Bush Will Veto Vet Benefits to Protect Iraq — From Lawsuits

Bush is set to veto the defense appropriations bill Congress passed that would help America’s vets. That’s bad enough but wait until you hear why.

White House on why Iraq liquidity outweighs vet benefits: ”(It is) too important an issue to allow this to go forward because it would tie up millions of dollars in Iraqi funds for months.”

President George Bush today said he intends to veto the $696 billion defense authorization that would include a pay raise for military personnel and fund the overhaul of veterans’ health care program.

Why the veto? Because the bill includes a provision that would “imperil Iraqi assets held in the United States,” the White House statement released Friday said.

A provision in the bill would permit lawyers to freeze Iraqi funds in the US and would expose Iraq to “massive liability in lawsuits concerning the misdeeds of the Saddam Hussein regime,” the White House argues.

I’m beginning to think John Edwards is so right that it could be dangerous for his safety to keep speaking out. Greed is the sole rationale for everything done by the Bush Administration and the mostly Republican power brokers in Washington, from waging war to raiding the public till and lining their own pockets.

I can’t wait to hear how the Rush Limbaughs and Bill O’Reillys of the world spin this one. Here’s how the White House explained it:

“The new democratic government of Iraq, during this crucial period of reconstruction, cannot afford to have its funds entangled in such lawsuits in the United States,” according to Deputy Press Secretary Scott Stanzel. ”(It is) too important an issue to allow this to go forward because it would tie up millions of dollars in Iraqi funds for months.”

The importance of liquidity for Iraqi funds doesn’t seem like an easy sell in Middle America. Let alone any V.A. hospital.

Connect:

3 thoughts on “Bush Will Veto Vet Benefits to Protect Iraq — From Lawsuits”

  1. “I can’t wait to hear how the Rush Limbaughs and Bill O’Reillys of the world spin this one. Here’s how the White House explained it”

    Here’s how:

    Rush will say, “Democrats are against the free market and are for lawyers! And we all know ‘the terrorists’ are against the free market, therefore the Democrats are for ‘the terrorists’, and furthermore, that means the Democrats are ‘against the troops’.”

    Pretty good?

  2. …and THEN…Michelle Malkin will say, “the Democrats are holding up the pay raise for our troops, by not removing the part of the bill for freezing Iraqi assets. So, the Democrats are against the troops!”

    And Sean Hannity will say, “The Democrats are holding our American troops hostage! By playing politics with this bill!”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.