New War Funding Battle

**CHUQ** · Agitator Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts votes: 3

This is a fact sheet on the war funding bill. Just thought I would give you thye "skinny" on what is what.

President Bush and congressional Democrats are locked in a fight on Iraq spending, each struggling for the upper hand in public perception.

For both sides, this rhetorical tug-of-war is a question of leadership on national security issues and who is more committed to the troops.

AT ISSUE:

This year, Bush requested about $196 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. This money is in addition to the Pentagon's $460 billion core budget for budget year 2008, which began Oct. 1.

LINK

**Tumbleweed** · Admin Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts votes: 4

Quote:

Congress has until mid-February before the Army will cease base operations and until March before the Marines takes similar steps, according to the Pentagon.

I seriously doubt it will come to shutting down the war machine. They still have lots of time to sling mud at each other. I'm sure they will find a compromise.

**CHUQ** · Agitator Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts votes: 3

Will the Dems cave again?

House Democratic leaders could complete work as soon as Monday on a half-trillion-dollar spending package that will include billions of dollars for the war effort in Iraq without the timelines for the withdrawal of combat forces that President Bush has refused to accept, House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) said yesterday.

In a complicated deal over the war funds, Democrats will include about $11 billion more in domestic spending than Bush has requested, emergency drought relief for the Southeast and legislation to address the subprime mortgage crisis, Hoyer told a meeting of the Washington Post editorial board.

If the bargain were to become law, it would be the third time since Democrats took control of Congress that they would have failed to force Bush to change course in Iraq and continued to fund a war that they have repeatedly vowed to end. But it would also be the clearest instance yet of the president bowing to a Democratic demand for more money for domestic priorities, an increase that he had promised to reject

LINK

**CHUQ** · Agitator Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts votes: 3

Pres is preparing for the battle with Congress.

The White House budget director warned on Saturday that President Bush was prepared to veto a $500 billion spending package being assembled in Congress if Democrats pushed for too much additional money for domestic programs.

Jim Nussle, the director of the Office of Management and Budget, accused Democrats of trying to tie money for combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan to what the president considers excessive spending for federal agencies and home-state projects.

“Instead of trying to leverage troop-funding for more pork-barrel spending, Congress ought to pass responsible appropriations bills and the funding for the troops our commanders say they need to build on their battlefield success,” Mr. Nussle said.

LINK

**CHUQ** · Agitator Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts votes: 3

"Absent a Republican willingness to sit down and work out a reasonable compromise, I think we ought to end the game and go to the president's numbers," Obey said. "I was willing to listen to the argument that we ought to at least add more for Afghanistan, but when the White House refuses to compromise, when the White House continues to stick it in our eye, I say to hell with it."

House Democratic leaders were scheduled to complete work last night on a $520 billion spending bill that included $11 billion in funding for domestic programs above the president's request, half of what Democrats had initially approved. The bill would have also contained $30 billion for the war in Afghanistan, upon which the Senate would have added billions more for Iraq before final congressional approval.

LINK

**CHUQ** · Agitator Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts votes: 3

Go figure! The Dems cave to Pres.

House Democratic leaders yesterday agreed to meet President Bush's bottom-line spending limit on a sprawling, half-trillion-dollar domestic spending bill, dropping their demands for as much as $22 billion in additional spending but vowing to shift funds from the president's priorities to theirs.

The final legislation, still under negotiation, will be shorn of funding for the war in Iraq when it reaches the House floor, possibly on Friday. But Democratic leadership aides concede that the Senate will probably add those funds. A proposal to strip the bill of spending provisions for lawmakers' home districts was shelved after a bipartisan revolt, but Democrats say the number and size of those earmarks will be scaled back

LINK

**CHUQ** · Agitator Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts votes: 3

Merry Xmas, George you got you blood money.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Democratic-led Congress authorized more Iraq war spending on Friday, sending President George W. Bush a defense bill requiring no change in strategy after failing again to impose a timetable for U.S. troop withdrawals.

The defense policy bill, approved 90-3 by the U.S. Senate, also expanded the size of the U.S. Army and set conditions on the Bush administration's plan to build a missile defense system in Europe.

The measure already had passed the House of Representatives and now goes to Bush, who is expected to sign it into law. It authorizes Pentagon programs expected to cost $506.9 billion during fiscal 2008, which began in October.

LINK

**CHUQ** · Agitator Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts votes: 3

Famous battle crys of losers....wait til next year! Yeah, and your check is in the mail, too.

WASHINGTON - Congressional Democrats are planning to take on a broader policy focus next year on the Iraq debate after failing repeatedly to pass anti-war spending legislation this year, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Wednesday.

While Democrats still will try to restrict war spending, they'll explore alternative policy measures aimed at advancing troop withdrawals, drawing attention to larger regional issues, and improving the training and equipping of military units headed into combat. Examples include legislation that would require that the Bush administration submit a plan to end combat or demanding that troops be given enough rest in between combat tours.

LINK

**CHUQ** · Agitator Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts votes: 3

But wait...you assclown! You guys just did support it with no strings attached. People wake the f*ck up!

WASHINGTON, Dec. 19 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued the following statement today opposing a Senate amendment to the fiscal 2008 Consolidated Appropriations bill that provided additional funding for the war in Iraq:

"Our troops are spending their fifth Christmas season in Iraq. Under the President's plan, they can look forward to spending at least another decade there. The President contends that the presence of 30,000 additional U.S. troops over the past few months has improved security, but the Iraqi government has not used this opportunity to move aggressively toward national reconciliation.

LINK

**Tumbleweed** · Admin Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts votes: 4

Nothing will change until 2008. The only way out of Iraq is to pull the Rebublicans out of Washington first.