The Stab a Soldier in the Back Act 2007

spike said:
Point?

Most soldiers who have served in Iraq support withdrawal by a clear majority.

http://zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1075
Click to expand...


The survey included 944 military respondents interviewed at several undisclosed locations throughout Iraq.
Click to expand...


Wow. I didn't know that 944 military respondents defines "Most soldiers who have served in Iraq..."

The dems are hypocrites: When elected they said they were going to end pork barrel spending. But now in order to pay off a campaign promise of troop withdrawl, they added 24 billion of pork to a single bill. What's up with that?

Recently Murtha bragged how the dems have "the power of the purse" threatening to withdraw funds for the support of the war effort. Today they end up passing a soon-to-be-vetoed bill that provides $124 billion to finance military operations--with a deadline for US withdrawl. Hypocrites. Not to mention the bill's swimming in pork fat.

If the Democrats truly believe in what they say, why can't they put forth legislation that ONLY addresses a date for withdrawl from Iraq? Or ONLY addresses ceasing military funding? Because aside from being hypocrites they are COWARDS.
 
Cerise said:
Wow. I didn't know that 944 military respondents defines "Most soldiers who have served in Iraq..."
Click to expand...

Most soldiers in who have been asked.

More than 90 percent also did not accept the justification most cited by the administration before the war -- to enforce U.N. resolutions requiring the destruction or removal of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) from Iraq. Less than five percent of respondents cited that as the ‘'main'' or a ‘'major reason.''

The dems are hypocrites: When elected they said they were going to end pork barrel spending. But now in order to pay off a campaign promise of troop withdrawl, they added 24 billion of pork to a single bill. What's up with that?
Click to expand...

A massive savings of taxpayer money while supporting much more worthwhile causes.
 
It's been pointed out many times that you only give a shit about the constitution when it's convenient. Give up the act already.

Invading and occupying countries which are no threat is not constitutionally justified anyway.
 
spike said:
A massive savings of taxpayer money while supporting much more worthwhile causes.
Click to expand...

If you insist. :rolleyes:

For Immediate Release
March 22, 2007

Senate Sweetens Supplemental/ Special interest spending to the emergency war supplemental bill

Washington, D.C. -- Below is a list of the most egregious and irrelevant special-interest goodies in the supplemental:

$1.5 billion to the Army Corps of Engineers for recovery along the coast, including funding for Hawaii for an April 2006 flood;
$850 million for Department of Homeland Security grants ($625M for rail/transit grants, $190M for port security grants, and $35M for urban area security grants);
$660 million for the procurement of an explosives detection system for the Transportation Security Administration;
$640 million for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program;
$425 million for education grants for rural areas;
$388.9 million for a backlog of Department of Transportation projects;
$165.9 million (including $60.4 million for salmon fisheries in the Klamath Basin region) for fisheries disaster relief;
$75 million for salaries and expenses for the Farm Service Agency;
$48 million in disaster construction money for NASA;
$25 million for grants through the Safe and Drug Free Schools program;
$25 million for asbestos abatement at the Capitol Power Plant;
$24 million to sugar beet producers;
$22.8 million for geothermal research and development;
$20 million for reimbursements to Nevada for “insect damage;”
$12 million for Forest Service money requested by the president in the non-emergency FY2008 budget
$3.5 million for guided tours of the Capitol;
$3 million for sugar cane; and
Allows the transfer of funds from holiday ornament sales in the Senate gift shop.

For Immediate Release
March 15, 2007

The Porkers are Back: Congress Fattens Up Emergency Supplemental/ Special interest spending to the emergency war supplemental bill

Below is a list of spending and policy provisions in the supplemental that are unrelated to military operations.

$500 million for emergency wildfires suppression; the Forest Service currently has $831 million for this purpose;
$400 million for rural schools;
$283 million for the Milk Income Loss Contract program;
$120 million to compensate for the effects of Hurricane Katrina on the shrimp and menhaden fishing industries;
$100 million for citrus assistance;
$74 million for peanut storage costs;
$60.4 million for salmon fisheries in the Klamath River region in California and Oregon;
$50 million for asbestos mitigation at the U.S. Capitol Plant;
$48 million in salaries and expenses for the Farm Service Agency;
$35 million for NASA risk mitigation projects in Gulf Coast;
$25 million for spinach growers;
$25 million for livestock;
$20 million for Emergency Conservation Program for farmland damaged by freezing temperatures;
$16 million for security upgrades to House of Representatives office buildings;
$10 million for the International Boundary and Water Commission for the Rio Grande Flood Control System Rehabilitation project;
$6.4 million for House of Representative’s Salaries and Expenses Account for business continuity and disaster recovery expenses;
$5 million for losses suffered by aquaculture businesses including breeding, rearing, or transporting live fish as a result of viral hemorrhagic septicemia;
$4 million for the Office of Women’s Health at the Food and Drug Administration; and
A minimum wage increase, which is the subject of separate legislation.
http://www.cagw.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=10590
http://www.cagw.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=10570&news_iv_ctrl=1389
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top