<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: War Funding Bill Passes Minus Troop Withdrawal Timeline</title>
	<atom:link href="http://themoderatevoice.com/13031/war-funding-bill-minus-troop-withdrawal-timeline-passes/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/13031/war-funding-bill-minus-troop-withdrawal-timeline-passes/</link>
	<description>An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2009 11:24:33 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: DLS</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/13031/war-funding-bill-minus-troop-withdrawal-timeline-passes/comment-page-1/#comment-82334</link>
		<dc:creator>DLS</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 May 2007 22:27:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/13031/war-funding-bill-minus-troop-withdrawal-timeline-passes/#comment-82334</guid>
		<description>The Democrats surrendered the issue.  Did you know that the Iraqi government is attempting to impose a time line, though?

&quot;The draft bill would create a timeline for a gradual departure, much as some Democrats in the United States have demanded, and require the Iraqi government to secure parliamentâ€™s approval before any extensions of the United Nations mandate for foreign forces in Iraq, which expires at the end of 2007.&quot;

&quot;[A]s in the United States, Iraqâ€™s legislators are moving away from the views of the government, particularly on the basic issue of the American presence in Iraq. The draft bill is being championed by a 30-member bloc loyal to al-Sadr, but it has support from some other Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish legislators.&quot;

&quot;The most prominent political parties in Iraq, including al-Malikiâ€™s Dawa party, do not support setting dates for withdrawal.&quot;

http://www.journalnow.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=WSJ%2FMGArticle%2FWSJ_BasicArticle&amp;c=MGArticle&amp;cid=1173351156603&amp;path=!nationworld&amp;s=1037645509161

Meanwhile:

Swing Voters Trouble Antiwar Dems

&quot;&quot;Swing voters are torn,&#039; says a Democratic strategist with close ties to the national party. &#039;They aren&#039;t sure immediate withdrawal is a good idea&#039; â€” and, as President Bush says, they don&#039;t want the sacrifices of U.S. troops to go to waste.&quot;

&quot;&#039;It works into a negative narrative that the Democrats are not standing up and fighting for what they believe in,&#039; says the strategist. And many voters are linking that perception to their longtime concern that the Democrats are weak on national security. &#039;A lot of people think, if you won&#039;t stand up and fight for what you believe in&#039; â€” pulling out the troops â€” &#039;then you won&#039;t stand up and defend us.&#039;&quot;

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/070525/25swing.htm</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Democrats surrendered the issue.  Did you know that the Iraqi government is attempting to impose a time line, though?</p>
<p>&#8220;The draft bill would create a timeline for a gradual departure, much as some Democrats in the United States have demanded, and require the Iraqi government to secure parliamentâ€™s approval before any extensions of the United Nations mandate for foreign forces in Iraq, which expires at the end of 2007.&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8220;[A]s in the United States, Iraqâ€™s legislators are moving away from the views of the government, particularly on the basic issue of the American presence in Iraq. The draft bill is being championed by a 30-member bloc loyal to al-Sadr, but it has support from some other Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish legislators.&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8220;The most prominent political parties in Iraq, including al-Malikiâ€™s Dawa party, do not support setting dates for withdrawal.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.journalnow.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=WSJ%2FMGArticle%2FWSJ_BasicArticle&amp;c=MGArticle&amp;cid=1173351156603&amp;path=" rel="nofollow">http://www.journalnow.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=WSJ%2FMGArticle%2FWSJ_BasicArticle&amp;c=MGArticle&amp;cid=1173351156603&amp;path=</a>!nationworld&amp;s=1037645509161</p>
<p>Meanwhile:</p>
<p>Swing Voters Trouble Antiwar Dems</p>
<p>&#8220;&#8221;Swing voters are torn,&#8217; says a Democratic strategist with close ties to the national party. &#8216;They aren&#8217;t sure immediate withdrawal is a good idea&#8217; â€” and, as President Bush says, they don&#8217;t want the sacrifices of U.S. troops to go to waste.&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8220;&#8216;It works into a negative narrative that the Democrats are not standing up and fighting for what they believe in,&#8217; says the strategist. And many voters are linking that perception to their longtime concern that the Democrats are weak on national security. &#8216;A lot of people think, if you won&#8217;t stand up and fight for what you believe in&#8217; â€” pulling out the troops â€” &#8216;then you won&#8217;t stand up and defend us.&#8217;&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/070525/25swing.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/070525/25swing.htm</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mikef</title>
		<link>http://themoderatevoice.com/13031/war-funding-bill-minus-troop-withdrawal-timeline-passes/comment-page-1/#comment-82208</link>
		<dc:creator>Mikef</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 May 2007 05:55:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/13031/war-funding-bill-minus-troop-withdrawal-timeline-passes/#comment-82208</guid>
		<description>The amazing number is in the Senate. 60% of Democratic Representatives voted against the bill, but of the 14 Senate no votes, only 11 were Democrats, and 3 of those are running for president.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The amazing number is in the Senate. 60% of Democratic Representatives voted against the bill, but of the 14 Senate no votes, only 11 were Democrats, and 3 of those are running for president.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
