House GOP Leaders Threaten To Vote Against Money For Troops

[babylonsister]

http://electioncentral.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2007/mar/02/house_gop_leaders_threaten_to_vote_against_money_for_troops

House GOP Leaders Threaten To Vote Against Money For Troops
By Greg Sargent | bio

Okay, so here's the state of play in the House right now with regard to the coming showdown between Congressional Dems and the White House over the war.

The House GOP leadership has now unveiled its response to the news this morning that House Dems are coming together behind an approach to the soon-to-be-voted-on spending bill that would bring the troops home if the Iraqi government fails to reduce violence there. House GOP leaders say that if Dems try to attach any conditions to the war spending bill, Republicans in the House may vote against it:

The House minority leader threatened Thursday to get his members to vote against a $96.3 billion spending bill for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan if Democrats persist in plans to attach conditions to the money that would tell President Bush how to conduct the wars.

This is interesting -- now it's the House Republican leadership who is threatening to vote against funding the troops. The same Republican leadership which, behind House GOP leader John Boehner, has been demanding that Dems show full support for funding the troops, lest they be accused of not supporting them:

REP. BOEHNER: Let’s have a real resolution on the floor. It’s a bill that says, “We will not cut the funding for our troops in harms’ way.”

Meanwhile, Hill sources tell us that it may be days before Congressional Dems seriously coalesce behind the current approach in any case.

more...

[HappyWeasel]

1. So be it.

It's their asses, not ours. When the republics make themselves out to be morans, they will just be hurting themselves.

[wicket]

2. Who've they got doing their political strategy, the Bush twins???

Wow, what a BRILLIANT plan!
:sarcasm:

[Demeter]

3. If the GOP Wants To Cut The War's Funding--More Power To Them!

Let's insist the Democrats fall in line!

[Zachstar]

4. Just make sure they don't try to exploit past associations.

When they vote against it. You can be damn sure that idiots like Rush will run to the mic to call this a dem action.

Then again this works in the end because no bucks no bullets to continue this madness and the president will be forced to get out.

And guess what everyone? Because he has to be FORCED to pull the troops out it will empower the already high amount of disrespect towards us thanks to Bush's mistake in the first place.

So GEORGE BUSH do the right thing and show STRENGTH by saying "F-You this isn't our war WE ARE OUT!"

[Morgana LaFey]

6. Yeah, seems like a no-brainer to me

Wouldn't take all that many Dem votes to do that, either, would it??

[The Backlash Cometh]

5. Okay, can someone point out the problem here?

No money to the troops, war over. Right?

[Warren Stupidity]

8. Works for me. It is that simple.

For every Republik 'nay' one of ours should step forward and vote 'no' too. It will be a bipartisan end to the war, and we can all share the blame.

[Roland99]

7. About damn time some Dems showed some freakin' guts!!!!

[Clintonista2]

9. So let me get this straight..

We get what we want, with no political consequences? Whats the catch?

[muntrv]

10. GOP says "no attaching conditions to the money." They definitely are not

the party of fiscal restraint.

[wryter2000]

11. This is Murtha's thing, right?

Doesn't matter how much the R's scream, "I voted against the restrictions." All that will be remembered is that they voted against the troops.

And, if it passes, it still kills the surge, maybe even the war. The restrictions make it impossible for Bush to continue this war without instituting a draft.

It's brilliant. There's no way it can fail.

[meldroc]

12. Funding with restrictions and conditions - best political strategy!

What is the GOP going to do, vote against it? BREAKING NEWS: you're outnumbered in the House, motherfuckers, and you don't get a filibuster, so go ahead and vote against it. When you lose the vote, we'll be the ones telling you to SUCK IT!

[sendero]

13. What cracks me up..

... is that our Dem "leaders" let the Republicans frame the issue as "not funding our troops on the battlefield".

No, stupid people, we are BRINGING THEM OFF THE BATTLEFIELD.

[w4rma]

14. … nt

[gasperc]

15. Troops held hostage by a failed foreign policy

Pelosi and Murtha are ahead of the establishment on this.
There is no choice on this, enabling Bush NOW means staying in Iraq for 10 or God only knows how many years. Feingold is one of the few in the Senate who get it, we have to do the right thing, we have to work to end the war NOW. The democratic leadership has to stop fearing the loss of the majority by trying to cut the funds to the war.
The war is an immoral diaster, the American people know this. Failing to stop the war now will cause it to drag on even if a Democrat is elected president. It took Nixon 7 years to get out of Vietnam.

