Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Those are lines in the defense budget. There is no independently existing fund for defense.
Those are lines in the defense budget. There is no independently existing fund for defense.
Please explain your reasoning.
Those are accounts set aside with guidlines for spending that have to be followed.
They are not supposed to be used for museums and other pet projects.
Those are lines in the defense budget. There is no independently existing fund for defense.
Please explain your reasoning.
Those are accounts set aside with guidlines for spending that have to be followed.
They are not supposed to be used for museums and other pet projects.
It hasn't happened 'for ages' and it tells us volumes how you always seem to have an excuse/explanation for these things.Those are lines in the defense budget. There is no independently existing fund for defense.
Please explain your reasoning.
Those are accounts set aside with guidlines for spending that have to be followed.
They are not supposed to be used for museums and other pet projects.
The accounts aren't being used for that. Some of the funds in the bill are being used for non-defense related purposes and that's not right, but that's been the practice for ages. That you guys suddenly care about it tells quite a bit.
It hasn't happened 'for ages' and it tells us volumes how you always seem to have an excuse/explanation for these things.Please explain your reasoning.
Those are accounts set aside with guidlines for spending that have to be followed.
They are not supposed to be used for museums and other pet projects.
The accounts aren't being used for that. Some of the funds in the bill are being used for non-defense related purposes and that's not right, but that's been the practice for ages. That you guys suddenly care about it tells quite a bit.
These sorts of things are the bill every single year. And yet, you guys now suddenly decide it's a problem.
look at the wet behind the ears pup making excuses for his master
It hasn't happened 'for ages' and it tells us volumes how you always seem to have an excuse/explanation for these things.The accounts aren't being used for that. Some of the funds in the bill are being used for non-defense related purposes and that's not right, but that's been the practice for ages. That you guys suddenly care about it tells quite a bit.
It has happened for ages, but now that it's not your guys doing it, it's suddenly the worst thing in the world. I'm not excusing the process. I personally think it's repugnant. Then again, I felt the exact same way when Republicans were doing it. You, of course, didn't because you don't give two shits about process. This isn't about governance for you, it's a sporting event and you just root root root for your side.
Our fearless gov strikes again (fearless in that they think they can get away with anything), this time raiding the Pentagon operations and maintenance budget which is used for ammo and fuel of COMBAT FORCES IN AFGHANISTAN.
WTG, most open and honest gov eva!
U.S. troop funds diverted to pet projects - Washington Times
GoP sucks also Willow.
I fight this attitude that too many have that seem to think they can excuse bad behavior by claiming those bringing it to light are hypocrites who used to let it slide.
Polk is a perfect example of this, he has an excuse for every fucked up thing the government does, and when these are seen to be bullshit he falls back on trying to create the old moral equivency dodge that party politics so relies on.
And what did the Senate Appropriations Committee do to better support our troops in the new 2010 DOD Appropriations bill? They cut the already-skinny O&M account by over $3 billion. The Defense Subcommittee Chairman, Senator Daniel Inouye (D-HI), with the full support of his Republican counterpart, Thad Cochran (R-MS), cut Obama's request for basic O&M by $2.4 billion and for wartime O&M by another $655 million.
Both parties are exactly the same in the way they govern, anything for the party, anything to get elected.GoP sucks also Willow.
I fight this attitude that too many have that seem to think they can excuse bad behavior by claiming those bringing it to light are hypocrites who used to let it slide.
Polk is a perfect example of this, he has an excuse for every fucked up thing the government does, and when these are seen to be bullshit he falls back on trying to create the old moral equivency dodge that party politics so relies on.
dammit i was just about to post this:
And what did the Senate Appropriations Committee do to better support our troops in the new 2010 DOD Appropriations bill? They cut the already-skinny O&M account by over $3 billion. The Defense Subcommittee Chairman, Senator Daniel Inouye (D-HI), with the full support of his Republican counterpart, Thad Cochran (R-MS), cut Obama's request for basic O&M by $2.4 billion and for wartime O&M by another $655 million.
Both parties are exactly the same in the way they govern, anything for the party, anything to get elected.GoP sucks also Willow.
I fight this attitude that too many have that seem to think they can excuse bad behavior by claiming those bringing it to light are hypocrites who used to let it slide.
Polk is a perfect example of this, he has an excuse for every fucked up thing the government does, and when these are seen to be bullshit he falls back on trying to create the old moral equivency dodge that party politics so relies on.
dammit i was just about to post this:
And what did the Senate Appropriations Committee do to better support our troops in the new 2010 DOD Appropriations bill? They cut the already-skinny O&M account by over $3 billion. The Defense Subcommittee Chairman, Senator Daniel Inouye (D-HI), with the full support of his Republican counterpart, Thad Cochran (R-MS), cut Obama's request for basic O&M by $2.4 billion and for wartime O&M by another $655 million.
They may claim they have different goals but the goal is to tell people what to do and they both practise that every chance they get.
For those who can think beyond partisan lines and sources, both The Washington Times and the Huffington Post ream Congress for diverting funds from the operations and management budget (historically is rarely adequate).
It hasn't happened 'for ages' and it tells us volumes how you always seem to have an excuse/explanation for these things.The accounts aren't being used for that. Some of the funds in the bill are being used for non-defense related purposes and that's not right, but that's been the practice for ages. That you guys suddenly care about it tells quite a bit.
It has happened for ages, but now that it's not your guys doing it, it's suddenly the worst thing in the world. I'm not excusing the process. I personally think it's repugnant. Then again, I felt the exact same way when Republicans were doing it. You, of course, didn't because you don't give two shits about process. This isn't about governance for you, it's a sporting event and you just root root root for your side.
I have to laugh at anyone who believes that the HuffPo is journalism rather than op-ed. P.T.Barnum would know your type.For those who can think beyond partisan lines and sources, both The Washington Times and the Huffington Post ream Congress for diverting funds from the operations and management budget (historically is rarely adequate).
the huffington post posted the article by wheeler. the washington times editorialized the wheeler article, that is one step removed from the source.
I have to laugh at anyone who believes that the HuffPo is journalism rather than op-ed. P.T.Barnum would know your type.For those who can think beyond partisan lines and sources, both The Washington Times and the Huffington Post ream Congress for diverting funds from the operations and management budget (historically is rarely adequate).
the huffington post posted the article by wheeler. the washington times editorialized the wheeler article, that is one step removed from the source.