Worried about the deficit?

Question

Congressman David Obey has unbelievably huge balls to try and cover up for the House scum that passed the Surrender Resolution on Friday. First the leadership bribes unscrupulous politicians for yes votes, the Obey has the nerve to blame the Washington Post, which called the House out for its despicable act.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNp4xuxi290&embed=1

Said the Post:
Altogether the House Democratic leadership has come up with more than $20 billion in new spending, much of it wasteful subsidies to agriculture or pork barrel projects aimed at individual members of Congress. At the tail of all of this logrolling and political bribery lies this stinger: Representatives who support the bill -- for whatever reason -- will be voting to require that all U.S. combat troops leave Iraq by August 2008, regardless of what happens during the next 17 months or whether U.S. commanders believe a pullout at that moment protects or endangers U.S. national security, not to mention the thousands of American trainers and Special Forces troops who would remain behind.

Roll call votes. Remember their names. Click here:

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070323/D8O21N1G0.html

Tell Me... funny how anytime we quote an article, you guys think we shouldn't. Like you are the only people who are allowed to read. If there is a liberal slant, that only makes the point more credible. If there isn't, you still don't get to limit who can cite their sources to only those that agree with you. Besides all that, the facts regarding the vote and the quote are facts without a slant. But you chose not to comment on the facts.

granny...guilty of destroying their country? It may be what you hope or what you've been led to believe, but it's not true - http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AvvcYgWhzXz_u7p5sQDNoMnsy6IX?qid=20070322150927AAkSe3L

Answer 1

Yes, it's problematic that the Democrats tagged on pork barrel spending to that bill. But, consider this. The $20 billion they added on is only about 1% of the federal budget. Now that's scary.
Also, the pork barrel spending, which is such a tiny % of the overall budget, gives the President a justifiable reason to veto the bill.
Everybody wins with this charade. The Democrats can say they presented the bill to end the war. The Preseident can say the bill has too much pork barrel spending.
This is truly a sad day for America. Both the Republicans and Democrats have joined forces to pull a fast one on the public. It will be interesting to see just what program the President has agreed to approve for the Democrats as their reward for this fiasco.

Answer 2

Iraq is not a threat.

They do not have weapons of mass destruction.

They were not behind the World Trade Center.

We are guilty of destroying their country.

Out of guilt we remain their imposing Marshall law and our ideas and beliefs much to there dismay.

America is in Iraq in rebuilding capasity only.

What we did in that country is disgraceful.

I agree they should not be able to add on other issues.

This corrupt government has proven time an time again that they have to be watched closly and punishments established and enforced.

I would like to see any corrupt government official have all laws and bills created by them disreguarded retrospectively and they loose all their benefits of the job.

Answer 3

Funny how the Washington Post is suddenly a credible source because you agree with something it said. Are you one of the people who normally whines about how liberally-slanted the Post is?

Answer 4

We need to end this iraq mistake before our country falls to 3rd world status.

Answer 5

don't worry about something you have no control over