T Nation

Remember These Names

Here are the names of the Senators who voted to cut off funding for the Armed Forces in Iraq.

From www.senate.gov.

Akaka (D-HI)
Biden (D-DE)
Boxer (D-CA)
Byrd (D-WV)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Clinton (D-NY)
Dodd (D-CT)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Obama (D-IL)
Reid (D-NV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schumer (D-NY)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)

Please remember them when you enter the ballot box.

JeffR

It is no surprise that you fail to mention the fact that the votes are largely symbolic and were expressed to show their displeasure with the course that the administration is taking in Iraq.

Its cool though, I’ll be sure to remember who voted for it. Better yet, I will even look into WHY they voted for it, last I checked that was kind of important too.

[quote]ren wrote:
It is no surprise that you fail to mention the fact that the votes are largely symbolic and were expressed to show their displeasure with the course that the administration is taking in Iraq.

Its cool though, I’ll be sure to remember who voted for it. Better yet, I will even look into WHY they voted for it, last I checked that was kind of important too.[/quote]

renny, absolute nonsense.

The people on this list are bragging about how many people voted for it.

It was a trial balloon to gauge if harry can push it through.

Don’t you think the first round ending in a veto was “symbolic” enough?

How about funding the troops who are fighting?

You do realize the symbolism to the troops?

How about which party is doing this?

Remember all the nonsense about “we support the troops?”

You wonder why Republicans are viewed as stronger on defense and garner the majority of Armed Services voting.

How about the people on that list who voted for the war and are now trying to harm the soldiers.

In short, there is nothing acceptable or reasonable in this vote. You cannot explain it away.

If the dems want to stop the war, elect a President who runs away.

Otherwise, it isn’t going to happen short of stopping the funding.

harry and the cabal are fully aware of this.

Oh, you got me. Congratulations.

I should have just ignored the usual troll drivel you spout.

JeffR

[quote]JeffR wrote:

Remember all the nonsense about “we support the troops?”
[/quote]

When an individual(s) says, “I (we) support the troops”, that’s like saying, “I (we) support teachers”.

Actually, you could put “firemen”, “butchers”, “prostitutes”, “policemen”, or “trashmen” in place of “troops” and it would mean the same thing…nothing. The slogan means absolutely nothing.

Its simple propaganda and it works. People like Jeff can accuse people he doesn’t like (anyone that isn’t republican) of not “supporting the troops” if said individual says something derogatory about Bush or the War itself.

It’s quite convenient for the simple minded. They don’t have to debate or discuss the issues. They can just say, “you don’t support the troops”, or “You must hate America and the military”.

We see it in this discussion board all the time.

Dustin

George W. Bush vetoed a war funding bill.

[quote]Malevolence wrote:
George W. Bush vetoed a war funding bill. [/quote]

Haha. Was gonna mention this.

Reid’s an ass, and they knew this wouldn’t pass. It’s just a big, symbolic ‘fuck you’ too a GWB whom no one likes anymore.

Lets cut the bullshit, I say. Stop trying to cut funding and vote to ask the Iraqi people. Referendum, prove their democracy works and all that.

They all vote we stay or go. And then we stay or go. Period.

If you haven’t noticed, the Iraqis lean towards go.

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
Malevolence wrote:
George W. Bush vetoed a war funding bill.

Haha. Was gonna mention this.

Reid’s an ass, and they knew this wouldn’t pass. It’s just a big, symbolic ‘fuck you’ too a GWB whom no one likes anymore.

Lets cut the bullshit, I say. Stop trying to cut funding and vote to ask the Iraqi people. Referendum, prove their democracy works and all that.

They all vote we stay or go. And then we stay or go. Period.

If you haven’t noticed, the Iraqis lean towards go.[/quote]

Beowolf,

I hate polls. However, if you are basing Bush’s popularity on those polls, you may want to view Congress’ “popularity.”

George Bush vetoed a spending bill that contained provisions that were unwise and dangerous.

I fully support that veto.

Finally, Iraq’s legitimate government continues to plead for more time and the troops to stay.

That is the answer.

I don’t think we need to provide the terrorists with a “we win if we win this vote” opportunity. They can’t win that on the battlefield. Let’s not give them a clear political victory.

The violence attending said vote, I fear, would be epic.

JeffR

[quote]JeffR wrote:

Remember all the nonsense about “we support the troops?”

[/quote]

What have you done, exactly, to support the troops? Better yet, one trooper?

[quote]coloradosteve wrote:
JeffR wrote:

Remember all the nonsense about “we support the troops?”

What have you done, exactly, to support the troops? Better yet, one trooper?

[/quote]Agree! Most of these grand standing weenies that run their mouths about supporting the troops would be the first pussies ,to switch over to the other side if their ass was on the line.Just like their fearless leader that shoulda went to nam when he had the chance. TO BRING IT On!!

[quote]coloradosteve wrote:
JeffR wrote:

Remember all the nonsense about “we support the troops?”

What have you done, exactly, to support the troops? Better yet, one trooper?

[/quote]

Have you done anything to help? Are you currently trying or in progress of helping?

[quote]coloradosteve wrote:
JeffR wrote:

Remember all the nonsense about “we support the troops?”

What have you done, exactly, to support the troops? Better yet, one trooper?

[/quote]

I have a number of family friends that have been deployed to Afghanistan and Iraq. I have bought them each multi-tools or ka-bars. I have sent them all care packages. I kicked in $ 50 so some guy I never met could have a lawn cutting service come by to save his pregnant wife the trouble.

