Would Bush still veto the supplemental war spending bill if we changed all of the pork to benefits

for veteran's and their family members? If we changed all of the pork in this bill already to money to treat returning soldiers and their mental and physical injuries, improve hospitals and care centers, provide training to medical professionals, provide support and services to families that have their loved ones over their or sent over there (again), etc. Could Bush still veto it, even if it still had the timetable for withdraw? I think the political backlash for him would be huge and show how unreasonable he is to the average American. How could anyone not vote for a bill that actually supports the troops, even if it has a timetable. That would become the issue for the talking heads, not the timetable for withdraw. Bush would have to put his "Support the Troops money" where his mouth is. That would give us a Mack Truck in this game of chicken.

Unless it was all privatly owned and halaburton was making a huge profit on it.

Seriously, I hope Nancy and Harry are as smart as you. :thumbsup: