No Pork For Us, No Money For Troops: Democratic Blackmail

Cross posted from Wake up America by request from Beth.

Pork is a nickname for earmarks and earmarks are spending items inserted by Congressmen and are usually specific to a Congressional district.

The other day we showed you that an omnibus bill that was being talked about by Steny Hoyer to Wapo, a bill that would lump the 11 appropriations bill that Congress is three months late in getting done, part of which is funding for our troops, all together into one massive bill, as well as adding 9,500 "earmarks" into the bill, totaling almost $9.5 billion dollars, which would have made the total around $522 billion for the omnibus.

We said it was the beginning of the end of the war funding fight.

Today, David Obey (D-Wis.), is whining to Wapo about those nasty Republicans not agreeing to all the pork and not allowing the Democrats to blackmail them with their ridiculous threats that our troops will not be funded if the Dems do not get their pork.

A Democratic deal to give President Bush some war funding in exchange for additional domestic spending appeared to collapse last night after House Appropriations Committee Chairman David R. Obey (D-Wis.) accused Republicans of bargaining in bad faith.

Instead, Obey said he will push a huge spending bill that would hew to the president's spending limit by stripping it of all lawmakers' pet projects, as well as most of the Bush administration's top priorities. It would also contain no money for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

"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.

But a stern veto threat this weekend from White House budget director Jim Nussle put the deal in jeopardy, and Obey said he is prepared for a long standoff with the White House.

"If anybody thinks we can get out of here this week, they're smoking something illegal," he said.

So, because his attempt to blackmail the Republicans and the President didn't work, he is going to take his toys and go home?

One of the best descriptions I have seen about this Wapo article quoting David Obey, is from Strata-Sphere who likens Obey and Co. to children throwing a temper tantrum, pouting and stomping their feet.

Only a seriously self-obsessed fool would threaten the lives of our military overseas to get his way on a budget deal. But the Dems are not capable of leading. They cannot stomach the compromise required to get bills past a divided Congress. They can’t give up anything - they would rather pout to the cameras and cripple our government.

House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.)has already made one thing very clear:

"We have to get to a point where the American public more clearly perceives our policy position and is not confused by whether or not the Democrats intend to support the troops that we've sent to Iraq. I don't think there's an option on that," Hoyer said.

He said that as he was testing the waters to see how the public as well as the politicians would react to this omnibus bill.

Evidently it isn't working out so well.

The problem for them, one they don't seem to "get" yet, is they cannot publicly hold our troops hostage to their pork aka earmarks.

Blackmail, especially when it is our troops that are threatened by the blackmail, is not going to come out well for them at all, in the eyes of the public.

The ramifications of Congress going on their Christmas recess without funding the troops is well known already, as has been told to the public by Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

All this leaves the department only with undesirable options to continue operations in the absence of a bridge fund. The path we believe is least undesirable fiscally and militarily would involve the following. The military would cease operations at all Army bases by mid-February next year. This would result in the furloughing of about 100,000 government employees and a like number of contractor employees at Army bases.

These layoffs would have a cascading effect on depots and procurements. Similar actions would follow for the Marine Corps about a month later. By law, we're required to notify certain union employees 60 days in advance, so appropriate notices would have to go out starting in mid-December.

By law, they are required to notify certain union employees 60 days in advance, which means that Congressional inability to do their jobs will have "pink slips" handed out for Christmas.

This 60 day notice law is not new, certain contracts have required it for years and Congress has been well aware of it.

Democratic politicians can make any statements to the press they want but it doesn't negate the fact that commanders have already been giving the following letters, sent on Nov. 26, 2007: (Doc. file here)

From: Cody, Richard A GEN VCSA
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 7:32 PM
To:

VCSA SENDS

TO ALL COMMANDS AND AGENCIES

SUBJECT: Contingency Budget Planning

REF A. SecDef Memo, 16 NOV 07, Subj: Contingency Budget Planning

REF B. SecArmy and CSA Memo, 20 NOV 07, Subj. Contingency Budget Planning

REF C. VCSA Email, 26 SEP 07, Subj. Outlook for Funding in FY 2008


1. The FY2008 DoD Appropriations Act did not provide funds for the Global
War on Terror (GWOT) and we do not know at this time when or if the GWOT
funds will be approved by Congress.

2. References A and B directed that we take immediate action to begin
planning to reduce operations at all Army bases. This message provides
instructions for developing these plans. Send your initial plans through
your RM channels. They are due on 4 DEC 2007. Your plans will be reviewed

by a G3-led task force here at HQDA.

3. This is a planning effort, repeat, a planning effort to reduce OMA
funded operations to the minimum mission essential level. Your initial
plans will identify the weekly cost to continue those OMA funded minimum
mission essential activities allowable under Feed and Forage after 23
February 08 and will include the amount of OMA funds available for return to
the Department when all other services and functions are discontinued.

Guidance in reference C stands; take no action at this time to slow any
program. Continue to execute your approved programs and do not implement
any spending restriction or reduction in the scope and pace of operations
until notified. Continue following existing guidance to review civilian
hiring actions and contracts.

4. Include these assumptions in your plans:

a. On or about 22 February 08, all distributed Operation and Maintenance,
Army (OMA) funds will be fully obligated or committed.

b. On 23 February 08, installations and commands will move to a "warm base"

status and all OMA funded activities will cease except those noted in
paragraph 4 below.

c. Civilian furloughs may last more than 30 days and therefore require a 60
day notice.

d. Military manpower, if available at your location, will be authorized to
replace civilian and contractor workforce. Military personnel other than
those preparing to deploy should be considered available.

e. Only direct funded OMA activities are affected. Programs, projects and
activities funded with other than OMA will continue as planned.

5. Your plans should identify the minimum mission essential activities
along with their estimated costs that are permissible by Feed and Forage (if
approved by OSD) and the impact of discontinuing all other services and
functions effective 23 February 08. For these planning purposes, consider
the following as minimum mission essential operations:

a. To protect the life, health and safety of occupants and residents of
Army installations.

b. To protect and maintain assets vital to the national defense.

6. Your plans should also provide a separate estimate of the weekly minimum
essential costs in order to determine what is permissible under Feed and
Forage:

a. Support forces deployed overseas including Europe, Korea, Japan and
COCOM activities.

b. Prepare forces for deployment to include recruiting, individual training
and unit training.

7. The ASA(FM&C) will provide a reporting format through RM channels. You
should be prepared to report the following information:

a. Life, Health and Safety. Those activities and services and their
estimated weekly cost that must be continued to protect occupants and
residents of Army installations to include military, civilians and Family
members.

b. Training. The amount of OMA funds by week necessary to support training
activities for deploying forces.

c. Quality of Life. Those activities and services for Soldiers and
Families that will be impacted and/or terminated once all existing OMA funds
are fully obligated or committed.

d. Depot Level Reset. To the maximum extent possible, plan to work off FY
07 carry over and new orders received from customers funded with other than
OMA appropriations. Identify the amount of OMA (both base and GWOT) by week
necessary to fund only the organic depot work required to keep production
lines operating and the total amount of OMA Reset funds available for
return.

e. Recruiting: Report the minimum weekly cost to continue to recruit the
force and train the load.

f. Mobilization and Demobilization: Provide the weekly cost to continue
mobilization and demobilization activities to support rotations into and out
of theaters of operation.

g. Field Level Maintenance: Plan to suspend all field level maintenance
except that necessary for life, health or safety or to support the war
fight. Provide the weekly cost for the latter.