American troops are being held hostage by a failed foreign policy.
For Democratic leaders, especially those in the Senate, to prefer to not do anything that might imperil their majority is foolish and deadly. What good is a majority that keeps troops in Iraq indefinately? If this is the choice made by the leadership, reinforced by the grotesque selection of Lieberman for tomorrow's response, it will end in diaster.

The leadership wants us to shut the fuck up, we delivered them the majority because of our fury over the Iraq war, now they want us to STFU.
The Democratic majority will slip away, the republicans are banking on the leadership being overly cautious, this is a Karl Rove electoral ploy. The leadership is afraid to lose voters if they look like they are "cutting off the troops", and Rove knows Democratic voters will not stand with the leadership if they don't end the war. Rove is trying to stack a house of cards against itself so that it will fall. The Democratic leadership is making the wrong choice. It is up to us to organize and help them see the error of their thinking.

[D23MIURG23]

16. The Dems Should Let Them Vote Against It.

Nothing would make a better bludgeon come election time than "a vote against the troops", and frankly, it would probably clear the house anyway.

[Jack Rabbit]

17. The Republicans don't support the troops

They support His Nibs.

As far as His Nibs is concerned, the troops are lower class kids who are there to fight wars for the benefit of rich people and supposed to complain about not having the proper equipment or having to be sent to squalid stateside hospitals when wounded.

His Nibs does not support the troops.

[KingFlorez]

18. Good, let them do it

They'd rather vote against the funding than attach stipulations to it, that proves what their real motives are and it shows them for what they really are.

[ninkasi]

19. What's holy Joe going to think?

This is going to be a problem for him, I think.

[mb7588a]

20. fuck that headline.

the money in the supplemental has NOTHING AT ALL about the troops. EVER. don't any of you EVER repeat that bullshit fucking worthless right wing talking point.

support the troops and money for the troops my ass. FUCK THAT. look at walter reed.

[bigtree]

25. that money has been spent on everything but the troops

the Democrats intend to change that with their budget approach to confronting Bush on Iraq

[hippiechick]

30. Bingo.

If it were money actually going to the troops - in the form of body armor, armored jeeps, pay for them or their families, etc ... then by all means - send it.

But in reality, its money being funnelled through Halliburton etc for supposed 'ammunition' and 'uniforms' and 'MREs' that we all know are substandard SHIT and that the war profiteers are skimming a fat % off the top of.

[Up2Late]

21. GOOD! But PLEASE Mr. DEAN, EXPLOIT THIS during the Next Election!

We really need to throw the Exact SAME GOP Rhetoric back in their faces!

[Spiffarino]

28. The ads could be beautiful

"Joe Blow supports our troops getting excellent body armor and upgraded equipment. But REPUBLICAN Joe Blowhole voted against it. Yet he voted for billions in tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires. Is that what Congressman Blowhole means when he says he supports our troops?"

:rofl:

[Vinca]

22. GOP cutting funding is political gold. nt

[Drops_not_Dope]

23. .....and there's a knock at the door

I'm sorry Mr. & Mrs. _______ your Son/Daughter has been killed in the war.
How many times will this be heard while both parties volley playing political games?
Sometimes I just feel like puking.

[ClassWarrior]

26. Yes, let's shift the blame from Bush/Cheney** and the GOP to...

..."both political parties." Nice.

:eyes:

NGU.

[disndat]

27. Yes, end the agony

for thousands of families waiting for this knock on the door. The troops are just canon fodder to the Repukes. Once injured or killed they end their usefulness to the Halliburton machine.

[bigtree]

24. bizzare, but typical of republicans

craven and unconcerned with the consequences of their cynical politics

great report

[jwirr]

29. Let them hang themselves. We have the votes and the people

behind us.

[nadinbrzezinski]

31. Color me surprsied

these are the most cynical troop hating politicos quite possibly in US History

[yellowcanine]

32. Sounds as if Bonerman is stuck in "pre 11/2006" thinking. I guess he is a slow learner.

Maybe another spanking in 2008 will reorient his thought patterns.

[johnnypneumatic]

33. Dems should always attach a tax increase to pay for it from now on

add in a tax increase for the rich to pay for any war funds: 100 billion for the war, increase taxes to bring in the 100 billion. let the repukes vote on that

[erpowers]

34. Call Their Bluff

I say the Democrats should call their bluff. If they do vote against the money then it will show that they are a bunch of hypocrites in that they did not support the idea of the Democrats not funding the war, but they decided to not fund the war because they could not get what they want. I think this is a great position for the democrats to be in in that they can force the Republicans to stand up for their ideas.

[focusfan]

35. it's ashame the Democrate have there hands tied

you think the stupid repubs would want to end this war and
bring our troops home unless they have some kind of investment
in it.