Democrats Fail to Support the Troops
Nov 20, 2007 Political
Too often the word is put out that the Democratic Party supports the troops and anyone who dares to question that is castigated by anyone associated with that group. People can’t really be blamed for the perception that the Democrats do not support the troops because they have a strange way of showing their support. In the past year they have voted on over 40 pieces of legislation designed to hurt the mission and to lose the war. They opposed the troop surge and now that the evidence is clear that the surge is providing benefits they claim it is not and that a decorated general is a liar. They have trumpeted the cry that we have lost the war and they wave the white flag in front of our enemies. This is what passes as support and how dare anyone question that. The same holds true with funding the war.
The Democrats have tried very hard to take money away from the troops who are in harm’s way. They haggle over cut and run strategies while those who are in harm’s way are denied the very items they need to survive. The Democrats have taken a beating from their fringe kooks who have chided them every time they voted for more money yet the Democrats are never voting to fund the troops. They are voting on a military package that they have loaded with pork because they realize this is the only way to push their unpopular agenda. They have added minimum wage increases and all kinds of other items that have nothing to do with the war to the spending bill because they know that the President will sign it as long as it does not have a time line for withdraw.
After taking a beating for the past year the Democrats are again playing politics with our troops. The president has asked for $196 billion to continue the war effort and the Democrats have responded by offering a $50 billion dollar package but only if it contains provisions for the withdrawal of our troops. They want to begin bringing them home by the end of December and have them completely out by the end of next year. This is a debate that has been rejected time and again so now the Democrats, fed up with the beating they are taking, have decided that they will not provide any money unless it includes a cut and run strategy. This is going to cause problems.
The Pentagon has announced that about 200,000 federal employees will be furloughed between now and February if the money is not authorized. The Secretary of Defense has reported that many military bases will operate with only enough people to provide protective services (fire, police, security) for the people living on those bases. The furlough notices will go out before Christmas and people will begin being told to stay home just after the first of the year. The troops will not have money or equipment and now they will not have the federal employees here to support them and their mission. This is nothing but pure politics and it comes at the cost of peoples paychecks which is always bad but even more so around this time of the year. Even more importantly, our troops will be placed in increased danger because of the politics of the Democratic Party, a party that does not have the guts to just cut off all funding for the war.
The Democrats have failed to pass any of the required budget items this year. They are months overdue and it does not look like they will be getting this accomplished any time soon. In addition to neglecting their Constitutional duties with regard to the budget, they have also neglected their Constitutional duty to provide for our war fighters.
So I have news for you Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and all you other left wing pukes. Don’t you dare tell me that you support the troops. Don’t you dare come out and act like you care about them and don’t you discuss how wonderful your party is with regard to them. You have abandoned them time and again and you have put their mission and their safety in jeopardy. If you ever say that you support the troops again someone should punch you right in the mouth.
I want the people in this country to remember that it is the Democrats who are screwing our troops. No matter who gets the nod in the primaries, none of them are fit to serve as Commander in Chief. The ones who are in Congress have voted to cut funding for the troops. They want to be the leaders of the greatest military in the world and yet they lack the guts to properly fund the people who make up that military and whose lives depend on Congress doing its damned job. This should be a wake up call to those who are sitting on the fence with regard to the next election. None of the Democrats are fit to serve. They are selling out our troops and are selling out our country. To hell with all of them. It is also important to remember that many of the ones who are not running for the presidency are up for reelection next year. It is time to send everyone of them packing.
Obviously, the Congress has to appropriate money for their own salaries and they need to send that to the President to be signed. The President should veto the appropriation for their pay until they get money to the troops without the strings attached. If the Congress votes to override the veto for their own pay it will send a clear message that they care about their own asses more than they care about our troops.
My challenge to the twits in Congress is simple. Either cut off all funding for the war completely right now or appropriate the money needed to properly fund them. You have the power to vote to end the authority for the war and to end the funding. Ask your older colleagues, they know how from their cut and run days during Vietnam. If you oppose the war have the testicular fortitude to cut off the funding and bring the troops home. Otherwise, let the President run the military and you fund it as the Constitution spells out. I realize you don’t want to be seen as weak on national security or not supportive of the troops but believe me, that ship has sailed.
