Bush's support falling even more

[SuzeQuze]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

CNN actually reported it as 42% last night.

What'd I tell ya! I'm psychic. Finally, a minority of people think he's done a good job in Iraq. Thank you, lord. I know these are small victories but lots of them will pile up and then hopefully the larger ones will follow.

[strandinthewind]

Frist just reversed himself and said he will push for the Bolton vote he will fail - and rightfully so IMO.

[SuzeQuze]

Originally Posted by dissention

A day late and a dollar short if you ask me. ****ing fools.

Totally, but we may actually see them go down. :fingers crossed:



WHY was everyone so sloooow to wake up? Scary.

[SuzeQuze]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Frist just reversed himself and said he will push for the Bolton vote he will fail - and rightfully so IMO.

He's got his flip flops on I see. President probly told him to. So now he goes back with tail between legs to fail again. Bad little doggie, bad bad!

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by SuzeQuze

. . . WHY was everyone so sloooow to wake up? Scary.

I think people for years had been told SH was a huge problem, that he had WMD according the UN, and that America had a ten year history of killing Iraqi's in an effort to make SH comply with his obligation to prove he no longer had WMD. Right or wrong, that is a long history of attacking someone. Then, after 9/11, the attitude was America could no longer afford to put up with SH's BS. I think that is why W was able to sell the Iraq War so easily - that and Americans in general could care a less how many Muslims die as long as we do not get attacked again.

Note - none of the foregoing should be contrued as me justifying W's decision to rush to war. I am not saying that. I was just pointing out the historical context of Iraq.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by SuzeQuze

He's got his flip flops on I see. President probly told him to. So now he goes back with tail between legs to fail again. Bad little doggie, bad bad!

That - or he thinks he has the votes, which I do not think he has. In any event, things are no longer so easy for the Pres. and his goons.

[SuzeQuze]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

I think people for years had been told SH was a huge problem, that he had WMD according the UN, and that America had a ten year history of killing Iraqi's in an effort to make SH comply with his obligation to prove he no longer had WMD. Right or wrong, that is a long history of attacking someone. Then, after 9/11, the attitude was America could no longer afford to put up with SH's BS. I think that is why W was able to sell the Iraq War so easily - that and Americans in general could care a less how many Muslims die as long as we do not get attacked again.

Note - none of the foregoing should be contrued as me justifying W's decision to rush to war. I am not saying that. I was just pointing out the historical context of Iraq.

No but this flawed reasoning seems plausible. I know at least a couple of people that didn't really care about the details and just wanted to see us go in and get the bad guys. That doesn't make it any less frustrating to possibly understand it.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by SuzeQuze

No but this flawed reasoning seems plausible. I know at least a couple of people that didn't really care about the details and just wanted to see us go in and get the bad guys. That doesn't make it any less frustrating to possibly understand it.

I know.

But, I think the reasoning is solid up to a point. I do think after 9/11 the world could no longer afford to have SH as a loose variable. So, I was with W on pushing the UN to hold SH's feet to the fire in an attempt to get SH to comply with the UN resolutions he had not complied with for years - again everyone in power assumed the intelligence was valid then. So, I get that part of it. Where they lost me was the inspections in the end were working, yet W would have none of that and stopped them and went to war anyway. A$$hole.

[strandinthewind]

Frist changes course on Bolton vote
Majority leader first says no, then plans to go ahead

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Reversing field after a meeting with President Bush, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said he will continue pushing for a floor vote on John R. Bolton for U.N. ambassador.

Frist switched his position after initially saying Tuesday that negotiations with Democrats to get a vote on Bolton had been exhausted.

Talking to reporters in the White House driveway after he joined other GOP lawmakers for a luncheon with Bush, Frist said: "The president made it very clear that he expects an up-or-down vote."

Just over an hour earlier, Frist said he wouldn't schedule another vote on Bolton's nomination and said that Bush must decide the next move.

Frist, R-Tennessee, had said there was nothing further he could do to break a Democratic stalemate with the Bush White House over Bolton, an outspoken conservative who, opponents argue, would undermine U.S. interests at the world body.

But he changed his position after talking to Bush.

Frist's abrupt public turnabout underscored the political pressures that the long-running battle over Bolton have heaped upon himself and Bush.

Six months into his final term in office, Bush is struggling to avoid the perception of a weakened lame duck at a time when his proposal for revamping Social Security has made little progress and some lawmakers are calling for troop withdrawals from Iraq.

Frist has lost control of the Republican-run Senate in recent weeks in fights over Bush's judicial appointments and earlier attempts to confirm Bolton.

Describing his talk with Bush, Frist said: "The decision in talking to the president is that he strongly supports John Bolton, as we know, and he asked that we to continue to work. And we'll continue to work."

