May 2, 2007

CQ Radio: Follow The Veto

blog radio

Today on CQ Radio, we will speak with Josh Holmes, the spokesman for the Senate Republican Communication Office, to talk about the veto, the Iraq war funding, and what we can expect over the next few days. You can speak with Josh and myself by calling 646-652-4889 between 2-3 pm CT this afternoon!

UPDATE AND BUMP: The House failed to override the veto. I'll post the final vote. If Nancy Pelosi couldn't hold the original 218 votes, that will be a significant defeat for her.

UPDATE II: Pelosi actually picked up four votes. The House voted 222-203 to override the veto, far short of the two-thirds necessary.


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Comments (3)

Posted by Lightwave [TypeKey Profile Page] | May 2, 2007 3:57 PM

Amazingly enough, since the veto override vote failed, we now see the headline at CNN is "No safe way for U.S. to leave Iraq, experts warn".

"Pulling U.S. forces from Iraq could trigger catastrophe, CNN analysts and other observers warn, affecting not just Iraq but its neighbors in the Middle East, with far-reaching global implications," the article begins. Readers of CQ of course have long figured this out, but what has prompted this article to be posted specifically today? That aspect of Iraq has not changed. While I applaud CNN for posting it, I have to boggle at the timing.

This opening paragraph is of course the absolute truth, but where was this article, say, weeks ago? Months ago? Before the '06 election?

Still, this may be evidence the MSM is bailing on the Dems' fantasy position that withdrawal is even possible:

"Done properly we should be in Iraq for years, not in a combat [role], but an embedded advisory role."

Note the President has been saying this since 2003. His position hasn't changed. Why the 180 degree turnaround from CNN? Nobody likes a loser, a coward, or a hack. The Dems are all three.

Posted by Rose [TypeKey Profile Page] | May 2, 2007 7:37 PM

It will be interesting to see who voted with the DIMS on this one.

Posted by georgfelis [TypeKey Profile Page] | May 2, 2007 9:51 PM

It would be more interesting to find out just what the 4 Dems who changed their votes were promised (or threatened).