Your party is weak on national security and none of you filthy slugs supports the troops. Perhaps instead of asking Hillary about what jewelry she prefers someone could ask this stinking wench why she does not support the troops.
And President Bush, let me show you how to deal with these jackasses. Tell them that you will veto every thing they send up until you get the money for the military and that there will be no money for anything including their staff and all federal employees will be furloughed, including Congress, if they don’t get their act together.
Source:
The Politico
Others with similar items:
Outside the Beltway, The Virtuous Republic, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, Perri Nelson’s Website, Rosemary’s Thoughts, The Random Yak, Right Truth, The Populist, Shadowscope, Leaning Straight Up, The Amboy Times, Chuck Adkins, Conservative Cat, Adeline and Hazel, Public Domain Clip Art, Allie is Wired, third world county, MyHTPC, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, The World According to Carl, Pirate’s Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Wake Up America, CommonSenseAmerica, CORSARI D’ITALIA, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Tags: Congress, Democrats, Hillary, kooks, Military, playing politics, President, support the troops, war, white flag, withdrawal
The Ron Paul Revolution
Nov 17, 2007 Political
I have to start off by saying that I like Ron Paul. I don’t know that I like him enough to vote for him for president yet but I like most of his positions. There is a Ron Paul Revolution that appears to be coming from the youth in America, those of college age who are most likely fed up with politics as usual in this country. The problem is, will there be enough of them to help him win? If the history of voting shows anything, it might not be an issue because the youth in America tend NOT to vote. That is why the mainstream politicians court the vote of the seasoned among us. The elderly vote in droves compared to the young however, Paul’s age might help him with the elderly vote. One other thing; is Paul the candidate that can beat any Democrat on the ticket?
Paul has great ideas about retuning this country to following the Constitution. His Congressional nickname is Dr. No because he votes no on any item that does not conform to the limits of the Constitution. As far as any of the candidates are concerned, his voting record is the only one that shows conformity to the Constitution.
Paul is for placing us back on the gold standard and for abolishing the IRS and he would repeal the income tax, all are not bad ideas. Placing us on the gold standard would not allow us just print money to handle inflation. Our country did well under the gold standard and it is time our money was backed by something of value. The backing of the words of politicians is not very strong. The tax system in this country is a sham and it allows government to take our money and redistribute it anywhere they so desire. Congress has shown that it does not know how to handle money and that it is fiscally irresponsible. The XVI Amendment, passed in 1913, is reported to have never been ratified by the required 3/4 of the states because Ohio was not “a state” due to an administrative error. Regardless of the arguments, the tax code has been in effect for nearly 100 years and the only way to do it right is to repeal it and start over.
The IRS is nothing more than the enforcement arm of the extortion racket the government runs. In the days of the mob, people were forced to join protection rackets. If they refused to pay some big guy named Bruno showed up and beat the hell out of them or their business mysteriously burned to the ground. The government extorts money from us and we cannot limit them when they do it. If they passed a law requiring everyone to pay 80% of income in taxes we could not stop it. If we refused to pay, the IRS (their Bruno) would come looking for us and make life miserable. Paul is on to something when he says that we should get rid of this stuff. I like his Constitutional approach. He is not like by the status quo because he says the things DC insiders do not like.
One thing that Ron Paul is adamant about is getting out of the UN. I agree 100% with him on that and believe that we should dissolve all treaties with regard to the UN and we should kick them out of our country. They are worthless and oppose us at every turn.
There are negatives though. Paul is in his 70s and that is a liability though he seems to be in good shape and is handling the rigor of a campaign well. It is still a concern though being young is not necessarily a guarantee one will not die while in office (JFK), it just means that they have a better chance.
There are also the fringe groups that support Paul. The Skinheads is probably the major one but I am sure there are others. I do not think for one minute that Ron Paul courts these people or that he agrees with their message but it is disconcerting that these kinds of folks would flock to his message. Regardless of how Paul feels, perception is reality to many people and many will perceive that he has their philosophies.
The other thing to think about is can Ron Paul beat any of the Democrats that are running? He certainly can garner votes from young people fed up with the system and he can garner votes from moderate conservatives who want the country run in accordance with the Constitution but there are a lot of liberals who are going to vote and they do not like this idea of limited government or repealing the income tax. Liberals are for big government and lots of tax money to spend on worthless programs. Since universal health care is not part of the Constitution, they will not like Paul’s positions because he would deny those things liberals believe to be entitlements.
