I'm glad to see the Democrats muddying up the latest Iraq funding supplemental with amendments and add-ons. Bush keeps swearing he'll veto anything but a clean bill, and if he'd like to veto a series of Iraq funding bills, I see no reason not to let him. But I wish the Democrats were being a bit more strategic as to what they were attaching to the legislation. As of now, the list appears to range from a second stimulus package to levee repair in the Gulf. The idea is that "by tying the war funding to a host of issues including unemployment, the housing crisis and trade with Colombia, Democrats hope to paint Bush and his allies as more concerned about Iraq’s problems than those at home." However, Bush's inevitable argument that these are unrelated issues will, in fact, hold water, as they are, in fact, unrelated issues.Better would be tying the bill to a series of riders that actually relate. The new GI Bill legislation proposed by Sen. James Webb would be one option. So too would be Webb's legislation to guarantee soldiers rest time equal to their deployment time. Similarly, policy riders requiring the president to clearly articulate our goals and the conditions for success would be useful. Slap those on, and then let him veto. Let him veto again and again and again. If he doesn't want to fund the troops, it's true, no one can make him. (Photo used under a Creative Commons license from Soldier's Media Center.) FUND THE TROOPS!
I'm glad to see the Democrats muddying up the latest Iraq funding supplemental with amendments and add-ons. Bush keeps swearing he'll veto anything but a clean bill, and if he'd like to veto a series of Iraq funding bills, I see no reason not to let him. But I wish the Democrats were being a bit more strategic as to what they were attaching to the legislation. As of now, the list appears to range from a second stimulus package to levee repair in the Gulf. The idea is that "by tying the war funding to a host of issues including unemployment, the housing crisis and trade with Colombia, Democrats hope to paint Bush and his allies as more concerned about Iraq’s problems than those at home." However, Bush's inevitable argument that these are unrelated issues will, in fact, hold water, as they are, in fact, unrelated issues.Better would be tying the bill to a series of riders that actually relate. The new GI Bill legislation proposed by Sen. James Webb would be one option. So too would be Webb's legislation to guarantee soldiers rest time equal to their deployment time. Similarly, policy riders requiring the president to clearly articulate our goals and the conditions for success would be useful. Slap those on, and then let him veto. Let him veto again and again and again. If he doesn't want to fund the troops, it's true, no one can make him. (Photo used under a Creative Commons license from Soldier's Media Center.) 
