Day: April 27, 2007

Poll: Most Americans Don’t Want Veto of Iraq Funding Bill

Buck Banks

The Pew Research Center has just released a poll that found six out of 10 Americans do not want President Bush to veto the Iraq spending bill that calls for a timetable for troop withdrawal. That’s almost as many Americans as voted for Al Gore for president in 2000!

The poll detected deep-seated pessimism among Americans for prospects in Iraq.

The challenge is that neither side seems inclined to compromise: 54 percent of withdrawl timeline supporters do not want the Senate to compromise with Bush to avoid a veto; likewise, 54 percent of those opposed to a timeline for withdrawal do not want Bush to back down on his veto promise. Not that that’s very likely.

The poll detected deep-seated pessimism among Americans for prospects in Iraq, and for the first time a majority (51 percent) of respondents said they did not think the U.S. would succeed in establishing a stable democracy in Iraq. Only a quarter think that the troop surge is having a positive effect and only a third think it will have a positive long-term effect on the situation in Iraq. Forty-one percent believe that maintaining a military presence in Iraq increases the likelihood of a terrorist attack on the U.S., while 45 percent say withdrawing would increase the odds of a terrorist attack on American soil.

Even Republicans are growing disenchanted with Bush’s handling of the war. Almost half (45 percent) say they want a candidate for president who will take a different approach from Bush’s, while only 41 percent say they want a candidate who will cary on in Bush’s footsteps. When applied to both Republicans and Republican-leaning voters, however, the number wanting a change in strategy jumps to 52 percent.

Quote du Jour

Buck Banks

I am persuaded that diverse of you, who lead the people, have labored to build yourselves in these things; wherein you have censured others, and established yourselves ‘upon the Word of God.’ Is it therefore infallibly agreeable to the Word of God, all that you say? I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken.

— Oliver Cromwell

McCain Was for ‘Precipitous Withdrawal’ before He Was Against It

Jon Ponder

Sen. John McCain is out banging the drum for Bush-style perpetual war by strongly criticizing the Democrats’ plan to redeploy troops from Iraq, which, via Rove talking points, he calls a “precipitous withdrawal.”

Well, look who was for precipitous withdrawals in the 1990s:

October 1994 — McCain argued for the precipitous withdrawal of U.S. forces from Haiti: “In my view that does not mean as soon as order is restored to Haiti. It does not mean as soon as democracy is flourishing in Haiti. It does not mean as soon as we have established a viable nation in Haiti. As soon as possible means as soon we can get out of Haiti without losing any American lives.” [Senate Floor, 10/6/94]

October 1993 — McCain argued against giving any strategy the chance to succeed in Somalia: “Mr. President, can anyone seriously argue that another 6 months of United States forces in harm’s way means the difference between peace and prosperity in Somalia and war and starvation there? Is that very dim prospect worth one more American life? No, it is not.” [Senate Floor, 10/14/93]

GOP Rep. Renzi Alleged to Have Concealed $200k Payment

Pensito Editors

The Hill:

Rep. Rick Renzi (R-Ariz.) failed to disclose a $200,000 payment he received from a business partner in 2005 in apparent violation of House ethics rules. Prosecutors could use the omission as evidence that Renzi intended to conceal a transaction he knew to be controversial or even improper.

The $200,000 was a payment from James Sandlin to settle a debt related to a previous business transaction involving land in northeast Arizona, one of the lawmaker’s attorneys, Grant Woods, told a newspaper last week.

However, Renzi did not disclose the payment in his 2005 required income filings with the House clerk.