8. In the report, you will be asked to break out the activities in
paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 into these categories:

a. Civilian Personnel. Identify the number of minimum mission essential
(Life, Health and Safety) and non-mission essential civilian personnel
funded through direct OMA appropriations. You should anticipate that the
Department will issue furlough notices to civilian employees with sufficient
lead time to implement a furlough on or about 23 February 08. For foreign
national personnel, provide the equivalent of furlough procedures under the
respective Status of Forces Agreement. Identify the weekly payroll cost of
mission essential civilian personnel. Furlough dates will be provided for
US Civilian personnel by G1.

b. Contracts. Identify the total amount of OMA funds needed for minimum
mission essential contracts. Also identify the amounts that can be returned
to the Department when all other services and functions are terminated or
suspended on or about 23 February 08. Factor in termination costs before
reporting the amount available for return.

9. DoD is considering the use of other authorities, Feed and Forage for
example, to continue essential operations as directed. The ASA(FM&C) will
issue instructions on these special funding authorities. The G1 will
provide additional guidance on civilian furloughs.

10. POCs are:

The DoD, December 4, 2007:

Some members of Congress have responded by saying the Pentagon has funds to continue operations through March, but a Pentagon spokesman today said furlough notices for Army employees could start going out the middle of this month. The employees would not be furloughed until after Christmas, but some contracts require a 60-day notice if the furlough will be longer than 60 days, Defense Department spokesman Bryan Whitman told reporters at the Pentagon. The department is using fiscal 2008 funds – not part of the supplemental funding needed – to keep operations going in the war on terror, he explained.

“Anyone who thinks that this is not a serious situation is simply misinformed or is ignoring the facts. We have tried to be as matter of fact as we can on this, but the reality is that we are using our program budget for FY 08 … to fund our operations in Iraq and Afghanistan,” Whitman said.

DoD is using its readiness funding, or operations and maintenance accounts, which typically pay for training, supplies, and maintenance of weapons and equipment.

Earlier this month, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates requested to shift $3.7 billion from Navy and Air Force payrolls and an $800 million excess in the working capital fund to Army and Marine Corps operations.

If funding continues to be delayed, it could affect as many as 200,000 civilian employees and contractors, DoD officials reported earlier.

They go on to report some of the actions that will have to be taken, but you can see a visual of most of them for yourself, right here.

From Federal Times, just today we see this reported:

The last thing anyone wants for Christmas is a furlough notice. But that’s just what hundreds of thousands of Defense Department civilian employees and contractors are facing.

The Defense Department is warning it may lay off employees, mostly in the Army and Marine Corps, because it will run out of money unless Congress and President Bush agree on an emergency war supplemental spending bill. The Army expects to run out of operations and maintenance funding by Feb. 23, the Marine Corps, by March 24.
As many as 200,000 Army civilian contractors and employees could be furloughed then; the Marine Corps says up to 24,000 civilian employees are threatened. The Army expects to send 60-day advance notices to affected employees the week of Dec. 17, and the Marine Corps said it must notify union leaders about planned furloughs by Christmas Eve.

“Neither contractors nor civil servants should be pawns in this process, but that’s the result of a political appropriations process,” said Alan Chvotkin, vice president of the Professional Services Council, which represents contractors.

Nice lump of coal Congress plans on sticking in those folks stockings huh?

Congressional leaders need to understand, if they do not do their job and get these funds to our troops and these layoff aka furlough notices go out, then Congress will suffer the consequences of their inaction.

If they think they have the lowest Congressional approval ratings in the history of polling for congressional approval, now.... just wait and see how much worse it gets for them.

.

Sphere: Related Content

Congress' Pork Spending Spelled Out so Easy a Democrat Could Understand It!

Swiped from Spree (with permission) at Wake Up America! who Cross Posted from an email she received and thanks to Norm for the email reminder about the Club for Growth email.

The Club for Growth keeps track of the Pork and our Congressional numbers on who votes for pork and who votes against it.

The numbers speak for themselves.

As an Arizona citizen, I will highlight our "larders", er, um, "leaders".

Club for Growth Releases 2007 RePORK Card

Washington - Even though the Democratic majority vowed to return Congress to a path of fiscal responsibility, the 2008 appropriations bills were stuffed with wasteful pork projects. While Representatives John Campbell, Jeff Flake, Jeb Hensarling, Scott Garrett, and David Obey (1 amendment) offered 50 amendments to strip outrageous pork projects from the appropriations bills, only one amendment, offered by Rep. Jeff Flake, passed.

The Club for Growth has compiled a RePORK Card of all members' votes on all 50 anti-pork amendments (see below). "Taxpayers have a right to know which congressmen stand up for them and which stand up for the special interests," said Club for Growth President Pat Toomey. "Unfortunately, the Club for Growth RePORK Card shows that most congressmen care more about lining their buddies' pockets than they care about protecting American taxpayers."

Some interesting numbers to consider:

• Sixteen congressmen scored a perfect 100%, voting for all 50 anti-pork amendments. They are all Republicans.
• The average Republican score was 43%. The average Democratic score was 2%.
• The average score for appropriators was 4%. The average score for non-appropriators was 25%.
• Kudos to Rep. Jim Cooper (D-TN) who scored an admirable 98%-the only Democrat to score above 20%.
• Rep. David Obey (D-WI) did not vote for his own amendment to strike all earmarks in the Labor-HHS appropriations bill. Rep. Obey scored an embarrassing 0% overall.
• 105 congressmen scored an embarrassing 0%, voting against every single amendment. The Pork Hall of Shame includes 81 Democrats and 24 Republicans.
• The Democratic Freshmen scored an abysmal average score of 2%. Their Republican counterparts scored an average score of 78%.

Some of the targeted pork projects this year include:

• $2 million for a "Paint Shield for Protecting People from Microbial Threats," requested by Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones (D-OH-11). Rep. John Campbell challenged Murtha to demonstrate that the $2 million earmark would be effective and that it had been put up for a competitive bid. Murtha could not. Amendment failed, 91-317.
• $1 million to the Center for Instrumented Critical Infrastructure in Johnstown, Pennsylvania, requested by Rep. John Murtha (D-PA). No congressional member could confirm the existence of the alleged Center. Amendment failed, 98-326.
• $2 million to establish the "Rangel Center for Public Service" at City College of New York, requested by none other than Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY). Amendment failed, 108-316.
• $34 million for the Alaska Native Education Equity program, requested by Rep. Don Young (R-AK). When Scott Garrett challenged Young's earmark, Rep. Young declared, "You want my money, my money!" Amendment failed, 74-352.
• $50,000 for the National Mule and Packers Museum in California, requested by Rep. Buck McKeon (R-CA). Amendment failed, 69-352.
• $100,000 for renovation of the Fire Fighters Hall in Columbus, Ohio, requested by Rep. Deborah Pryce (R-OH). Amendment failed, 66-364.
• $100,000 for the renovation of St. Joseph College's theatre in Indiana, requested by Rep. Pete Visclosky (D-IN). Amendment failed, 97-328.

