English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

support...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071022/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_war_spending

Frightening.

2007-10-22 07:45:21 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/iraq_usa_dyncorp_dc;_ylt=An8ujzFz6YvNQP.ksOo7h58DW7oF

2007-10-22 23:47:53 · update #1

11 answers

Is he just supposed to leave our military over there insufficiently funded? I can't imagine an American that would be in favor of that.........

2007-10-22 07:49:13 · answer #1 · answered by Brian 7 · 5 5

It may be frightening but it is a fact that every spending bill submitted is challenged on camera by those in Congress that want to shed a bad light on the Executive Branch but at the end of the day the funding is still approved. There is much more to the war than either of us know but from what I have seen it is enough to continue the war.

2007-10-22 14:57:44 · answer #2 · answered by rance42 5 · 1 0

Personally, I'd like to see Congress tell Bush NO.

The democrats are willing to do that--by making continued funding contingent on a firm timetale for withdrawal. Unfortunately, the Republicans are doing their usual hypocritical doubletalk. They SAY they are opposed to the war--but won't vote to override Bush's veto. Typoical GOP hypocrisy and doubletalk.

The amazing thing to me is that the GOP members of Congress haven't figured out that pandering to a base that is down to 12% (as far as approving of the war) is a good way to commit political suicide. That 12 % is not going to vote for a Democrat if it were Christ Himself on the ticket. The most some of themwould do is stay home. And a LOT more than that are going to vote against any Republican who continues to support Bush.

2007-10-22 14:54:46 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2 2

Yes, in order to continue the war against terror, and to continue bringing Afghanistan and Iraq into self-sufficiency, this money is needed.

What's frightening is the number of people who think that defeating Bush and the GOP is far more important than to beat the jihadists who have stirred up violence and war the world over. They are not figments of Bush's imagination.

2007-10-22 15:12:10 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

The only ones still supporting this clown are the Karl Rovers out there, legions of semi-literate buffoons whose sole purpose is to clutter up the Internet with endless quesitons of, "Isn't George Bush the greatest President EVER??????????????????????" while completely ignoring the fact the man couldn't tie his shoe laces without a signing statement telling him which shoe was for which foot.

Frankly, it makes me sick, to see how blatantly this President is willing to throw American soldiers' lives away, so he can blame Democrats when the inevitable (and predicted by MILLIONS of people worldwide) failure of Democracy in Iraq actually comes true (you can't give someone Democracy, they have to want it enough to NOT blow up troops there to help them get it). Michael Ironside said it best in "Starship Troopers" (in one of the only scenes actually taken from the original Heinlein book), where he says, "Something Given Has No Value"-

Heck, you cons have been saying that exact same thing for decades about welfare to US citizens, as opposed to hundreds of billions to Iraq. I ask again:

"Why do Republicans only feel anger over 'Hand Outs" when it's Americans needing the assistance?"

Of course, Bush will be out of office and not in a position to answer inquiries about where TEN TRILLION DOLLARS WENT.

But we will be the ones having to pay that back.

Thanks George, now go play golf some more.

2007-10-22 14:58:37 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 3

if congress tried to force Bush to leave Iraq by cutting funding everyone knows what would happen....Bush would rather leave the troops there stranded and without support to blackmail congress into continued funding. Bush is holding every serviceman and women in Iraq hostage to his failed policies, forcing congress to fund his crimes.

this is not the kind of balance of power with check and balances that the founding fathers had in mind.

2007-10-22 14:52:01 · answer #6 · answered by Free Radical 5 · 3 1

He is getting less and less all the time. But if Congress just cut off funding, Bush would blqame them for this atrocity of a war.

2007-10-22 14:53:06 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

Think of all the free abortions that money could have bought.
I'm tired of Bush not admitting he and his neocon semite friends flew those airplanes into WTC.
I want Bush to tell us how he created the first racist hurricane.
I want Bush to stop eating muslim babies.
I want Bush to stop raising my gas prices.
I want Bush to stop raising college tuition.
I want to know why Bush lowered the price of sandwiches at places like Sheetz and Subway yet raised the price of bottled water.
ANSWERS!!!!!!!

2007-10-22 15:04:04 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

You are complaining that we need money for our troops fighting? Now that is a typical liberal point of view. Act like you care about the troops, claim you support them, but don't want to pony up for them. The fact that YOU can't figure this out doesn't in the least suprise me. Clearly it's too complicated for you. I'll make it simple, whether or not we've made a mess, we still have to clean it up, no matter the cost. BTW, just like before, the liberal congress will act superior, grandstand for a couple of weeks, and then give Bush the money just like they did before.

2007-10-22 14:51:35 · answer #9 · answered by Scott B 7 · 4 7

Not a lick of accountability; billions lost through corruption; years and lives wasted by inept planning from that schmuck Rumsfeld and 5-D Cheney...

It's not just frightening, it is criminal.

2007-10-22 14:50:18 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 5 4

fedest.com, questions and answers