Who Really Supports the Troops?

In a press conference in the White House Rose garden yesterday, a very irritated Bush lambasted congressional Democrats for the recent passage of an emergency supplemental spending bill for Iraq, which includes dates for withdrawal and funding for hurricane Katrina recovery. Bush also characterized the Democratic Congress as "irresponsible" for going into spring break without sending a no "strings" bill to his desk, and insisted that the spending bill constituted "playing politics", since Bush warned them he would veto any bill which includes dates or timetables for withdrawal.

The message sent by Bush in yesterdays Rose Garden press conference is that the Democratic Congress, voted in by the American people largely due to opposition to the Iraq occupation, should simply hand over whatever Mr. Bush wants simply because he demands it - maybe someone should remind him that the American people aren't down with kings.

It is indeed absurd for a US president to so arrogantly expect that the US Congress - a separate, and equal branch of government - should surrender its power to the executive branch - a very unpopular one at that. Furthermore, the logic Bush uses in expressing this position is equally absurd, as the White House has been framing the Democrat's Iraq supplemental spending bill as an undercutting of the troops, when in reality the Democratic lead congress has offered every penny, and more, of the money requested by Bush to prolong his disastrous and unpopular Iraq occupation. Therefore, when Bush vetoes the bill as he has promised, it is he who will be undercutting and postponing future funding for the Iraq occupation, not the Democrats who are simply expressing the peoples rightful demands through legislation - which is an entirely proper conduit in which to do so.