---

These scores reflect the percentage of YES votes on 50 anti-pork amendments, which are itemized at the bottom of the page. Four House members were not included on this scorecard:

1. Jo Ann Davis (R-VA-01) - recovering from surgery and thus did not vote
2. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA-08) - the Speaker of the House typically does not vote
3. Charles Norwood (R-GA-10) - passed away on Feb. 13, 2007
4. Juanita Millender-McDonald (D-CA-37) - passed away on Apr. 22, 2007

Full Name	Score	Ratio
Flake (R-AZ-6)	100%	50 / 50
Campbell (R-CA-48)	100%	50 / 50
Hensarling (R-TX-5)	100%	50 / 50
Broun (R-GA-10)	100%	12 / 12
Deal (R-GA-9)	100%	50 / 50
Franks, T. (R-AZ-2)	100%	50 / 50
Garrett (R-NJ-5)	100%	48 / 48
Heller (R-NV-2)	100%	50 / 50
Kline, J. (R-MN-2)	100%	50 / 50
Lamborn (R-CO-5)	100%	49 / 49
Pence (R-IN-6)	100%	44 / 44
Ryan, P. (R-WI-1)	100%	50 / 50
Sensenbrenner (R-WI-5)	100%	50 / 50
Shadegg (R-AZ-3)	100%	50 / 50
Thornberry (R-TX-13)	100%	50 / 50
Westmoreland (R-GA-3)	100%	50 / 50
Cooper (D-TN-5)	98%	49 / 50
Feeney (R-FL-24)	98%	48 / 49
Jindal (R-LA-1)	98%	42 / 43
Jordan (R-OH-4)	98%	47 / 48
Miller, J. (R-FL-1)	98%	49 / 50
Price, T. (R-GA-6)	98%	49 / 50
Bachmann (R-MN-6)	96%	48 / 50
Cannon (R-UT-3)	96%	48 / 50
Chabot (R-OH-1)	96%	48 / 50
Linder (R-GA-7)	96%	48 / 50
Myrick (R-NC-9)	96%	43 / 45
Akin (R-MO-2)	94%	47 / 50
Blackburn (R-TN-7)	94%	46 / 49
Musgrave (R-CO-4)	94%	45 / 48
Petri (R-WI-6)	94%	47 / 50
Sali (R-ID-1)	94%	47 / 50
Sessions, P. (R-TX-32)	94%	31 / 33
Sullivan (R-OK-1)	94%	44 / 47
Conaway (R-TX-11)	92%	46 / 50
Pitts (R-PA-16)	92%	46 / 50
Royce (R-CA-40)	92%	46 / 50
Terry (R-NE-2)	92%	46 / 50
Davis, David (R-TN-1)	91%	43 / 47
King, S. (R-IA-5)	91%	43 / 47
Barrett (R-SC-3)	90%	45 / 50
Inglis (R-SC-4)	90%	45 / 50
Mack (R-FL-14)	90%	45 / 50
Duncan (R-TN-2)	88%	44 / 50
Coble (R-NC-6)	87%	39 / 45
Issa (R-CA-49)	86%	43 / 50
Neugebauer (R-TX-19)	86%	43 / 50
Rohrabacher (R-CA-46)	86%	43 / 50
Walberg (R-MI-7)	86%	43 / 50
Wilson, J. (R-SC-2)	86%	43 / 50
Ramstad (R-MN-3)	84%	42 / 50
Smith, Adrian (R-NE-3)	84%	42 / 50
Stearns (R-FL-6)	84%	42 / 50
Tancredo (R-CO-6)	84%	21 / 25
Cantor (R-VA-7)	82%	40 / 49
Pearce (R-NM-2)	82%	41 / 50
Poe (R-TX-2)	82%	41 / 50
Fossella (R-NY-13)	81%	39 / 48
Bilbray (R-CA-50)	78%	38 / 49
Burton (R-IN-5)	78%	39 / 50
Graves (R-MO-6)	76%	38 / 50
Roskam (R-IL-6)	76%	38 / 50
Shimkus (R-IL-19)	76%	37 / 49
Gingrey (R-GA-11)	74%	37 / 50
Lungren (R-CA-3)	74%	37 / 50
Schmidt (R-OH-2)	74%	37 / 50
Johnson, S. (R-TX-3)	72%	28 / 39
Bishop, R. (R-UT-1)	71%	30 / 42
Burgess (R-TX-26)	71%	34 / 48
McHenry (R-NC-10)	71%	35 / 49
Nunes (R-CA-21)	69%	34 / 49
Hastert (R-IL-14)	68%	26 / 38
Keller (R-FL-8)	68%	34 / 50
McCarthy, K. (R-CA-22)	66%	33 / 50
Barton (R-TX-6)	64%	32 / 50
McCaul (R-TX-10)	62%	31 / 50
Marchant (R-TX-24)	61%	30 / 49
Boehner (R-OH-8)	60%	29 / 48
Buyer (R-IN-4)	60%	30 / 50
Platts (R-PA-19)	58%	29 / 50
Gohmert (R-TX-1)	56%	28 / 50
Mica (R-FL-7)	56%	28 / 50
Souder (R-IN-3)	55%	27 / 49
Putnam (R-FL-12)	54%	27 / 50
Rogers, Mike (R-MI-8)	54%	27 / 50
Buchanan (R-FL-13)	52%	26 / 50
Kingston (R-GA-1)	52%	26 / 50
Radanovich (R-CA-19)	52%	25 / 48
Biggert (R-IL-13)	50%	25 / 50
Herger (R-CA-2)	47%	22 / 47
Brown-Waite, G. (R-FL-5)	46%	23 / 50
Ehlers (R-MI-3)	45%	22 / 49
Camp (R-MI-4)	44%	22 / 50
Johnson, Timothy (R-IL-15)	44%	22 / 50
Foxx (R-NC-5)	43%	21 / 49
Upton (R-MI-6)	42%	21 / 50
Castle (R-DE-AL )	40%	20 / 50
Brady, K. (R-TX-8)	38%	18 / 47
Carter (R-TX-31)	38%	18 / 48
Fortenberry (R-NE-1)	38%	19 / 50
Tiberi (R-OH-12)	38%	19 / 50
Goodlatte (R-VA-6)	36%	18 / 50
Dreier (R-CA-26)	34%	17 / 50
Hall, R. (R-TX-4)	32%	16 / 50
Weldon (R-FL-15)	30%	15 / 50
Paul (R-TX-14)	29%	12 / 41
Davis, T. (R-VA-11)	28%	14 / 50
Bartlett (R-MD-6)	27%	13 / 49
Bilirakis (R-FL-9)	26%	13 / 50
Fallin (R-OK-5)	26%	13 / 50
Gallegly (R-CA-24)	26%	13 / 50
Hunter (R-CA-52)	26%	11 / 42
Walden (R-OR-2)	26%	13 / 50
Miller, Gary (R-CA-42)	24%	12 / 50
Shuster (R-PA-9)	24%	12 / 49
Blunt (R-MO-7)	22%	11 / 49
Hastings, D. (R-WA-4)	22%	11 / 50
Hulshof (R-MO-9)	22%	11 / 50
Granger (R-TX-12)	21%	10 / 48
Barrow (D-GA-12)	20%	10 / 50
Hoekstra (R-MI-2)	20%	10 / 49
Marshall (D-GA-8)	20%	8 / 41
Forbes (R-VA-4)	19%	8 / 43
Kirk (R-IL-10)	19%	9 / 48
Jones, W. (R-NC-3)	18%	9 / 50
Gerlach (R-PA-6)	16%	8 / 50
Smith, L. (R-TX-21)	16%	8 / 50
