NYT's, LA TImes etc. no doubt that they will omit the reason for the vetoe as will accomplices.

[agincourt1415]

Thanks!

I authorize the President to post a sign on the South Lawn too!

Day 01, Troops Held Hostage by Democrats

[Lucky9teen]

Bin Laden is counting on the democrats...and they're falling over themselves trying to not disappoint him.

[HamiltonJay]

You won't see it removed, and its a simple reason why.

This particular bill would never get Blue Dog support without all that bribe pork Pelosi stuck in there to get the votes. These dems know damned well their constituents do not support the democrats cut and run strategy. So bascially the pork in this bill is a lot of bribery. So without this pork the bill has ZERO chance of simple majority in the house.

Bush didn't need to bring the word "pork" into his rejection, he made IMHO a very big political mistake by even mentioning the word in his veto, because his record is such a joke on that.

Veto it, veto it purely on the merits of its effect to the war in the field... Play to your strengths, not your weaknesses. Bush was doing great, until he decided to mention Pork.. now the news stories will all just be pointing out how he's never vetoed pork in his career until this bill... and make him look like a hypocrite.. mark my words... that story will be in every nightly newscast for the next week or so, every one will do an expose' on Bush's pork approvals.