"It's not dead," he said. "It is going to require some continued talking and discussion."

Frist, however, also said that some Democrats, led by Sens. Christopher Dodd and Joseph Biden, had "locked down."

"We'll continue to get an up or down vote for John Bolton over the coming days, possibly weeks," he said.

Deputy State Department spokesman Adam Ereli had greeted Frist's initial announcement with a declaration that Democrats had left Bolton "hanging in the wind."

Frist said the president did not discuss the possibility of going around the Senate and making a recess appointment while they are on break. That would allow Bolton to take the job without a confirmation vote and serve until early 2007.

Before Frist met with Bush, White House press secretary Scott McClellan had said there had been no talk of withdrawing Bolton's nomination. McClellan continued to refuse to rule out a recess appointment, but said only that the White House was pushing for an up or down vote in the Senate.

"It's not that many more that is required to move forward on this nomination," he said.


Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/06/....ap/index.html

[SuzeQuze]

Democracy put together a clever little video about the memo.

http://democracyforamerica.com/memo_movie.php

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Frist just reversed himself and said he will push for the Bolton vote he will fail - and rightfully so IMO.

Someone must have called him and threatened him with who knows what.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

Someone must have called him and threatened him with who knows what.

Apparantly, that person was the Pres. - I LOVE Dissention amongst the ranks!

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Frist said the president did not discuss the possibility of going around the Senate and making a recess appointment while they are on break. That would allow Bolton to take the job without a confirmation vote and serve until early 2007.

That would be interesting.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by gldstwmn

That would be interesting.

I do not think W would dare to do this now. He is already being called a lame duck by many of not most press and to cave in on this will only solidify that notion. Also, people are suspicious of recess appointments, though I think all Presidents have done them and W certainly has before and with some grumbling about it. Finally, unlike the far right judges he appointed, people do not like Bolton, which makes all the difference here I think. In the end, I sure hope the signs that W is losing his power ring true.

[strandinthewind]

So it begins - this is a huge loss for W - HUGE!!!!!

It is, however, a gain for the American people in that although I am all for personal accounts in theory, W's plan was ridiculous, too expensive, and did not address the financial long term crisis in maintaining adequate funds in the SS trusts.
___________________________________________________________

GOP senator to propose plan sans private accounts
White House: Bush encouraging all ideas on Social Security

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush encouraged a Republican senator on Tuesday to offer Social Security legislation that would not include private investment accounts, but the White House said the president still was committed to allowing workers to invest part of their Social Security taxes.

Bush's nod to Utah Sen. Bob Bennett's plan comes as public polls show that most Americans do not support the president's handling of the Social Security issue. Congress has been deadlocked on it.

Bennett said that during a luncheon with other Republican senators at the White House, he told the president of his plans to introduce the bill as early as next week.

"He indicated that I should go forward and do that," Bennett said. "And I'm grateful to have him do that even though his own preference would be to have personal accounts included."

The White House said the president is encouraging all members of Congress to offer their ideas to make the Social Security system solvent.

"This in no way should be interpreted to mean that the president is backing off of personal accounts," White House spokesman Trent Duffy said. "He is not."

Since the beginning of his second term, Bush has been pushing to allow younger workers to create voluntary personal accounts funded out of their Social Security payroll taxes. Democrats accuse the White House of seeking to privatize the Depression-era program and have been unified in opposition to the idea.

"I've decided that the Democrats have made it clear that they will not back personal accounts," Bennett said outside the White House. "And in response to the president's position that let's try to get something done, I will be proposing a bill that does not include personal accounts."

Bennett said some Democrats have told him privately that they would support such a bill, but he is not sure how many will be on board publicly now that he's introducing the legislation.

He said he is looking for Democrats to co-sponsor the bill, but he didn't have any to announce Tuesday.

"We've had a lot of interest," he said. "We have a lot of hope that we can use this bill to break the logjam and move forward on Social Security. We'll find out in the weeks to come."

Bennett said when he told Bush of his plans, "He just said, 'I like your bill.' Period."

White House press secretary Scott McClellan responded: "The president, as he has indicated previously, welcomes all ideas for moving forward to save and strengthen Social Security. Nothing has changed in terms of his belief that voluntary personal accounts are an important part of any solution."

Bush and other supporters of private investment accounts argue they are needed to modernize the program. Under current projections, Social Security will begin to pay out more in benefits than it receives in tax receipts in 2017, and the trust funds will be depleted in 2041. At that point, benefits would be cut to adjust for the reduction in available funds.

An Associated Press-Ipsos poll earlier this month found 37 percent of Americans support Bush's handling of Social Security, while 59 percent disapprove. Those numbers hadn't budged after more than four months of the president barnstorming the U.S. to sell his plan.

Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/06/....ap/index.html