Bono (R-CA-45)	15%	7 / 48
Miller, C. (R-MI-10)	14%	7 / 50
Davis, G. (R-KY-4)	12%	4 / 34
Dent (R-PA-15)	12%	6 / 50
Diaz-Balart, M. (R-FL-25)	12%	6 / 50
Wamp (R-TN-3)	12%	6 / 50
Goode (R-VA-5)	11%	5 / 45
Cubin (R-WY-AL )	10%	4 / 39
Culberson (R-TX-7)	10%	5 / 50
Matheson (D-UT-2)	10%	5 / 50
Porter (R-NV-3)	10%	5 / 50
Wilson, H. (R-NM-1)	10%	5 / 50
Bean (D-IL-8)	8%	4 / 50
Boozman (R-AR-3)	8%	4 / 50
Brown, H. (R-SC-1)	8%	4 / 50
Cole (R-OK-4)	8%	4 / 50
Gillmor (R-OH-5)	8%	4 / 50
Manzullo (R-IL-16)	8%	4 / 50
Murphy, P. (D-PA-8)	8%	4 / 49
Taylor (D-MS-4)	8%	4 / 50
Bachus, S. (R-AL-6)	7%	3 / 42
Delahunt (D-MA-10)	7%	3 / 45
Blumenauer (D-OR-3)	6%	3 / 50
Carney (D-PA-10)	6%	3 / 50
Frank, B. (D-MA-4)	6%	3 / 50
Hill (D-IN-9)	6%	3 / 49
Hobson (R-OH-7)	6%	3 / 50
LaTourette (R-OH-14)	6%	3 / 50
Lucas (R-OK-3)	6%	3 / 50
Meehan (D-MA-5)	6%	1 / 16
Rodgers, (R-WA-5)	6%	3 / 50
Shays (R-CT-4)	6%	3 / 50
Young, C.W. (R-FL-10)	6%	3 / 50
Young, D. (R-AK-AL )	6%	2 / 31
Crenshaw (R-FL-4)	5%	2 / 40
Costa (D-CA-20)	4%	2 / 50
Davis, L. (D-TN-4)	4%	2 / 50
DeFazio (D-OR-4)	4%	2 / 49
Doggett (D-TX-25)	4%	2 / 49
Drake (R-VA-2)	4%	2 / 50
Eshoo (D-CA-14)	4%	2 / 50
Everett (R-AL-2)	4%	2 / 50
Gordon (D-TN-6)	4%	2 / 50
Gutierrez (D-IL-4)	4%	2 / 49
Kanjorski (D-PA-11)	4%	2 / 50
Latham (R-IA-4)	4%	2 / 50
Lewis, R. (R-KY-2)	4%	2 / 50
LoBiondo (R-NJ-2)	4%	2 / 50
Lofgren (D-CA-16)	4%	2 / 50
Mahoney (D-FL-16)	4%	2 / 50
McKeon (R-CA-25)	4%	2 / 50
Moran, Jerry (R-KS-1)	4%	2 / 50
Pryce, D. (R-OH-15)	4%	2 / 50
Reichert (R-WA-8)	4%	2 / 50
Reynolds (R-NY-26)	4%	2 / 49
Saxton (R-NJ-3)	4%	2 / 45
Simpson (R-ID-2)	4%	2 / 50
Smith, C. (R-NJ-4)	4%	2 / 50
Space (D-OH-18)	4%	2 / 50
Waxman (D-CA-30)	4%	2 / 50
Weller (R-IL-11)	4%	2 / 49
Wexler (D-FL-19)	4%	2 / 50
Whitfield (R-KY-1)	4%	2 / 50
Wolf (R-VA-10)	4%	2 / 50
Woolsey (D-CA-6)	4%	2 / 49
Wu (D-OR-1)	4%	2 / 50
Brown, C. (D-FL-3)	3%	1 / 35
Clarke (D-NY-11)	3%	1 / 31
Stark (D-CA-13)	3%	1 / 38
Ackerman (D-NY-5)	2%	1 / 49
Allen (D-ME-1)	2%	1 / 50
Baird (D-WA-3)	2%	1 / 48
Berkley (D-NV-1)	2%	1 / 50
Berman (D-CA-28)	2%	1 / 50
Berry (D-AR-1)	2%	1 / 50
Bishop, S. (D-GA-2)	2%	1 / 48
Bonner (R-AL-1)	2%	1 / 50
Boren (D-OK-2)	2%	1 / 50
Boswell (D-IA-3)	2%	1 / 49
Boyd, A. (D-FL-2)	2%	1 / 50
Brady, R. (D-PA-1)	2%	1 / 50
Braley (D-IA-1)	2%	1 / 49
Capps (D-CA-23)	2%	1 / 50
Cardoza (D-CA-18)	2%	1 / 50
Carnahan (D-MO-3)	2%	1 / 49
Castor (D-FL-11)	2%	1 / 48
Chandler (D-KY-6)	2%	1 / 50
Clay (D-MO-1)	2%	1 / 45
Cleaver (D-MO-5)	2%	1 / 50
Clyburn (D-SC-6)	2%	1 / 50
Cohen (D-TN-9)	2%	1 / 50
Courtney (D-CT-2)	2%	1 / 50
Crowley (D-NY-7)	2%	1 / 49
Cuellar (D-TX-28)	2%	1 / 49
Cummings (D-MD-7)	2%	1 / 50
Davis, A. (D-AL-7)	2%	1 / 50
Davis, Danny (D-IL-7)	2%	1 / 50
Davis, S. (D-CA-53)	2%	1 / 50
DeGette (D-CO-1)	2%	1 / 50
Dicks (D-WA-6)	2%	1 / 49
Dingell (D-MI-15)	2%	1 / 50
Doolittle (R-CA-4)	2%	1 / 50
Doyle (D-PA-14)	2%	1 / 50
Ellison (D-MN-5)	2%	1 / 50
Emanuel (D-IL-5)	2%	1 / 50
Engel (D-NY-17)	2%	1 / 50
English (R-PA-3)	2%	1 / 50
Farr (D-CA-17)	2%	1 / 50
Fattah (D-PA-2)	2%	1 / 50
Ferguson (R-NJ-7)	2%	1 / 50
Filner (D-CA-51)	2%	1 / 48
Giffords (D-AZ-8)	2%	1 / 49
Gillibrand (D-NY-20)	2%	1 / 50
Green, A. (D-TX-9)	2%	1 / 50
Hare (D-IL-17)	2%	1 / 50
Harman (D-CA-36)	2%	1 / 48
Hayes (R-NC-8)	2%	1 / 45
Herseth-Sandlin (D-SD-AL )	2%	1 / 50
Higgins (D-NY-27)	2%	1 / 45
Holden (D-PA-17)	2%	1 / 50
Honda (D-CA-15)	2%	1 / 43
Hooley (D-OR-5)	2%	1 / 50
Hoyer (D-MD-5)	2%	1 / 45
Jackson-Lee, S. (D-TX-18)	2%	1 / 50
Jefferson (D-LA-2)	2%	1 / 50
Johnson, E. (D-TX-30)	2%	1 / 50
Johnson, H. (D-GA-4)	2%	1 / 48
Jones, S. (D-OH-11)	2%	1 / 44
Kilpatrick (D-MI-13)	2%	1 / 45
Kind (D-WI-3)	2%	1 / 50
King, P. (R-NY-3)	2%	1 / 50
Klein, R. (D-FL-22)	2%	1 / 45
Langevin (D-RI-2)	2%	1 / 50
Lantos (D-CA-12)	2%	1 / 45
Larsen, R. (D-WA-2)	2%	1 / 50
Larson, J. (D-CT-1)	2%	1 / 50
Lee (D-CA-9)	2%	1 / 49
Lewis, John (D-GA-5)	2%	1 / 50
Loebsack (D-IA-2)	2%	1 / 50
Lowey (D-NY-18)	2%	1 / 50
Lynch (D-MA-9)	2%	1 / 50
Maloney (D-NY-14)	2%	1 / 50
Markey (D-MA-7)	2%	1 / 50
Matsui (D-CA-5)	2%	1 / 50
McCarthy, C. (D-NY-4)	2%	1 / 50
McCotter (R-MI-11)	2%	1 / 50
McCrery (R-LA-4)	2%	1 / 49
McDermott (D-WA-7)	2%	1 / 49
McGovern (D-MA-3)	2%	1 / 50
McHugh (R-NY-23)	2%	1 / 50
McNerney (D-CA-11)	2%	1 / 50
Meek, K. (D-FL-17)	2%	1 / 48
Meeks, G. (D-NY-6)	2%	1 / 50
Melancon (D-LA-3)	2%	1 / 50
Miller, B. (D-NC-13)	2%	1 / 50
