«

»

Novak: There Will Be A White House-Democrat Deal On Troop Funding


Apr 11, 2007 by

In his latest edition of his Evans-Novak Political Report, columnist Robert Novak says there will be a deal on troop funding, the “surge” is not working and that the U.S. is destined to start removing troops no matter what:

# A bipartisan deal on the supplemental appropriations bill to finance the Iraq war appears to be in the books, with less talk now of a presidential veto and a subsequent crisis over funding the troops in the field. The final version probably will contain the benchmarks opposed by President George W. Bush, but with no cutoff of funding.

# The early reports from Baghdad indicate the “surge” and new strategy will not win the war. The expectation from all sides is that a troop removal will be underway in earnest by year’s end, no matter who is winning the war.

He elaborates on the surge further down in his report:

The heightened U.S. troop presence, according to the top commanders, appears to be pushing the violence out of certain areas, but it has increased in others. Meanwhile, U.S. troop deaths are skyrocketing, with very little attention being paid to this fact at home. The first quarter of 2007 saw 244 deaths, far more than the same period last year. On April 10, the Pentagon reported 35 troop deaths in the first 10 days of this month. The grand total is approaching 3,300.

Sen. John McCain’s (R-Ariz.) recent ordeal in Iraq illustrates the political problem the war is posing for Republicans. McCain suffered an embarrassing political moment when he declared Baghdad safe before his trip there, only to tour a Baghdad neighborhood days later, escorted by a large military security contingent (including two helicopters) and wearing a bulletproof vest. Part of the precaution surely stems from his status as a presidential candidate, but the message was clear: Iraq is not [this boldfaced word is Novak's] safe.

Novak also says that McCain’s trying to use the the war as a positive political issue is a sign of “desperation.”

Novak’s conclusions are likely to cause yet more erosion from the administration’s support. Increasingly, the America public — and elites — are divided between those who for one reason or other don’t support the conduct of the war and those who are involved in intensive spin control to say it’s going fine…or to give it more time. Novak’s latest column shows that time for the administration is running out.

Novak’s work can be regularly read on Humaneventsonline.com

Donate to The Moderate Voice

Share This

Related Posts

Sponsors

468 ad

6 Comments

  1. White Agent
    April 11, 2007 | 1:13 pm

    Novak is not behind bars yet? There is no justice.

    Troop deal: George W Bush will sign the House bill effectivly putting an END to this stupid republican war, or, he will pay for it out of his own pocket.

    I’m sure that Bush’s next move will be to refuse to pull out our troops even as they die in the field for lack of support. How dare the Democrats defy a Bush edict!

  2. Kevin H
    April 11, 2007 | 1:32 pm

    The final version probably will contain the benchmarks opposed by President George W. Bush, but with no cutoff of funding.

    That sounds like a great compromise to me.

  3. kritter
    April 11, 2007 | 3:21 pm

    The Democrats are taking a lot of heat for this bill, so I commend them for trying to work with a stubborn mule like W and his minions in Congress. Its no fun to do what you know is inevitable, is in the best interest of your country, and be blasted as cowardly for doing it.

  4. White Agent
    April 11, 2007 | 5:50 pm

    Like Kritter, I am very proud of the Democrats for finally Teaching the republicans what “Conviction in Principal” really means. God knows we’ve needed this in Washington for Decades.

    If the Democrats stick to their guns, they win. No other outcome is possible. I might also point out that their popularity is going up, not down.

    Caveat: Screw your false words at VMI today McCain. I am more convinced than EVER that you are one sick and deluded individual.

  5. Rudi
    April 11, 2007 | 9:26 pm

    It’s interesting that this Novak article is addressed but another from the WaPo is ignored. Novak takes a position on the occupied territories similar to Carters and it is ignored.
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/08/AR2007040800924.html?nav=hcmodule

    Worse Than Apartheid?

    By Robert D. Novak
    Monday, April 9, 2007; Page A13

    BETHLEHEM, West Bank — Hani Hayek, an accountant who is the Christian mayor of the tiny majority-Christian Palestinian village of Beit Sahour, was angry last week as he drove me along the Israeli security wall. “They are taking our communal lands,” he said, pointing to the massive Israeli settlement of Har Homa. “They don’t want us to live here. They want us to leave.”

    Har Homa, dwarfing nearby dwellings of Beit Sahour, seemed larger than when I saw it at Holy Week a year ago. It is. The Israeli government has steadily enlarged settlements on the occupied West Bank, and I could see both the construction at Har Homa and road building for a dual transportation system for Israelis and Palestinians.

    Jimmy Carter raised hackles by titling his book about the Palestinian question “Peace Not Apartheid”.

  6. втора
    April 20, 2007 | 6:56 am

    this is very very interesting