Pot, meet kettle
In only the second veto of his presidency, Bush rejected legislation pushed by Democratic leaders that would require the first U.S. combat troops to be withdrawn by Oct. 1 with a goal of a complete pullout six months later. “This is a prescription for chaos and confusion and we must not impose it on our troops,” Bush said in a nationally broadcast statement from the White House.
Bush vetoes troop withdrawal bill – Yahoo! News
I suppose it makes for a good sound byte, but it’s positively dripping with irony.
Bush is right that he has every constitutional right to deploy troops, as Commander in Chief. The Democrats are right that they have the constitutional right to cut of funding… and there was little question they would move to do so – when Bush deployed the troops, given the election results from last November.
My question is, if Bush can rail against Democrats for “not supporting our troups in the field with the funding they need,” why can’t Democrats rail against Bush for essentially abanding the additional troops he sent there as part of the surge… knowing full well he wouldn’t be able to pay for them? Remember, the surge strategy was implemented AFTER the elections, and AFTER the Democrats in control started talking about more funding oversight.
The truth of the matter is, if the troops are in danger of inadequate funding… they’re both to blame.