Bush invites lawmakers to listen to how right he is

The White House is probably aware of the public relations benefits involved with chatting with one’s rivals. When it comes to the war in Iraq, House and Senate Democratic leaders, perhaps foolishly, have indicated many times that they’re willing to broker some kind of compromise with the White House over funding.

Dems don’t want a veto; they want a spending bill. Both chambers have already approved funding with a withdrawal timeline; if the president wants to work out a deal, now’s the time to pick up the phone. So far, the Bush gang, true to form, has preferred silly games to actual governing.

Today, it reached an almost comedic level.

President Bush on Tuesday invited Democrats to discuss their standoff over a war-spending bill, but he made clear he would not change his position opposing troop withdrawals. The White House bluntly said the meeting would not be a negotiation. […]

“At this meeting, the leaders in Congress can report on progress on getting an emergency spending bill to my desk,” Bush said. “We can discuss the way forward on a bill that is a clean bill, a bill that funds our troops without artificial timetables for withdrawal and without handcuffing our generals on the ground. I’m hopeful we’ll see some results soon from the Congress.” […]

In essence, Bush invited the Democratic leaders of Congress to come hear the stance he has offered for weeks. He again accused them of shirking their responsibilities. “We’re at war,” Bush said. “It is irresponsible for the Democratic leadership in Congress to delay for months on end while our troops in combat are waiting for the funds they need to succeed.”

The AP’s headline reads, “Bush inviting Dems to meet about Iraq.” A more accurate headline might read, “Bush inviting Dems to give him everything he wants with no exceptions.”

Can someone explain to me what the point is of even inviting Dems to the White House?

Thankfully, the point was not lost on White House reporters.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino … said Bush would invite congressional leaders to the White House to “discuss with him how they are going to be able to bring him a clean bill that he can sign,” Perino said. “I will point out this is not a negotiation.”

Her description of Bush’s invitation immediately raised questions about exactly what the point was.

When a reporter said it sounded like an invitation for Democrats to agree with Bush, Perino said, “Well, hopefully so…. Maybe [lawmakers] need to hear again from the president about why he thinks it is foolish to set arbitrary timetables for withdrawal.”

Yes, of course, that’s it. Pelosi and Reid have been listening to Bush say for years that he wants an open-ended commitment to a losing effort that he’s botched every step of the way, but what they really need is to hear it again.

It’s almost as if the White House is trying to sound ridiculous.

I assume by “clean bill” he means do this his way.

I guess he doesn’t understand that while there are still many Republicans and even a few Dems (I am speaking of you Sen. Lieberman) who are willing to bend over backwards and give him what he wants, how he wants it while at the same time abrogating their Constutionally assigned powers, Democrats run the show and some Republicans can’t recreate their former enthuasism for Bush and his way of doing things.

  • Our little tinpot is going to dissolve congress as obstructionist and declare Martial Law.

    Not sayin’ it can be enforced, just sayin’…

  • once again, the democrats need to stand up and portray bush as a “petulant child” throwing a tantrum. repeat over and again that congress is sending him a bill that funds the troops, even better than the funding he proposed. if he chooses to veto the bill, he has made the choice to not fund the troops. these matters are not negotiable, they are what america wants.

  • Pelosi and Reid should challenge the f*cker to a public debate, British House of Commons style. Discussion will be limited to a single topic: Who is delaying for “months on end”.

  • Can someone explain to me what the point is of even inviting Dems to the White House?

    It’s headlines like “Bush inviting Dems to meet about Iraq,” that make it worthwhile. Since most people just skim the headlines looking for news about missing blond girls, they are getting the impression that Bush is reaching out and trying to compromise.

  • This the same bull they tried to pull on Iran and we have seen how well that worked. “Yes, we’ll sit down and negotiate with you as long as you concede and give us our main goal first…stop all nuclear enrichment.” Hmmm. Maybe the Dems should kidnap someone…

  • How tempting is it for Pelosi to say, “Well, Goerge, I guess you’ll just have to stay in your room until you learn how to listen to others.”

  • “President Bush has made clear that he is not interested in negotiating. We have a lot of business to take care of, and do not have the time to listen to the President repeat his old talking points on the price of withdrawal. If President Bush has compelling new evidence that we need to stay in Iraq, or that it will improve the situation, I suggest he present it to his constituents, the American people. Throughout this invasion and occupation, President Bush has done nothing but ignore his own Administration’s deadlines, why should we expect anything different from him in the future? ”

    That is what I would like to hear from the Dems.

  • I’ll say it again: The Dem position should be that Bush has his bill. His choices are to either accept the bill and plan to begin withdrawing our troops in 6 months (or whatever timeframe comes out of reconciliation) or he can veto the bill and start withdrawing them tomorrow. Those are the only 2 choices he has and the only 2 choices he will get.

