On that war funding bill vote
One of our commenters, Another Disgrunted IVAW “member” wrote last night;
Looks like 170 Republicans voted against the troops today. Why do they hate us? They send us to war and don’t want us to have the necessary equipment to win the wars.
He/She is talking about this vote yesterday on the war funding bill;
The 226-202 roll call Tuesday by which the House approved a $106 billion bill to ensure financing for war operations in Iraq and Afghanistan over the coming months.
A “yes” vote is a vote to pass the bill.
Voting yes were 221 Democrats and 5 Republicans.
Voting no were 32 Democrats and 170 Republicans.
A quick look through the news turned up the reason why so many Republicans voted against the bill like this one from Reuters;
The House of Representatives on Tuesday narrowly backed a $106 billion bill to pay for the U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and extend billions in new credit to the International Monetary Fund.
The legislation also includes extras like vouchers to spur U.S. car sales, and comes after a series of political battles that exposed the sharp fissures between President Barack Obama’s Democrats and the Republican minority.
In fact, Republicans mostly opposed the $108 billion for the IMF (doesn’t the Left hate the IMF?) which they called an international bailout. Oh, yeah, and the spending bill included lots of little extras that had nothing to do with the war in Afghanistan and Iraq
The legislation also ballooned after Obama sought billions of dollars to combat the H1N1 flu virus which has now become a pandemic. Lawmakers nearly doubled his request of $4 billion to $7.7 billion, though $5.8 billion is contingent on needs.
From the Dayton Daily News;
“What does a $108 billion global bailout have to do with protecting our troops and giving them the tools they need for victory?” asked House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio.
I find it a little disingenuous of Democrats, and commenters, who didn’t complain about Democrats trying to pull funding out from the troops for the last two years and now suddenly want to denigrate Republicans for opposing Democrat spending sprees with legitimate concerns.
TSO ADDED: I hope Jonn will forgive me for weighing in on his post, but the majority of Congressmen of both parties voting against this that I talked to also cited the conference taking out the Senate language blocking release of the photos. This coupled with the non-military, non-emergency stuff in the supplemental (which is off budget) is what sealed the deal on the no votes. It should be noted that there was still another month before these funds were needed. The promise of Obama to block the release doesn’t ring true with a lot of folks.
Category: Barack Obama/Joe Biden, Politics, Terror War
And, once again, the amendment/rider process has so screwed up the legislative process that the original bill becomes an afterthought, with political opponents using it to distort the opposition’s voting record; “But look! He voted AGAINST funding the troops!” How many times have we seen that kind of crap every other year?
Nice goin, lefties. You aren’t supporting the troops. You’re using them as a convenient way to further your BS agenda.
I wish I could find tape of this, I heard the quote on the radio.
“House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., unsuccessfully appealed to Republicans for support, saying 80 percent of the package still went to the troops.”
80% is good?
80% is damn good! How far could we improve things at home if we even got 50% of that bill to use towards a crumbling infrastructure, schools and medical benifits??!
Yeah, nothing like “totally” supporting the troops? Oh, let’s just add in some pork for the 0’s buds in Europe and Africa, like the IMF bailout, and the pork for the swine flu “pandemic”. I find it odd that the UN released the statement that swine flu was now a “pandemic”, just 5 days before the vote on the war funding. On second thought, I don’t find that odd at all.
DCNative,
Had they called it the “Comprehensive Liberal Pet Project and Global War Against Man Made Disaster Supplemental Funding Bill of 2009”, I could see spliting it 50-50.
How much more do you think DC needs to fix their public schools? It is already more than 24K per student.
And wasn’t the stimulus bill supposed to go towards all of those shovel ready infastructure projects?
This vote, I think, really brought out a lack of integrity on the part of a lot of people:
a) Republicans. Not because of whatever objections they had to the bill and this particular vote; I’m glad they did not feel held hostage by the war funds and voted their conscience on the various provisions. It did, however, expose quite a bit of hypocrisy over their overheated rhetoric over the past few years about folks voting against war funding being anti-troop. It was never that simple, and I’m glad that’s the position they’re taking now.
b) Democrats, especially: Yvette Clarke, Steve Cohen, Jim Cooper, Jerry Costello, Barney Frank, Luis Gutierrez, Jay Inslee, Steve Kagen, Edward Markey, Doris Matsui, Jim McDermott, George Miller, Grace Napolitano, Richard Neal, James Oberstar, Jan Schakowsky, Mike Thompson, Edolphus Towns, Nydia Velázquez, and Anthony Weiner. These folks explicitly sought out the anti-war constituency in their district, signed pledges, etc., and then hey look our president is about to be embarrassed…let’s vote for some war funds. And, wonder of wonders, Democratic leadership discovers the “vote against this bill and you don’t support the troops” canard. Boo.
c) Reporters. Tons of reporters, especially in the Hill rags, quoted Democratic staffers without giving their name so that they could take shots at Republicans as anti-troop. There’s no reason to grant that anonymity…the aides aren’t going to get shot in the street if they’re named. The reporters are doing the flack’s job for them.
