Comments on: Iraq pullout legislation will be vetoed, Bush says

By: Tricia M Charlottetown PEI Canada

Tricia M Charlottetown PEI Canada — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 12:46:41 +0000

"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!

By: Mike, Corpus Christi Texas

Mike, Corpus Christi Texas — Wed, 11 Jul 2007 23:06:21 +0000

Nothing new here, same old same old! Tough talk from a former member of the "champagne squadron."

By: Austin Wyman, Evergreen Park, IL

Austin Wyman, Evergreen Park, IL — Wed, 11 Jul 2007 19:14:55 +0000

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.

By: Mike, HI

Mike, HI — Wed, 11 Jul 2007 18:26:50 +0000

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.

By: George Wenger, Baltimore, MD

George Wenger, Baltimore, MD — Wed, 11 Jul 2007 18:16:22 +0000

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.

By: Greg, Houston

Greg, Houston — Wed, 11 Jul 2007 17:57:38 +0000

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.

By: DJ, Los Angeles

DJ, Los Angeles — Wed, 11 Jul 2007 16:39:29 +0000

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.