GOP Don't Support the Troops - Another SillyBooBoo Lie

Discussion in 'Military' started by sealybobo, Jun 17, 2009.

  1. sealybobo
    Offline

    sealybobo Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    50,765
    Thanks Received:
    3,200
    Trophy Points:
    1,845
    Location:
    Michigan
    Ratings:
    +10,223
    House Republicans are preparing to vote en bloc against the $106 billion war-spending bill, a position once unthinkable for the party that characterized the money as support for the troops.

    For years, Republicans portrayed the bills funding the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as matters of national security and accused Democrats who voted against them of voting against the troops.

    In 2005, Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.) went so far as to say sending troops into battle and not paying for it would be an “immoral thing to do.” And just last year, more House Republicans voted for the war supplemental bill than did Democrats, who opposed the legislation because it did little to wind down the military effort in Iraq.

    But Republicans say this year is different. Democrats have included a $5 billion increase for the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to help aid nations affected by the global financial crisis. Republicans say that is reason enough to vote against the entire $106 billion spending bill and are certain voters will understand.

    But wait!!!

    This is Boehner in 1998:

    That wasn't Boehner's tune in 1998, when the Clinton administration requested $18 billion in IMF funding to ameliorate the effects of the Asian financial crisis.

    "I have been as critical about the IMF as many, but given the crisis we have around the world, the U.S. needs to provide leadership," the Ohio Republican told the [Newark, N.J.] Star Ledger in Oct. 1998. "The only real avenue is the IMF."

    His comments were in keeping with the rest of the House GOP leadership at the time, including then-Speaker Newt Gingrich, who said the U.S. had "an obligation to work with" the fund.

    Boehner backed IMF funding in '98 - Glenn Thrush - POLITICO.com

    And how much garbage was in Bush's "supplimental war bills"? Shall we look? We know that 75% went to private contractors and only 25% went to the troops, and we also know the troops were under funded under Bush.

    Now a small percentage of the bill is going to the IMF and the GOP have the balls to not fund the troops? Fine! We'll use this against them in 2010.

    For the record, I agree with the GOP to not fund these bullshit wars. Its just their hypocricy that makes me sick!!!
     
  2. KittenKoder
    Offline

    KittenKoder Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2008
    Messages:
    23,281
    Thanks Received:
    1,711
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Nowhere
    Ratings:
    +1,714
    If Bush did it, he was praised, if Obama does it, it's bad ... I just don't get partisan freaks.
     
  3. sealybobo
    Offline

    sealybobo Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    50,765
    Thanks Received:
    3,200
    Trophy Points:
    1,845
    Location:
    Michigan
    Ratings:
    +10,223
    Didn't you see where I wrote that I agree with cutting off funds and bringing the troops home?

    My problem is with the GOP hypocricy. They signed Bush's bills regardless of the garbage/pork that was slipped in. And they said the Dems weren't supporting the troops if they didn't sign too.

    We are just pointing out to you the hypocricy.

    But I know what you will do with the information. You'll say, "both parties do it".

    Just like that Ensign guy who cheated. They all cheat, right? So completely ignore that the guys a fucking hypocrite.

    The GOP pray on idiots like you.
     
  4. KittenKoder
    Offline

    KittenKoder Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2008
    Messages:
    23,281
    Thanks Received:
    1,711
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Nowhere
    Ratings:
    +1,714
    Don't give me that shit, Dems are doing it to.
     
  5. sealybobo
    Offline

    sealybobo Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    50,765
    Thanks Received:
    3,200
    Trophy Points:
    1,845
    Location:
    Michigan
    Ratings:
    +10,223
    What, praying on idiots like you?
     
  6. Gunny
    Offline

    Gunny Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    44,689
    Thanks Received:
    6,753
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    The Republic of Texas
    Ratings:
    +6,770
    Read your own link, moron. The GOP opposes the IMF pork attached to the funding, so your thread title is once again, just more partisan lying from you.
     
  7. Gunny
    Offline

    Gunny Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    44,689
    Thanks Received:
    6,753
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    The Republic of Texas
    Ratings:
    +6,770
    The only one trying to prey on anyone here is YOU. Your thread is a lie. As usual. Served again. As usual.
     
  8. KittenKoder
    Offline

    KittenKoder Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2008
    Messages:
    23,281
    Thanks Received:
    1,711
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Nowhere
    Ratings:
    +1,714
    I just can't seem to get how people like Bobo don't see their own hypocritical idiotic views. They ignore what the party they blindly follow does but get angry with the other party when they do the same damned thing ... then they have to lie about it to make it seem more than it is.
     
  9. sealybobo
    Offline

    sealybobo Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    50,765
    Thanks Received:
    3,200
    Trophy Points:
    1,845
    Location:
    Michigan
    Ratings:
    +10,223
    We didn't approve of the pork that Bush put in his Iraq "supplimental" spending bills either. And you guys said if we didn't sign, we weren't supporting the troops.

    Just like Bush said, "this is too important. we have troops out in harms way".

    And that was a lie too. Because the troops themselves were plenty funded. The money bush needed went to private contractors and to Mook Tada El Sadr. Remember we bribed the sunni's and shiites to stop shooting at us so Bush could say the surge worked?

    For a guy who was in the military, you sure haven't a clue.
     
  10. sealybobo
    Offline

    sealybobo Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    50,765
    Thanks Received:
    3,200
    Trophy Points:
    1,845
    Location:
    Michigan
    Ratings:
    +10,223
    Served?

    Bush and Cheney are playing their ace in the hole: The old, tattered “you don’t support the troops” card.

    Any Democrat and any Republican too (hear that, Chuck Hagel) who doesn’t want to throw another hundred billion dollars down the tubes for Bush’s Iraq War gets this card thrown at them.

    Cheney was up to his old tricks on Monday.

    He went down to Birmingham to give a talk. (Don’t kid yourself; it wasn’t to hail civil rights, it was to raise cash for Republican Senator Jeff Sessions.) And Cheney took the occasion to try to relink the Iraq War with 9/11, a link he’s stressed all along, never stopping when the evidence failed to materialize.

    Facts are insignificant to him.

    It’s propaganda that counts.

    And bullying.

    So he peddled the canard that Democrats in Congress are working “to undercut General Petraeus and the troops.”

    And he made clear that he has no understanding of, or patience for, the constitutional powers of Congress.

    “The fact is,” said Cheney, “the United States military answers to one commander-in-chief in the White House, not 535 commanders-in-chief on Capitol Hill.”

    But Cheney omitted a couple of crucial facts.

    Like the Congress funds the military.

    And the commander-in-chief can’t go to war without a Congressional declaration of war, which, in actual fact, it never gave.

    Congress certainly has the constitutional right to tell the President to stop fighting a war it never declared.

    Bush, Cheney Play the “You Don’t Support the Troops” Card | The Progressive
     

Share This Page