Miller, George (D-CA-7)	2%	1 / 48
Mitchell (D-AZ-5)	2%	1 / 50
Moore, D. (D-KS-3)	2%	1 / 50
Moore, G. (D-WI-4)	2%	1 / 49
Moran, James (D-VA-8)	2%	1 / 49
Nadler (D-NY-8)	2%	1 / 48
Neal (D-MA-2)	2%	1 / 49
Oberstar (D-MN-8)	2%	1 / 50
Perlmutter (D-CO-7)	2%	1 / 50
Pickering (R-MS-3)	2%	1 / 48
Pomeroy (D-ND-AL )	2%	1 / 50
Rahall (D-WV-3)	2%	1 / 50
Rodriguez (D-TX-23)	2%	1 / 50
Ross (D-AR-4)	2%	1 / 50
Rothman (D-NJ-9)	2%	1 / 50
Rush (D-IL-1)	2%	1 / 49
Salazar, J. (D-CO-3)	2%	1 / 50
Sanchez, Linda (D-CA-39)	2%	1 / 50
Sanchez, Loretta (D-CA-47)	2%	1 / 50
Schakowsky (D-IL-9)	2%	1 / 50
Schiff (D-CA-29)	2%	1 / 50
Schwartz (D-PA-13)	2%	1 / 50
Scott, D. (D-GA-13)	2%	1 / 50
Scott, R. (D-VA-3)	2%	1 / 50
Sestak (D-PA-7)	2%	1 / 50
Shea-Porter (D-NH-1)	2%	1 / 50
Sires (D-NJ-13)	2%	1 / 50
Skelton (D-MO-4)	2%	1 / 45
Slaughter (D-NY-28)	2%	1 / 50
Smith, Adam (D-WA-9)	2%	1 / 50
Solis (D-CA-32)	2%	1 / 49
Spratt (D-SC-5)	2%	1 / 50
Stupak (D-MI-1)	2%	1 / 50
Sutton (D-OH-13)	2%	1 / 50
Tanner (D-TN-8)	2%	1 / 50
Tauscher (D-CA-10)	2%	1 / 50
Thompson, M. (D-CA-1)	2%	1 / 50
Tierney (D-MA-6)	2%	1 / 49
Turner (R-OH-3)	2%	1 / 50
Udall, M. (D-CO-2)	2%	1 / 50
Waters (D-CA-35)	2%	1 / 48
Weiner (D-NY-9)	2%	1 / 50
Wicker (R-MS-1)	2%	1 / 50
Wynn (D-MD-4)	2%	1 / 50
Yarmuth (D-KY-3)	2%	1 / 50
Abercrombie (D-HI-1)	0%	0 / 41
Aderholt (R-AL-4)	0%	0 / 50
Alexander, R. (R-LA-5)	0%	0 / 50
Altmire (D-PA-4)	0%	0 / 50
Andrews (D-NJ-1)	0%	0 / 50
Arcuri (D-NY-24)	0%	0 / 50
Baca (D-CA-43)	0%	0 / 50
Baker (R-LA-6)	0%	0 / 50
Baldwin (D-WI-2)	0%	0 / 50
Becerra (D-CA-31)	0%	0 / 45
Bishop, T. (D-NY-1)	0%	0 / 50
Boucher (D-VA-9)	0%	0 / 50
Boustany (R-LA-7)	0%	0 / 50
Boyda, N. (D-KS-2)	0%	0 / 50
Butterfield (D-NC-1)	0%	0 / 50
Calvert (R-CA-44)	0%	0 / 50
Capito (R-WV-2)	0%	0 / 50
Capuano (D-MA-8)	0%	0 / 49
Carson (D-IN-7)	0%	0 / 50
Conyers (D-MI-14)	0%	0 / 46
Costello (D-IL-12)	0%	0 / 49
Cramer (D-AL-5)	0%	0 / 49
DeLauro (D-CT-3)	0%	0 / 50
Diaz-Balart, L. (R-FL-21)	0%	0 / 50
Donnelly (D-IN-2)	0%	0 / 49
Edwards (D-TX-17)	0%	0 / 50
Ellsworth (D-IN-8)	0%	0 / 50
Emerson (R-MO-8)	0%	0 / 49
Etheridge (D-NC-2)	0%	0 / 50
Frelinghuysen (R-NJ-11)	0%	0 / 50
Gilchrest (R-MD-1)	0%	0 / 46
Gonzalez (D-TX-20)	0%	0 / 49
Green, G. (D-TX-29)	0%	0 / 50
Grijalva (D-AZ-7)	0%	0 / 50
Hall, J. (D-NY-19)	0%	0 / 50
Hastings, A. (D-FL-23)	0%	0 / 50
Hinchey (D-NY-22)	0%	0 / 50
Hinojosa (D-TX-15)	0%	0 / 39
Hirono (D-HI-2)	0%	0 / 49
Hodes (D-NH-2)	0%	0 / 50
Holt (D-NJ-12)	0%	0 / 50
Inslee (D-WA-1)	0%	0 / 50
Israel (D-NY-2)	0%	0 / 50
Jackson, J. (D-IL-2)	0%	0 / 50
Kagen (D-WI-8)	0%	0 / 49
Kaptur (D-OH-9)	0%	0 / 49
Kennedy, P. (D-RI-1)	0%	0 / 49
Kildee (D-MI-5)	0%	0 / 50
Knollenberg (R-MI-9)	0%	0 / 50
Kucinich (D-OH-10)	0%	0 / 44
Kuhl (R-NY-29)	0%	0 / 50
LaHood (R-IL-18)	0%	0 / 34
Lampson (D-TX-22)	0%	0 / 50
Levin, S. (D-MI-12)	0%	0 / 49
Lewis, Jerry (R-CA-41)	0%	0 / 49
Lipinski (D-IL-3)	0%	0 / 50
McCollum (D-MN-4)	0%	0 / 49
McIntyre (D-NC-7)	0%	0 / 50
McNulty (D-NY-21)	0%	0 / 43
Michaud (D-ME-2)	0%	0 / 48
Mollohan (D-WV-1)	0%	0 / 50
Murphy, C. (D-CT-5)	0%	0 / 49
Murphy, T. (R-PA-18)	0%	0 / 50
Murtha (D-PA-12)	0%	0 / 49
Napolitano (D-CA-38)	0%	0 / 48
Obey (D-WI-7)	0%	0 / 48
Olver (D-MA-1)	0%	0 / 50
Ortiz (D-TX-27)	0%	0 / 34
Pallone (D-NJ-6)	0%	0 / 50
Pascrell (D-NJ-8)	0%	0 / 50
Pastor (D-AZ-4)	0%	0 / 50
Payne (D-NJ-10)	0%	0 / 46
Peterson, C. (D-MN-7)	0%	0 / 50
Peterson, J. (R-PA-5)	0%	0 / 49
Price, D. (D-NC-4)	0%	0 / 50
Rangel (D-NY-15)	0%	0 / 50
Regula (R-OH-16)	0%	0 / 50
Rehberg (R-MT-AL )	0%	0 / 50
Renzi (R-AZ-1)	0%	0 / 50
Reyes (D-TX-16)	0%	0 / 49
Rogers, H. (R-KY-5)	0%	0 / 50
Rogers, Mike D. (R-AL-3)	0%	0 / 50
Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL-18)	0%	0 / 50
Roybal-Allard (D-CA-34)	0%	0 / 50
Ruppersberger (D-MD-2)	0%	0 / 49
Ryan, T. (D-OH-17)	0%	0 / 50
Sarbanes (D-MD-3)	0%	0 / 50
Serrano (D-NY-16)	0%	0 / 50
Sherman (D-CA-27)	0%	0 / 50
Shuler (D-NC-11)	0%	0 / 50
Snyder (D-AR-2)	0%	0 / 50
Thompson, B. (D-MS-2)	0%	0 / 50
Tiahrt (R-KS-4)	0%	0 / 50
Towns (D-NY-10)	0%	0 / 50
Udall, T. (D-NM-3)	0%	0 / 50
Van Hollen (D-MD-8)	0%	0 / 50
Velazquez (D-NY-12)	0%	0 / 50
Visclosky (D-IN-1)	0%	0 / 49
Walsh (R-NY-25)	0%	0 / 50
Walz (D-MN-1)	0%	0 / 50
Wasserman-Schultz (D-FL-20)	0%	0 / 50
Watson (D-CA-33)	0%	0 / 50
Watt (D-NC-12)	0%	0 / 50
Welch (D-VT-AL )	0%	0 / 49
Wilson, C. (D-OH-6)	0%	0 / 50