I know other guys on this board do similar things.

[quote]ron33 wrote:
coloradosteve wrote:
JeffR wrote:

Remember all the nonsense about “we support the troops?”

What have you done, exactly, to support the troops? Better yet, one trooper?

Agree! Most of these grand standing weenies that run their mouths about supporting the troops would be the first pussies ,to switch over to the other side if their ass was on the line.Just like their fearless leader that shoulda went to nam when he had the chance. TO BRING IT On!!

[/quote]

This is ignorant. Many of the guys here are in the services.

For “the troops”… HA HA. Good one…

Congressional Report: Gross Mismanagement of Iraq Funds
The 45-page report, “The Cost of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Other Global War on Terror Operations Since 9/11,” prepared for Congress by the Congressional Research Service, warned lawmakers that before they release additional funds to the Pentagon for the Iraq war, they should first demand that Defense Department officials provide an accurate accounting of how the money is being spent.

Since 2001, the Pentagon has grossly mismanaged the $510 billion spent thus far on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars; has used money earmarked for equipment upgrades to finance fighting on the battlefield, and has refused to provide Congress with a transparent accounting of the money it has spent and intends to spend, according to the CRS report…
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/041107J.shtml

Contractors are Cashing in on the War on Terror
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=10110

Washington’s $8 Billion Shadow
It is a simple fact of life these days that, owing to a deliberate decision to downsize government, Washington can operate only by paying private companies to perform a wide range of functions. To get some idea of the scale: contractors absorb the taxes paid by everyone in America with incomes under $100,000. In other words, more than 90 percent of all taxpayers might as well remit everything they owe directly to SAIC or some other contractor rather than to the IRS…
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/03/spyagency200703

White House: 3.5 percent pay hike unnecessary
Troops don’t need bigger pay raises, White House budget officials said Wednesday in a statement of administration policy laying out objections to the House version of the 2008 defense authorization bill…

In addition to the pay raise, there are other personnel initiatives in the bill that the White House opposes…
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/05/military_payhike_whitehouse_070516/

I wish I could vote for every fuckin’ one of them, they voted against Bush’s bullshit, not against the troops there hero! Please, join up! Please? Make a difference there, not behind your keyboard. You are such a bad man, talkin’ smack, go be Superman, stupidman!

Am I to late to chip in?

[quote]coloradosteve wrote:
JeffR wrote:

Remember all the nonsense about “we support the troops?”

What have you done, exactly, to support the troops? Better yet, one trooper?

[/quote]

Hey, just wanted to tell you that you are a punk and a weakling of the first order.

That being said:

http://adoptaplatoon.org/new/

I’m not going to name names. Let’s just say the troops know that I support them.

JeffR

[quote]reckless wrote:
Am I to late to chip in?[/quote]

Yes. You are too late for every thread.

JeffR

[quote]micromuscle wrote:
I wish I could vote for every fuckin’ one of them, they voted against Bush’s bullshit, not against the troops there hero! Please, join up! Please? Make a difference there, not behind your keyboard. You are such a bad man, talkin’ smack, go be Superman, stupidman![/quote]

I knew it was too good to be true. You said you were leaving.

Here you are.

Too bad for all of us.

I’m proud to say I think I make a small contribution to the effort.

That certainly trumps you in every way imaginable.

JeffR

[quote]JeffR wrote:

George Bush vetoed a spending bill that contained provisions that were unwise and dangerous.

I fully support that veto.

[/quote]

But he DID vote no against funds for the troops though.

If we can’t point out that Bush vetoed a bill EVERYONE KNEW WOULD BE VETOED, then why does the same not apply to democrats that voted for a bill they knew would not pass?

Both situations are simply different viewpoints send a clear and distinct message to the other one.

[quote]renny wrote:
JeffR wrote:

George Bush vetoed a spending bill that contained provisions that were unwise and dangerous.

I fully support that veto.

But he DID vote no against funds for the troops though.

If we can’t point out that Bush vetoed a bill EVERYONE KNEW WOULD BE VETOED, then why does the same not apply to democrats that voted for a bill they knew would not pass?

Both situations are simply different viewpoints send a clear and distinct message to the other one. [/quote]

renny, the democrats on that list are voting to cut off funds to a war that several voted for.

How do you think the soldiers feel when they see this?

Stabbed in the back. They sent us and now they are going to cut off our supplies?

I’d bet they could care less about “symbolism.”

Again, harry reid has publically announced he wants to cut off funding. This was his trial balloon. He and his little pals are now bragging about how many people voted for it.

Do you think this will slow them down?

No, it will embolden them to further recklessness.

Do not compare this with Bush’s veto.

Bush was saying, You cannot usurp the CIC’s authority in this manner. Further, it’s bad war making policy to set deadlines in a combat zone. Both tactically and strategically it will be harmful.

He is exactly correct. Remember the last time we set deadlines like this in a successful war?

I don’t either.

The dems are really looking to cut the funds. See harry reid.

I cannot think of any worse message.

They know that Bush will not withdraw until he is ready. Therefore, they are going to push this until the funding stops.

Do you support that?

Make sure you say yes or no.

One thing I don’t want you to do is compare Bush’s stance with the people on that list.

There is a world of difference.

Finally, I’ll repeat: If you want a change in Iraq, elect a President who runs/waves the white flag.

DO NOT CUT OFF THE FUNDING. Whatever your feeling about this war, they shouldn’t be punished in this way.

JeffR