The threat hath been levied:President Bush would veto the new Iraq spending bill being developed
by House Democrats because it includes unacceptable language
restricting funding, White House press secretary Tony Snow said
Wednesday morning. Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One,
Snow said of the bill: "There are restrictions on funding and there are
also some of the spending items that were mentioned in the first veto
message that are still in the bill."
Cheney was in Iraq today, speaking about the state of the nation in the U.S. Embassy, which was briefly rocked by a nearby explosion while he was there: "I think they recognize it's in their interests as well as ours to make progress on the political front," Cheney said. Cheney
spoke less than an hour after an explosion could be heard in the U.S.
embassy where he spent most of the day. Windows rattled and reporters
covering the vice president were briefly moved to a more secure area. Said Cheney spokeswoman Lea Anne McBride: "His meeting was not disturbed and he was not moved."
Meanwhile, we've only got 'til September for a turn-around:
Where, a few months
ago, Giulliani beat (by 5-10 percent) and McCain beat or tied all
Democratic comers, in this week's poll, Giuliani loses to Clinton by 3
percent, to Edwards by 6 percent and to Obama by 7 percent. (For a net
negative turn around of 10-15 percent for Giuliani). McCain loses
worse, respectively, by 6 percent, 10 percent and 13 percent. As neither the Democratic nor Republican candidates'
campaigns (nor their parties' general efforts) have been strikingly
strong or weak in the last month, what these shocking shifts
demonstrate is the virtual collapse of the Republican brand appeal in
the face of the continuing bad news from Iraq.
Unless the numbers
shift back by September, Republican congressmen will naturally assume
that they are looking at the prospect of a 2008 electoral drubbing
along the lines of post-Watergate 1974 or Goldwater 1964 (let us pray
they don't add to that list Hoover 1932). Assuming continuing bad news and bad polling in September,
enough Republicans may well support the Democrats' inevitable "out by
the spring" military appropriation to allow for a successful override
of the president's certain veto. Then the president may try to
challenge congressional authority in court (perhaps relying on the 1861
Food and Forage Act, if Congress doesn't exempt their cut-off from that
law, which permits an army to stay in the field without appropriated
monies.) Perhaps the president will win in court. Perhaps things will
be seen to be getting much better in Iraq. Perhaps fewer Republicans
will cross the aisle, and instead stick with their commitment to our
national security requirements. Perhaps the Democrats will so grossly
demonstrate their unfitness for national leadership that they lose
electoral credibility (although their growing electoral strength in the
face of their already clearly grotesque irresponsibility makes one
wonder what more they could do that might, finally, appall the public.)
But a betting man wouldn't count on it.
Some Republicans are already planning to bail. I think this calls for a little statesmanship from John McCain, in one of my favorite quotes of his, upon being asked how success or failure in Iraq might affect his presidential run:
"My only answer is that I've held this position for four
years. I cannot let anything to do with my political career affect my
judgment on Iraq."
"I don't know and I don't care what effect it will have on my political aspirations." Well said. Maybe he can get his fellow Republicans some spine supplement pills?
|