While I agree with Paul on domestic issues, I am not in agreement with his foreign policy ideas. Regardless of what one believes about the war in Iraq, a complete withdrawal would result in disaster in Iraq as well as here at home. If we are perceived as weak then the radical Muslims will increase their attacks upon us. Clinton’s decisions not to attack them after they continually attacked us led to 9/11. Despite the rewritten history and the Berger stolen documents, it is undeniable that this is what happened. Bin Laden told us that he attacked us because of the weakness displayed by Clinton. If Ron Paul displays a similar weakness then we will be hit again.
If Ron Paul is unwilling to use our military then he should not be President. If, on the other hand, he has some idea as to how to use them to keep us from being attacked then I can listen to what he has to say. I realize that Paul believes we attacked illegally and that the money is being wasted and I know liberals would love to spend it on street corner abortion clinics or other such things. With regard to Paul, the money is worthless if we are attacked here at home and with regard to liberals, they will not get the money if Paul is President. However, if Paul agrees to withdraw all of the financial support we provide around the world and bring our troops home from all nations and put them on bases guarding our country from enemies (and ILLEGALS) then we might be on to something. This means ALL support but it also means that we would be abandoning our allies like Israel, unless Paul has some idea about a treaty with them to help protect them from the Muslim world. I doubt that would happen because Paul seems convinced that since we were able to stare down a Soviet Union with nukes that an Iran with nukes would pose little threat and should be of no concern. I am not sure that he understands that Ahmadinejad is not plating with a full deck and would launch on Israel. In that case I would have to throw back the Ron Paul supporter’s question; WWRPD?
I have not decided on a candidate as of yet. I am watching and listening to see who will do the best job for this country and who can beat the Democratic candidate. I will continue to watch Paul with the rest of them (I never discounted him like the media did) and will decide as we get closer to the election.
One thing is for sure, thoughtful comments and dialog will be beneficial to the process but Ron Paul spammers calling names does little to help the process.
Someone from the Revolution enlighten me and my readers.
Tags: conformity, Congress, constitution, Democrats, gold standard, illegals, income tax, Military, President, ron paul, sham, war
So Much for Democratic Fiscal Responsibility
Nov 15, 2007 Political
Citizens Against Government Waste is putting the finishing touches on its pork report for the year and what they will report is not pretty. There were 8000 earmarks totaling 20 billion dollars. That is 20 billion dollars in taxpayer money that was flushed down the drain by the Democratic Congress, the ones who promised to put an end to waste and be a more efficient government. The truth is they could not keep their money grubbing hands out of our pockets and they could not exercise any control. For those who say the government should tax the hell out of us to provide unconstitutional social programs, here is 20 billion dollars that could have provided services without raising taxes.
Of course, I do not believe in universal health care or other government run and government provided services but if I did I would be asking how we can afford this kind of waste and not the items that Democrats think are important. The Republican led Congress (and President Bush for that matter) was no better but they lost last year so this is on the new majority. The Democrats campaigned on their ability to fix these kinds of things and now it is glaringly obvious that they are unable. They lack control and they lack responsibility.
Democrats like to say we need to end the war because that is why they were elected. They campaigned on ending the war along with the promise to be responsible with our money so that means if ending the war was a mandate, so was being fiscally responsible. They have failed miserably on both counts.
I do not think the election was a mandate on the war but this is what they think. So they are not free to cherry pick what they were elected to do. They promised to be responsible with our money and they have not been. This is another reason we need the line item veto and it is a very good example of why we should never trust Democrats.
There should be no doubt that they are truly the tax and spend party.