  • Meanwhile the Karl Rove-directed ambush of Pelosi’s Syria trip has seemingly failed in the light of Congress’s upward approval ratings…

    Nancy Pelosi takes a fact-finding trip to the Mideast while Bush is irrigating his sinuses (or his brainpan) at Prairie Hell Ranch in Texas…go figure.

    Nothing in Bush’s old dirty tricks playbook seems to be working…and everything Reid and Pelosi touch is gold…why would they consent to Bush’s wishes now???

    (And they have Gonzales on the hotseat in another week…)

  • The United States of America has not found itself subjected to a “Command Performance” since the days of George Rex III, tyrant and absentee landlord to the American Colonies.

    From that moment in history to this, the United States of America has demonstrated that it will not be subjected to the imperial whims of any such tyranny—with the exception of the current tyranny of yet another “george” who fancies himself a unilateral ruler of the land; the people; the nation.

    It is time, therefore, for the Congress to establish a new Declaration of Independence, pronouncing that the Republic, the People, and the Nation are not subject to the political whimperings and demands of this self-envisaged Monarch. It is not the People and their duly-elected Representatives who answer to the Executive; it is the Executive who, as a servant of the People, must answer to the People and their duly elected Representatives. If that Executive demonstrates, through negligence, incompetence, or criminal subterfuge that he is not willing to accept his subordinate position in the greater order of things of which this Republic exists, then that Executive must, as was the previous tyrant bearing the name of George, be removed from power, whether by means forceful or peaceful….

  • This reminds me of that old Paul Simon song:

    And if I was the President the minute the Congress called my name.

    I’d say now who do you think you’re fooling?

    I’ve got the Presidential Seal

    I’m up on the Presidential podium.

    Oh, my Mama loves me, she loves me. She gets down on her knees and hugs me!

    I can just picture Babs holding little Georgie and saying “There, there. I won’t let those old meanies in Congress hurt my little boy.”

  • I think that Congress should reply “We have given the President a bill to fund the troops in Iraq. If he would like to discuss it he is welcome to come down to Capitol Hill and we will reiterate our points. We aren’t offering to negotiate, just offering to repeat our offer until he understands and agrees.”

    Sort of turn around his offer on him.

  • Someone needs to open a website that simply links to articles and gives what would be the correct headline if we had a real media.

    In this case it would be “Bush Invites Democrats For One-Way ‘Discussion'”

  • Can someone explain to me what the point is of even inviting Dems to the White House?

    Uh, I believe you stated the answer to this question in your first line:

    “The White House is probably aware of the public relations benefits involved with chatting with one’s rivals. ”

    Its always about politics, about showmanship, with this crew.

  • “Can someone explain to me what the point is of even inviting Dems to the White House?”

    Maybe a better question would be, “What would be the point of any Democrats even showing up?”

    Well, not better, maybe, but just as good. 😉

  • Quote:

    “The White House is probably aware of the public relations benefits involved with chatting with one’s rivals. ”

    Unless, of course, it’s Nancy Pelosi talking to the Syrians.

  • I can just picture Babs holding little Georgie and saying “There, there. I won’t let those old meanies in Congress hurt my little boy.”

    [Eeyore]

    While she crushes the servant’s heads with one hand.

    Can someone explain to me what the point is of even inviting Dems to the White House?

    Have you ever heard of a chap called Vlad the Impaler? He’d invite folks over for a meal and then *Shhh-thunk!*

    In-curious George never ceases to amaze. I’m sure he’s convinced he’s being oh so nice by even taking time to speak to the unwashed masses that are the Democrat [sic] Majority.

    If they refuse he will be hurt, which will justify a veto (in his booze-addled brain). I say they go (with a huge security detail and lots of cameras) listen to what he has to say, tell him why it’s unacceptable and leave.

  • Can someone explain to me what the point is of even inviting Dems to the White House?

    So Hannity can say Bush invited them for an open, candid discussion, but they hate America anyway.

    “doubtful” # 5 makes and excellent point. It’s the headlines and the TV lead-ins that have the greatest influence on perceptions of coverage, left and right. most people, if they even read or tune in to news shows, never get beyond the headline. If they do, they don’t get much beyond the first paragraph. Why bother to read or listen to the whole thing?

  • Just wondering are any of the readers here who happen to live in a district with Republican representatives / senators, taking the time to give them a piece of their mind…. in a nice way of course.

    Nothing better than hearing from your constituency, especially when it comes time to protect your hide and they notice that there are more complaints than encouragements to support Bush.

  • Racerx #14 — far too generous:

    “Bush Invites Democrats For One-Way ‘Discussion’ Imperial Audience”

  • Comments are closed.