Friday, January 19, 2007
Nancy Pelosi Supports Present Troops, Not Future Troops
UPDATED
No Political Downside
Ace wants the Democrats to do what he knows they can’t and mustn’t, namely, take a clear, committed position on the surge. They don’t want to support it or else they’ll antagonize the nuts, but they don’t want to oppose it either just in case Bush pulls a rabbit out of the hat in the next six months. So they’ll end up taking the Reid/Biden approach — there’s nothing we can do, our hands are tied, and here’s a non-binding resolution expressing our deepest misgivings about the surge plus a check granting you almost everything you’ve asked for just in case you end up winning.
And today Pelosi accuses President Bush thusly:
Via Power Line:
The president knows that because the troops are in harm's way, that we won't cut off the resources. That's why he's moving so quickly to put them in harm's way."She can't possibly mean that"? How about the fact that she just stated it. I can't think of any other interpretation either. And as we expect of her ilk, Pelosi denied saying that which she had declared mere minutes earlier.
Pelosi's charge was not only patently false, it bordered on incomprehensible. Is she really suggesting that any time the President intends to send troops anywhere, he should wait until the next Congressional budget cycle to find out whether funds have been appropriated for that particular mission? She can't possibly mean that, but I can't think of any other interpretation.
What a piece of work.