Bush discussed Iraq Tuesday in a town hall event in Cleveland.
WASHINGTON (CNN) - President Bush will veto a defense appropriations bill being debated in the Senate if it includes an amendment setting a timetable for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq, the White House said Tuesday.
Senate Democratic leaders have said they plan to bring forward an amendment from Sens. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island, and Carl Levin, D-Michigan, that calls for beginning a redeployment of U.S. troops in as little as four months, to be completed by next spring. House Democratic leaders announced late Tuesday that they would bring a similar proposal to a vote by the end of the week.
But in a policy statement issued Tuesday by the Office of Management and Budget, the White House said the proposed Reed-Levin amendment infringed on Bush's authority as commander-in-chief and was "equivalent to setting a date for failure."
We all know he will attempt to veto any legislation calling for troop withdrawls...it's obvious.
What this article does not say is that Congress needs 2/3 majority to override his veto.
So far it's about 50/50 but now there are a few Republican Senators that have announced intentions to go along with the Democrats.
Even if they override his veto he will have his lawyers figure out a way to ignore the law like he always does. The Constitution and the law means nothing to this man.
Under the Constitution, the President does not have the power to propose legislation. Threatening a pre-emptive veto is simply another means by this morally-bankrupt President to extend his own personal power at the expense of the Constitution.
Now is the time for the Democrats to show some backbone. I think they know that backing down last time hurt them. They need to make it clear that it is Bush, not Congress, that is denying the troops the funding they need. Congress has a bill with all the money the military wants, and it's the President keeping the funds from reaching the troops.
I know the White House will spin it, and probably better than the Democrats, but I think the people will back Congress. I believe their lower approval ratings is a result of their failure to deal with Iraq, and when they do stand up to the President, the majority of the country will support them.
The point at which our system of government has failed is not when an administration goes way beyond its constitutionally defined powers and ignores or violates the law. The point at which our system of government has failed is when an administration has just enough allies who can run just enough interference to make sure nobody anywhere can do a damn thing about it.
Nothing new here, same old same old! Tough talk from a former member of the "champagne squadron."
"Reed-Levin amendment infringed on Bush’s authority as commander-in-chief and was “equivalent to setting a date for failure.”
1) Bush hasn't earned the respect of a President therefore there isn't anything that can infringe upon his Authority, as, he doesn't deserve to, hold any Authority. He should have been striped of any Authority long ago due to the way he has continually abused it while fostering no regret or shame for doing so.
2) As far as, “equivalent to setting a date for failure.” This statement is pathethic! The date that was set for failure was the one he set when he initated a war on bogus facts and premises.
All Troops should be home now, including our Canadian Troops. This President does not deserve the aid he is receiving from Nato Troops. And I have contacted our Prime Minister Steven Harper to share the same message with him! This War has been a total Fiasco from day one and it's time to cut everyone's loses(including Canadian, British, et al ) before it's too late!