Note: In each case where the Amendment failed, this means that the spending PASSED. The Amendment was to prevent the spending. So look down the list and you can see how YOUR DEMOCRATIC run Congress has reneged on their pledge to CLEAN UP CONGRESS

House Vote 559 - Bars funding of $150,000 for the Clover Bend Historic Site in Arkansas. Amendment failed, 98-331.

House Vote 560 - Bars funding of $100,000 for the St. Joseph's College Theatre Renovation in Indiana. Amendment failed, 97-328.

House Vote 561 - Bars funding of $150,000 for the Maverick Concert Hall preservation in New York. Amendment failed, 114-316.

House Vote 562 - Bars funding of $150,000 for the Bremerton Public Library restoration in Washington. Amendment failed, 98-333.

House Vote 565 - Bars funding of $140,000 for the Wetzel County Courthouse in West Virginia. Amendment failed, 104-323.

House Vote 566 - Bars funding of $150,000 for equipment for the Conte Anadromous Fish Laboratory. Amendment failed, 97-330.

House Vote 567 - Bars funding of $150,000 for the W.A. Young and Sons Foundry in Pennsylvania. Amendment failed, 104-328.

House Vote 568 - Bars funding of $100,000 for the Ohio Association of Professional Firefighters to renovate a hall in Ohio. Amendment failed, 66-364.

House Vote 569 - Bars funding of $1,200,000 for projects related to the Southwestern Pennsylvania Heritage Route. Amendment failed, 86-343.

House Vote 590 - Bars funding of $231,000 for the Grace Johnstown Area Regional Industries Incubator and Workforce Development program in Pennsylvania. Amendment failed, 87-335.

House Vote 591 - Bars funding of $500,000 for a project in the Barracks Row area of Washington, D.C. Amendment failed, 60-361.

House Vote 592 - Bars funding of $231,000 for the San Francisco Planning and Urban Research Association's SPUR urban center. Amendment failed, 102-317.

House Vote 593 - Bars funding of $129,000 for the Mitchell County Development Foundation for the home of the "perfect Christmas tree" project. Amendment passed, 249-174.

House Vote 594 - Bars funding of $231,000 for the West Virginia University Research Corporation's renovation of a small-business incubator. Amendment failed, 101-325.

House Vote 595 - Bars funding of $231,000 for the Abraham Lincoln National Airport Commission. Amendment failed, 107-318.

House Vote 597 - To remove 148 requested earmarks from the bill. Amendment failed, 48-372.

House Vote 636 - Bars funding of $1,000,000 for the Center for Instrumented Critical Infrastructure in Pennsylvania. Amendment failed, 98-326.

House Vote 637 - Bars funding of $1,500,000 for the South Carolina Historically Black Colleges and Universities Science and Technology Initiative. Amendment failed, 70-357.

House Vote 638 - Bars funding of $500,000 for the Emmanuel College Center for Science Partnership in Massachusetts. Amendment failed, 79-337.

House Vote 639 - Bars funding of $1,000,000 for nano-structured fuel cell membrane electrode assembly in California. Amendment failed, 81-348.

House Vote 640 - Strikes numerous earmarks from the bill. Amendment failed, 39-388.

House Vote 654 - Bars funding of $34,000,000 for the Alaska Native Education Equity program and other programs. Amendment failed, 74-352.

House Vote 663 - Strikes all earmarks in the bill. Amendment failed, 53-369.

House Vote 664 - Bars funding of $300,000 for its Bay Area Science Teacher Recruitment, Retention and Improvement Initiative. Amendment failed, 89-341.

House Vote 667 - Bars funding of $300,000 for the On Location Entertainment Industry Craft and Technician Training project at West Los Angeles College in Culver City, CA. Amendment failed, 114-316.

House Vote 668 - Bars funding of $150,000 for the American Ballet Theatre in New York City for educational activities. Amendment failed, 118-312.

House Vote 669 - Bars funding of $150,000 for the South Carolina Aquarium in Charleston, S.C. Amendment failed, 70-360.

House Vote 670 - Bars funding of $100,000 for the Kansas Regional Prisons Museum in Lansing, Kan. Amendment failed, 112-317.

House Vote 671 - Bars funding of $200,000 for the Corporation for Jefferson's Popular Forest in Forest, VA. Amendment failed, 68-360.

House Vote 678 - Bars funding of $2,000,000 for the Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service at the City College of New York in New York City. Amendment failed, 108-316.

House Vote 679 - Bars funding of $200,000 for the American Jazz Museum in Kansas City, MO. Amendment failed, 96-327.

