Bush, War, and Dems

The Dems did make a lot of noise after the election without having the votes to back up the noise...Did I miss something after the 2006 election when the Dems had only something like a 232-201 majority in the House, far from the 287 votes needed to override a King George veto...and the Dems also had a slim 50 seats plus one independent Democrat who votes Republican to 49 majority...far from the 66 votes needed to override the King's veto...I was saying back in December 2006 the Dems don't have the juice or power to get the Republicans to break away from the King and influence the war policy and funding...the King is to stubborn to change his mind even when something like 70% of Americans want to start bringing our troops home...Did anyone really think the Dems would get Bush to sign a bill with timelines and withdrawal dates or have his fellow Republicans jump ship and override the King's veto?...the Republicans are lemming heading to the ocean in mass...all the Dems could do is keep sending the same bill to the King until the funding for the troops was a real issue and try to blame Bush for vetoing all the bills with all the money he requested and hope more people blame the King and the Republicans who continue to support him instead of blaming the Dems...the Dems had two choices in my mind: the Dems could simply send the King a bill with no withdrawal dates or even benchmarks with teeth, basically give the King what the King wants...or keep sending the King bills he would only veto and the Dems won't have the votes to override the King and either way we all lose, especially the troops, since the troops would be underfunded eventually while still fighting...when did the Dems ever have the power to end the war without the help of the Republicans? Again, what did I miss?...and the Republicans, probably lead by Doctors Evil, Chaney and Rove, kept the lemming Republicans in line...did anyone really think the Dems could end the war themselves without having the votes in the Senate or the House to take on the King...I never thought the Dems had a chance to make any noise...if anything, the Dems didn't want to risk being the ones who cut off funding for the troops...and how many of us want the troops not funded while they are still fighting the civil war in Iraq...What options did the Dems really have? Keep rolling the rock up the hill and have it fall back down on them? How long could they really do that? Edwards can saying send the King the same bill but he doesn't have to run for re-election in the House or Senate...Trust me, I have lost faith in the two party system...neither party is doing the will of the people...only maneuvering for position in the 2008 election...which is the real crime....worrying about re-elections and positioning for the 2008 presidential election, instead of listening to the majority of the American people...the Dems should take their share of the blame...the King called their bluff...what does the King have to lose? He is already naked...the lemmings are too afraid to hold the King accountable...and the Dems never had the power to influence policy...the Dems keep rolling the rock up the hill and the rock keeps falling on them, on the American people, the troops, and the two party system...and now the King trots out the war horse that al Qaeada in Iraq wants to kill Americans...information from 2005...and why are we suppose to believe the King now after all his lies...shocking that al Qaeda wants its followers to kill Americans...all the King has is the fear card...and his lies... information from 2005 he disclassifies to give a commencement speech!