Iraq Supplemental: Bush Offers "Compromise"; Agree With Me Or Else

By Big Tent Democrat, Section War In Iraq
Posted on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 12:03:19 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

In today's press briefing, David Gregory asked Dana Perino, Acting Press Spokesperson for the White House, if there is room for compromise with the Congress on the Iraq supplemental bill.

In marked contrast to the Decider's defiant uncompromising statements, Perino flatly stated there is room for compromise and tried to frame the Congress' position as "extreme," ironically citing the Iraq Study Group report as the mainstream. Yes, the very report President Bush tossed in the trash can when he ordered his Escalation.

Of course, the American People strongly support the position of the Congress, and the Iraq Study Group report calls for withdrawal in 2008, just as the Congress' proposal does.

But the facts have never gotten in the way of the White House. What is most interesting to me is the new tack of welcoming compromise from BushCo. And, frankly, it is worrisome for the Democratic strategy. An obstinate vetoing Bush is integral to their end the Iraq Debacle strategy. Resolve is a critical now. A "compromising" Bush makes that more difficult.

< Kyle Sampson Contradicts Alberto Gonzales on PurgeGate | Help Gary Tyler >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Iraq Supplemental: Bush Offers "Compromise"; Agree With Me Or Else | 17 comments (17 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Strategy? (5.00 / 2) (#1)
by baba durag on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 12:07:25 PM EST

If they offer to compromise and Bush won't they appear even better (the Dems). Are they betting he won't give up his obstinance?

: I think so (5.00 / 2) (#2)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 12:10:27 PM EST

Was the Iraq Study Group's recommendation... (5.00 / 1) (#3)
by cal11 voter on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 12:34:21 PM EST

of 2008 withdrawal of combat troops a goal? How does this square with what Congress Dems should do? Will Iraq be destabilized if binding guidelines are used instead of goals?

I'm beginning to believe that if goals are used then Bush will not veto.

: The ISG report (pdf) (5.00 / 3) (#4)
by Edger on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 12:38:17 PM EST

is here for download.

well, (5.00 / 2) (#5)
by andgarden on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 12:49:31 PM EST

the small installment plan seems like it could get lots of support.

As a one timer (5.00 / 4) (#6)
by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 12:58:10 PM EST

I am not against it. As a long term strategy for ending the war, it will not work.

An ANNOUNCED date certain is critical.


: I think I agree with you because... (5.00 / 2) (#8)
by cal11 voter on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 01:21:56 PM EST

I believe it is important for Congress Dems to present an alternative Iraq War policy. Seems to me it would be difficult to do so if new funding bills are required every few weeks or months. Dems need to build a Dem consensus and present an alternative policy.

: March 2008? (none / 0) (#17)
by JanL on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 08:39:44 PM EST

It seems as if there is some agreement coming together about the March 08 time-frame...I am waiting for the Pretzeldent to veto this, except I still wonder if he will actually do so. Democrats need to stand together now and take their licks if ever there was a time to, I believe. I do like the idea of presenting variations on this theme, presented again and again to the Decider. It may peel off moderate Repub's and that's the only real way I see this going - worse & worser for the the troops, but hey, everybody gets their a$$ covered politically. Yuck.

Uh-oh. (5.00 / 1) (#10)
by mentaldebris on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 01:38:12 PM EST

BushCo using the word "compromise"?

Democrats beware.

It was much better when he was stomping around threatening to hold his breath if he didn't get his way. Brier patches abound when the word "compromise" passes this administration's lips. "Danger, Will Robinson!"

compromise (2.33 / 3) (#13)
by diogenes on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 02:31:39 PM EST

The war is four years old, and will be five years old by March 2008. Why don't the dems just win the white house in 2009, withdraw on January 21, 2009, and let the history books give them the credit for what happens.

: I can't speak for Dems ... (5.00 / 2) (#14)
by Sailor on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 02:38:38 PM EST

... but my reason would be that another 1000+ Americans and 15,000+ Iraqis will die by that time and the 'stability' won't have increased.
Get the troops out NOW!

: They've (5.00 / 2) (#16)
by taylormattd on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 04:00:27 PM EST

got to do their best to end the war as soon as possible in order to stop the death and destruction.

I'd say (none / 0) (#7)
by Edger on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 01:11:41 PM EST

he's feeling more than a little desperation now if he's holding out the ISG report as mainstream. Extremism anyone?

I think when he trashed the ISG is when (5.00 / 3) (#9)
by kindness on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 01:29:32 PM EST

Saudi King Abdullah decided that Junior needed to be tossed under a bus. Not that I'm the Saudi's biggest fan, I'm not. But when you have a historically very close family with lots of financial & governmental ties say dubya is illegally occupying Iraq....well, I think the writing is on the wall.


Aw, its just... (5.00 / 1) (#11)
by desertswine on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 02:28:19 PM EST

a lover's spat.


: A little more than at I think (none / 0) (#12)
by Edger on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 02:31:31 PM EST

King Abdullah canceled his appearance next month at a White House dinner in his honor.
Heh. Maybe Gonzo can find a job for George.

The wring's been on the wall (5.00 / 1) (#15)
by Edger on Thu Mar 29, 2007 at 02:42:55 PM EST

a long time.

George can't read.