House Vote 698 - Bars funding of $300,000 for the Belmont Complex in Kittanning, PA. Amendment failed, 87-335.

House Vote 699 - Bars funding of $400,000 for the North Central Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission in Wausau, WI. Amendment failed, 68-356.

House Vote 700 - Bars funding of $50,000 for the National Mule and Packers Museum in Woodlake, CA. Amendment failed, 69-352.

House Vote 701 - Bars funding of $300,000 for the Friends of Cheat Rails-to-Trails Program in West Virginia. Amendment failed, 81-342.

House Vote 702 - Bars funding of $300,000 for the Houston Zoo in Texas. Amendment failed, 77-347.

House Vote 705 - Bars funding of $150,000 for the Edmonds Center for the Arts in Edmonds, WA. Amendment failed, 97-327.

House Vote 706 - Bars funding for "parking facilities". Amendment failed, 86-338.

House Vote 735 - Bars funding of $200,000 for the Lobster Institute at the University of Maine in Orono, Maine. Amendment failed, 87-328.

House Vote 736 - Bars funding of $250,000 for the East Coast Shellfish Research Institute in Toms River, NJ. Amendment failed, 77-337.

House Vote 809 - Bars funding of $878,046 for the Catfish Pathogen Genomic Project in Auburn, AL. Amendment failed, 74-357.

House Vote 810 - Bars funding of $628,843 for grape genetics research in Geneva, NY. Amendment failed, 76-353.

House Vote 811 - Bars funding of $400,000 for the alternative uses of a tobacco grant in Maryland. Amendment failed, 94-337.

House Vote 812 - Bars funding of $489,000 for Ruminant Nutrition Consortium in Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wyoming. Amendment failed, 74-355.

House Vote 813 - Bars funding of $6,371,000 for the wood utilization grant in Mississippi, North Carolina, Minnesota, Maine, Michigan, Idaho, Tennessee, Arkansas and West Virginia. Amendment failed, 68-363.

House Vote 839 - Bars funding of $2,500,000 for the Presidio Trust national park in San Francisco, CA. Amendment failed, 94-311.

House Vote 842 - Bars funding of $2,000,000 for the "Paint Shield for Protecting People from Microbial Threats." Amendment failed, 91-317.

House Vote 843 - Bars funding of $1,500,000 for the Doyle Center for Manufacturing Technology in Pittsburgh, PA. Amendment failed, 98-312.

House Vote 844 - Bars funding of $3,000,000 for the Lewis Center for Education Research in Apple Valley, CA. Amendment failed, 57-353.

House Vote 845 - Bars funding of $39,000,000 for the National Drug Intelligence Center in Johnstown, PA. Amendment failed, 109-301

Anything else really need to be said?

Didn't think so.

Sphere: Related Content

President Bush Tells it Like it Is and Brings the Hammer DOWN!

Courtesy of Snooper at Capitalism or Socialism...You Decide: http://takeourcountryback.townhall.com/Default.aspx?ID=1&Month=4&Year=2007

Without The USUAL Political BS!!!
(Transcript of speech at the end of this article)

Bush Thanks Military Families, Urges Congress to Pass War Spending Bill
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, April 16, 2007 –

President Bush thanked families of troops serving overseas for their sacrifices and praised organizations that support veterans and military families today at the White House. He also urged Congress to quickly pass an emergency war spending bill so that the troops can get the funding they need to accomplish their mission.

“I appreciate very much to be in the presence of moms and dads, husbands and wives, sons and daughters of some of the finest citizens our nation has ever produced,” Bush told military family members in the audience.

The president noted the challenges faced by military families during war.“

A time of war is a time of sacrifice for our nation, but especially for our military families. Being left behind when a loved one goes to war is one of the hardest jobs in our military,” Bush said. “The families here today inspire our nation -- inspire them with their sense of duty and with their deep devotion to our country.”

Bush also expressed his gratitude to representatives of troop-support organizations in the audience.

“I want to thank the leaders of organizations that support our military families. I appreciate your tireless work to send a clear signal that many in the United States of America support our troops,” Bush said. “Each of you knows what is stake -- what is at stake in this war on terror. And I appreciate your efforts to rally our nation to support our troops, and to support the mission for which they have risked and, in some cases, have given their lives.”

Bush said the troops must be given “the tools and resources they need to prevail,” and he is looking forward to meeting with members of Congress April 18 to iron out differences between the administration and Congress.

The disagreement is over the fiscal 2007 Emergency Supplemental Request. The $93.4 billion request will fund operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and other operations in the war on terror. Both the Senate and House versions of the supplemental have a timetable for the exit of U.S. troops from Iraq. President Bush said he will not sign any legislation with a withdrawal date.

“I think it is wrong for Congress to restrict our military commanders,” Bush said. “I can understand having a difference of opinion about Iraq, but our commanders need the flexibility necessary to meet the mission. We should not be substituting political judgment for the judgment of those in our military.”

Bush said honest differences over the best course in Iraq should be debated. “That's healthy,” he said. “That's normal. … But our troops should not be caught in the middle.”

Bush said failure to fund the supplemental quickly will impact military readiness, and that “will mean that the readiness of our forces will suffer. This is unacceptable to me; it's unacceptable to you, and it's unacceptable to the vast majority of the American people.”

The U.S. must provide its troops with the support they need to accomplish their mission, Bush said.

“We owe it to every sailor, soldier, airman, Marine in harm's way to give them the tools they need to prevail,” Bush said. “That's what we owe them.”

The president said he is open to trying to settle political differences in order to provide the military with the funding it needs.

“I am willing to discuss any way forward that does not hamstring our troops, set an artificial timetable for withdrawal and spend billions on projects not related to the war,” he said.

Bush said the American people expect the White House and Congress to work together.

“Congress needs to put the partisanship on hold; it needs to get rid of all the politics right now and send me an emergency war spending bill that I can sign that gets our troops the support they need and gives our commanders the flexibility they need to complete this mission,” he said.

Related Sites:Transcript of President Bush's Speech

Sphere: Related Content

Raul Grijalva's Response to Pork Spending

I received this condescending, patronizing letter in my email from Congressman Grijalva (I call him "Pancho Villa" and it's NOT a compliment). I will highlight certain areas so you can see how this man's mind is twisted in his Democratic, Defeatist, BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome)mentality.

Dear Miss :

Thank you for taking the time to communicate with me regarding the supplemental spending bill for the Iraq War.

Since my arrival in Congress, I have voted against every single previous bill to fund this war. I have opposed this war from the beginning and I want to see our men and women in uniform withdrawn from Iraq as quickly as is practically feasible. As a member of the Progressive Caucus, I support an immediate commencement of a withdrawal to be completed within six months. In other words, you're a coward who wants his rights protected but no one else's and you don't have the stomach to support those who fight to protect your rights along with everyone else's.

Accordingly, I have co-sponsored a number of bills to bring this war to an end, foremost among them HR 508, the Bring the Troops Home and Iraq Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2007. I am well aware of your voting record--I subscribe to two voting services that keep me apprised of your self-serving interests.

However, in making my decision on the supplemental, I had to take into account that any bill that could pass this House would have to be the product of negotiation and compromise among a number of incongruous groups with often incompatible philosophies and goals. Furthermore, there are a number of provisions in this bill that are desperately needed and that I wholeheartedly support. These include fulfilling our moral obligation to properly fund medical care for our nation's veterans, increasing the minimum wage, restoring the people and communities of the Gulf Cost region, addressing health care needs for our children, and low income energy assistance. The troop funding is not the place to put your pork and special interests. It should have funded the troops and veteran's EXCLUSIVELY.

