Bush Defunds Troops in Iraq

[earthside]

If Bush vetoes a war appropriations bill, HE has defunded the troops.

Isn't this the plain, unvarnished truth?

Only Congress can appropriate funds for the military.
Only Congress can appropriate dollars for the war and occupation of Iraq.

Bush cannot veto a non-existent appropriations bill.

If Congress does not send a bill to Bush at all, there is no new money.

Therefore, sent a bill, Bush can decide to get the money for the troops ... or he can say 'no' to money for the troops.

This really is all up to Bush.

But, I don't think that the leading Democrats in the House and Senate have made this point strong enough so far.

The Democrats in Congress have the upper hand in this dispute if they can really emphasize that they have done their part in sending the appropriation to Bush. If Bush vetoes and is stubborn on the timetable/withdrawal issue -- then he is the obstinate defunder of the troops, right?

It seems to me that Reid and Pelosi should be saying one thing to Bush: "Please, Mr. President, don't be the defunder of the troops. Sign the bill."

[Buzz Clik]

1. Bush will veto the bill, and Congress will give the money under his terms.

Period.

[Homer12]

2. Lets Face It...

..Bush needs more time to fuck-up Iraq even more. This is what he's asking for.