Bush Urges Musharraf to Reverse Course but Signals No Penalty if He Doesn’t
"There was no sign on Monday that Democratic leaders in Congress would try to push Mr. Bush to cut aid to Pakistan... there was little Washington could do in response to the Pakistani president’s actions."
Yeah, can't cut off the money. Not like YOU need that money, AMERICAN!!!
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, Democrat of New York, called the Bush administration’s approach to Pakistan “fundamentally incoherent.” Yet neither Mrs. Clinton nor any of her fellow candidates offered details about how they would chart a different course than the one that the White House has followed for the past six years.
You want change in America? The VOTE Ron Paul!
"... $1.6 billion has been sent in part to buy big-ticket weapons such as F-16 jets and P-3 Orion patrol aircraft.
It is this last category — weapons that Pakistan has sought primarily to keep pace with rival India — that officials said Monday could get the closest scrutiny from Congress. Lawmakers may be willing to put restrictions on future payments for high-tech weapons that are less critical for counterterrorism operations.
Aaaaah, I see! Defense contractors getting phat off Pakistan!
A senior Democratic congressional aide who said he expected lawmakers to at least consider putting strings on future payments to Pakistan:
“Do you need an F-16 to deliver ordnance on a mud hut? You don’t."
Do we need to be DROPPING BOMBS on them AT ALL, you fucking racist puke?
The New York Times also agrees with Bush's policy:
"Editorial: The Pakistan Mess"
"This is what you get when policy is centered slavishly on a single, autocratic ruler rather than more broadly on his country....
That's why the U.S. is in the shape it's in, huh?
It was encouraging to see Pakistani lawyers openly challenge the legitimacy of Mr. Musharraf’s emergency degree on Monday
Yeah, here in AmeriKa, the Times just ignores us!!!!
— although the response was less than heartening. General Musharraf first sent his police to beat the protesters and then announced that a national election would take place in January. At this point, what is that assurance worth?
What, like a rigged election, is that what the Times is implicating?
Pffffffffttttttt!!!!!
... Ultimately, democracy, not dictatorship, is the best hope for a stable Pakistan. Reviving General Musharraf’s back-room deal with the former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, however distasteful, may be a way back from the abyss."
Yeah, DEMOCRACY is the BEST HOPE-- as long as it is the "back-room deal" that Bush helped cut!!!!!!
Yup, DEMOCRACY is a "BACK-ROOM DEAL" to the NYT!!!
Sort of explains their trashing of Ron Paul, doesn't it?
Well, for the people of this nation, FUCK OFF, you fucking SHITSTINK FUCKING ELITES at the WAR DAILIES!!!!!!
And if you think there is still a chance for the Dems, think again:
'Blank check' seen headed Bush's way, despite Democratic promises to change course in Iraq
"Democratic leaders in Congress are quietly preparing to give President Bush essentially everything he wants to keep the Iraq war going for at least another six months without forcing any change in course."
There's no real difference between democrats and republicans: they're all acquisitions of the defense industry (to say nothing of a certain foreign entity).
The only thing both sides of the isle appear to know how to do is roll over, play dead, and give this administration everything it wants.
So much for promises of "change" from last year's election, which have turned out to to be another pack of lies these candidates fed us just to get elected. -- Mike Rivero, What Really Happened