Still, I was disappointed with the end product of this House's legislative process. I felt, and I still feel, that the schedule for withdrawal in the bill is far too long, and that the benchmark formula in the bill will be easily manipulated by an Administration that has demonstrated a willingness to deceive the Congress and the American people with regard to the situation in Iraq . Still, the bill did set a precedent by declaring a date for withdrawal, however distant. I don't see that you've ever had any military service, although you talk a big game. You're a coward, plain and simple, and can't stand there are positive things happening in Iraq.

Ultimately, I was faced with the option of voting for the bill or voting against it and seeing the Congress' first attempt to bring the War in Iraq to an end fail, thus delivering a victory for the Bush Administration and an even larger defeat for the peace movement. NICE TO SEE THEY ADMIT DEFEAT FOR THE PEACE MOVEMENT!

I will tell you in all sincerity that this choice was extremely difficult. Sure it was--until you got your pork and appropriate bribe in the pork--what was your bribe to get you to sell out the country?

But in good conscience, I could not sit on the sidelines, with the vote as close as it was, and witness a result that would, in effect, enable this administration's desire for war without end. I voted to pass this bill. You have no conscience and you have no morals or you would have demanded a clean bill for troops and veteran's alone instead of all the pork and your bribes.

If I had the opportunity, I would have voted for an amendment offered in Committee by Representative Barbara Lee, to fully fund a withdrawal of US forces and bring the War to an end. This remains my preferred policy.

I am certain that this will not be the last word by this Congress on Iraq . Ultimately it is the American people who have pushed their government to face reality with regard to Iraq , and their sustained pressure which will continue to move this debate forward. The reality is if we don't finish in Iraq, we'll be fighting here at home. The reality is the surge is working. And the reality is, the last word will be held by the true President, not the 535 pretenders such as yourself.

I will continue to fight to bring this tragic misadventure in Iraq to an end, and I hope I will retain your confidence in this struggle. Fighting for your rights is not a tragic misadventure. You, however, are a tragic excuse for an American.

Sincerely,

Raul M. Grijalva

Member of Congress

This is what the troops are facing in the 110th Congressional mindset, not to mention the treasonous behavior and fiduciary mismanagement encouraged by Pelosi and Reid.

Sphere: Related Content

Friday Potpourri-March 30, 2007

The COMPLETELY shameful Senate bill (S.965 Report No. 110-37 Calendar No. 83), laden with PORK, assuring our troops surrender and which emboldens our enemies completely can be found here in PDF form: http://victorycaucus.com/S965.pdf

It's 157 pages long, but fully downloadable.

The Senate betrayed our troops and our country March 27, 2007.Here's the article on the Democratic "Blue Dogs" (those that ran as "conservative" Democrats and "a group that purports to fight for fiscal responsibility and strong national security") and how they voted on the March 23,2007 House bill (HR 1591): http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=20009

The US Air imams are raising hell again, this time raising the possibility of suing the passengers who reported them. That link is here: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,259263,00.html

You can support the passengers (and YOUR) right to keep yourself safe from suspicious activity on an airline as well as publicity stunts such as these imams have engaged in by going here: http://www.americancongressfortruth.com/ArchDetails.aspx?id=155

This column of Michelle Malkin's tells who is helping these ordinary citizens fight these terrorists (and yes, anyone pulling such a publicity stunt in a post-9/11 world is a terrorist) as well as a "John Doe Manifesto". Look for the Manifesto at the top of the blog! : http://www.townhall.com/columnists/column.aspx?UrlTitle=the_john_doe_manifesto&ns=MichelleMalkin&dt=03/28/2007&page=1

Well, Rosie's at it again! At least Lorie Byrd has it right in her March 29, 2007 Townhall Column, "Rosie O'Donnell is Bad News", linked here: http://townhall.com/columnists/LorieByrd/2007/03/30/rosie_o_donnell_is_bad_news

Which of course, brings me to the homosexual propaganda these days. I have MANY gay friends. My gay friends, however, know and have known since we met (some over 20 years ago), that I in NO WAY condone or approve of their lifestyle. That being said, they refrained then and have continued to refrain from "flaming" (their term, not mine) in my and my children's presence. However, homosexuals like Rosie give gays a bad name and leave a rotten taste in the mouth of anyone confronted with homosexuality. Do I agree with gay marriage? Unequivocally, NO. Nor do I approve of gays forcing their lifestyle and agenda down my throat, and when I or anyone else (including General Pace) voice an opinion, something called "free speech" in this country, we're hounded. TOO BAD. Call me fundamental all you like, the fact remains I, like General Pace, believe homosexual behavior is immoral. It's in the Bible. End of story.

And for the gays that want to force their agenda on youth groups (such as the Cub/Boy Scouts) and subsequently THINK they're ruining an institution...get over it. I was a scout leader and had I known another scout leader was gay and was attempting contact with my son or any of the boys under my care, I would have ordered my son and all the boys under my care to avoid that leader and been extremely explicit as to why. Then I would have sent letters to the parents explaining my actions. This is called protecting the children and being a responsible leader of children.

Over at moonbat central (also known as the GOP.com blog), the lunatics are crawling out of the woodwork. Seems they think Congress is doing the right thing in loading up the emergency troop funding bill with pork (remember all those Democrats that ran for re-election on the platform of cutting pork out of the budget), bi-partisan cooperation (have you seen any of that yet?) and support of the troops (so much support the troops are going to have to go without the funds they need!). Then, of course, Congress goes on spring break. Guess they don't think there IS a need for emergency funding for the troops--the only emergency is for the pork in the bills. THANK GOD BUSH IS GOING TO VETO THIS TRAVESTY!

Moonbat central is still trotting out the old chestnut, "Bush lied, our kids died". Did anyone ever stop to think: "Democrats lie, babies die" (abortion and stem cell research)? Or, with reference to the above paragraph, "Democrats lie, troops die"? Not once have any of these moonbats admitted going to war was supported by their Democrats as well as the Republicans...it was a bi-partisan AUMF. I could go on and on. If you want a good laugh, though, go over there and sign in. FAIR WARNING, THOUGH--BE PREPARED FOR TOTAL INCOHERENCE! Here's the link: http://www.gop.com/Blog/BlogPost.aspx?BlogPostID=2687.

Also a caveat: if you do sign in, DO NOT USE ANY PERSONAL INFORMATION! They are stalkers and like trying to infect your computers with nasty viruses. That's how far they'll go to promote their communist/socialist/fascist agenda. They will not answer questions and everytime you get them pinned to a wall, they bolt. They can't answer because their propaganda machines don't teach how to answer. They will attempt every diversionary tactic in the books...much like Billary. Be prepared! If you really want to toy with them, though, continue to ask them questions, hammer the questions in. Also, demand they cite their sources and question their personal integrity. Be prepared for sexual harassment, name calling, etc. And, above all, keep in mind, THIS is what our men and women in uniform are fighting and dying for--their right to spout this nonsense. And keep in mind the shameful protests across the country of filthy, unwashed protestors, thinking they live in the 60's, burning our flag and our soldiers and our president in effigy.

That's it for this week! Stay safe and see you soon!

Sphere: Related Content