BNG, don’t expect a quick answer to your questions, because DCnative has to get the new dnc/commie talking points memo, first, because the old one isn’t able to stand up to scrutiny anymore.
As for all the crap slapped onto this; as I said in the original thread, the dems put it all on there as a poison pill for the repubs. By putting all the crap they want, which has nothing to do with the troops, and any repubs voting against it, will give them what they want; a talking point for the campaign trail. Of course, they won’t mention any of the crap they put in, just highlight the fact that repubs voted against it.
BNG, don’t hold your breath waiting for DCnative’s answer. Whenever you confront a lib like it with inconvenient facts, the tactic employed is to ignore. You might ask of DCnative where in the constitution it tells the feds to fund LOCAL schools or be involved in curriculum, but you’d get no answer. And where, other than “promote the general welfare”, it says anything at all about the feds being involved in healthcare. But then, I repeat myself, they have NO answers.
I am not waiting. In case DC Native is trolling around here.
We spent $45 Billion on the Dept of Education in ’08.
And $70.6 Billion on the Dept of Transportation in ’08.
And $70.5 Billion on the Dept of HHS in ’08.
Add another $47.1 on HUD in ’08.
Oh, and let us toss in $11.7 Billion for Interior in ’08.
Total spent in ’08 on “crumbling infrastructure, schools and medical benifits” is $244.9 Billion or so.
Wow, imagine if we just gave them another $54 Billion (half of $108). I am sure that extra 20% would have fixed all that ails us.
Senator’s Coburn, DeMint, Enzi (Republicans) voted against funding our troops while they serve our Country overseas. The Military Supplimental Bill that the House approved this week was passed today by the Senate. Atleast the majority of Republican Senators showed their support for the troops. Unlike the Republican members of the House who obviously hate our troops.
How dare people vote for politicians who vote against the troops?
AD IVAW: Could you possibly show some intellectual honesty, or have you not received the new dnc talking points, yet?
Maybe, if you had read the other posts you would have noticed that it’s not as simple as you want to make it out to be. Or, maybe you can’t comprehend that much?
Intellectual honesty??
First off…just to be clear, I’m not a Democrat nor a Republican. I didn’t vote for either Obama nor did I vote for McCain.
Doesn’t this “talking point” sound alittle familiar, haven’t we heard this before?
Old Trooper, did you complain when the Republicans said the same thing about the Democrats. Or are you being Intellectually DIShonest?
I’m not a repub, or dem, either. As for honesty, show me your example of the repubs adding a bunch of crap that has nothing to do with war funding and the dems voting against it BECAUSE of the crap, not the initial intent of the bill? For you to come on here with your boilerplate leftist drivel is more accurately intellectual laziness, rather than dishonesty.
All that BS that “they’re not supporting our troops” crappola that you either believed because you failed to use critical thinking skills, or you know it’s not true, but felt it necessary to try and get us to believe it, which makes you stupid in either case.
Next time, look at the actual bill before coming on here and spouting that BS, or at least know your audience, first. I’m sure it would play better on college campuses, or the DailyKos.
OldTrooper, it’ll be back, as soon as he gets his new talking points from the IVAW, or DNC.
Hoyer wanted Republican cover, so no one would mention the IMF bailout, or the pork for the UN in the form of “pandemic of swine flu” money. Hey, it’s not like the UN or IMF mis-spends our money. Right?
I guess you just rather be Intellectually DIShonest. Thats okay though.
I love voting records. I hold both parties to the same standard, unlike you. I was disgusted when the Dems voted against troop funding, and I’m now disgusted by Reps voting against us.
Now who’s being Intellectually Honest?
Go get your talking points from RedState.com.
First off; I don’t get talking points from anyone. Second; where was I being dishonest? Please point it out to me. Third; have you figured out, yet, that you really haven’t addressed the reason for the vote against the bill? Fourth; do some homework and then tell me why the dems needed to put a bunch of non-war funding crap in the bill? Was it done so chuckleheads like you could have something to bitch about?
Now, either answer the questions, or just go away.
Sorry OldTrooper, I don’t take orders from you.
They did it just like when the Republicans added non-War Spending pork to their supplemental bills. This action of adding things to bills is done by both parties.
For example, Why did Republican’s in 2006 add $4 billion in farm programs to the supplimental?
That same bill had Republican Senators adding $700 million for railroad construction in the Gulf Coast region.
Why would they do such a thing to a War Spending Bill???
Stop being DIShonest dude!