Source:
The Politico
Others with similar items:
Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson’s Website, The Virtuous Republic, Rosemary’s Thoughts, The Random Yak, Right Truth, The Populist, The Pet Haven Blog, The Amboy Times, Leaning Straight Up, Cao’s Blog, Wake Up America, Conservative Cat, Nuke’s, Faultline USA, Pirate’s Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Dumb Ox Daily News, CORSARI D’ITALIA, High Desert Wanderer, Right Voices, and Gone Hollywood, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Tags: Congress, Democrats, government waste, line item veto, mandate, pork report, President, tax and spend, taxpayer money, universal health care, war
Hillary Finally Takes a Position
Nov 14, 2007 Immigration, Political
Hillary Clinton finally took a position on issuing driver’s licenses to ILLEGALS (she calls them undocumented) by declaring that she agrees with New York Governor Spitzer’s decision not to issue them. Hillary sort of supported his position when he was going to issue them, then said no, then say yes and left it at a maybe. Since Spitzer has finally decided the Hildabeast figured it was OK to take a stand. She also indicated that, as President, she will not issue driver’s licenses to ILLEGALS and that she will fix the immigration problem in America.
The President is not the person to fix these things. Congress is the body that is supposed to come up with bills that address these kinds of issues. After it is worked out it is sent to the President to be signed into law. The President can tell Congress how he wants things and they can work together but the biggest thing the President gets to do is sign it into law or veto it. Hillary Clinton will have little success with immigration if the Congress does not act. She had a better chance of doing something as part of the Senate and yet I can’t seem to find any bills she has authored to address the problem. The only thing she has done is criticize GOP efforts to toughen criminal laws regarding ILLEGALS and blame the Bush administration for a problem caused by Democrats long before he ever took office. In fact, Bush and Congress tried to ram amnesty down our throats and Hillary voted for that plan. She wants to give them licenses but not until she gives them amnesty. Hillary Clinton votes to help ILLEGALS.
I am sure this is not the last we have heard on this issue. If a poll comes out in a few weeks indicating that Hispanics are supporting another candidate and they cite this stance as the reason, Hillary will change faster than you can shake a stick.
Tags: amnesty, Congress, criminal laws, Democrats, governor spitzer, hildabeast, Hillary Clinton, Immigration, immigration problem, President, take a stand, veto
Even the Flags Hate Hillary
Nov 12, 2007 Political
Talk about a tough span, Hillary has gone through it in the last few weeks. There were her evasive debate answers, planted questions and the broken promise not to do it again with more planted questions. Hillary was on the news and said neither she nor her campaign condone such a thing and yet, it was her campaign that did it. Go figure…
Hillary was at an event yesterday and when she had finished she was turning to leave and an aide pulled open a curtain and all the Flags came crashing down. Hillary and staff tried to catch them before they hit the floor but there is no indication as to how successful they were. The link to the video is gone so I assume someone felt it was not newsworthy and took it down. [UPDATE: Breitbart has the video.] Looks like they handled it OK, considering.
Could this be an indication that veterans of yesteryear oppose Hillary and do not want her as President? Could this be a sign of disrespect from the Flags for all the disrespect she has shown to the military? Perhaps the Karma of her hippie days is coming back to haunt her. Regardless, I can see Hillary at her next speech:
You know, the Flags fell at my feet yesterday. Though they should fall at my feet because they hail me as the next leader of this country and they bow down to my greatness, I know that the real reason they fell is because the Bush administration is not providing support to our Flags. These Flags fell because their President failed to provide the support they need in tough times. He failed to give them a good base from which to wave.
As President, I will tax the rich to ensure Flag bases are weighted properly and I will make sure that no Flag ever has to fall again, except when bowing to my greatness. Within 100 days of taking office I will introduce legislation that is designed to ensure no Flag is ever left with a light base or is left behind a curtain to be knocked off a light base. I will call it the No Flag Left Behind Act (NFLB) and I will fund it from sales of US Flags from the Capitol and by taxing the rich and placing a tax on all the Flag lapel pins and buttons. You think people like Obama won’t wear Flags pins now? Just wait until I tax the damned things, then you will see pin less lapels, my friends. We can’t have people wearing Flags when they might fall over and have a Flag bowing when I am not around!
I remember when I was a little girl my daddy told me we were descendants of Betsy Ross and that my great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great Aunt Betsy sewed that Flag in hopes that one day a woman from the family would become President and have Flags bow down to her greatness. It is up to me to be that woman and it is up to you to vote for me because a vote for me is a vote for the Flag [screeched in that nails-on-chalkboard voice].
Yep, it sure has been a tough few weeks for the Hildabeast. And what fun it has been…
Source:
ABC News Blog
Tags: broken promise, flags, haunt, Hillary, hippie days, Military, Obama, President, tough times