What to do with a war account? Ammo or a Ted Kennedy 'institute'

[Xenophon]

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

 

[Mr. H.]

If we can read this, the troops can too. What a punch in the gut.

 

[ba1614]

In addition to the $2.6 billion in earmarks, the bill includes $2.5 billion for 10 Boeing C-17 cargo planes that the military says it does not need, and $1.7 billion for an extra DDG-51 destroyer not requested in the Pentagon's budget proposal.

Too fuckin' much

 

[Fatality]

ted died so he deserves it

 

[mudwhistle]

Ted's Dead.

Seems the libs really don't have any shame.

They hate the military so much they wanna cut their throats.

Hold back like Obama is doing, leave em hanging like they did to us in Somalia and then after a bunch of them die, leave Afghanistan with our tails between our legs.

 

[Polk]

These sorts of things are the bill every single year. And yet, you guys now suddenly decide it's a problem.

 

[mudwhistle]

These sorts of things are the bill every single year. And yet, you guys now suddenly decide it's a problem.

My understanding that this wasn't an earmark but rather money that was supposed to have gone to the DOD but ended up being diverted to the Dem's pet projects.

Correct me if I'm wrong on this.

 

[Xenophon]

These sorts of things are the bill every single year. And yet, you guys now suddenly decide it's a problem.

My understanding that this wasn't an earmark but rather money that was supposed to have gone to the DOD but ended up being diverted to the Dem's pet projects.

Correct me if I'm wrong on this.

You are 100% correct, this is NOT done on every bill, this is money diverted from combat forces for pet projects.

 

[Polk]

These sorts of things are the bill every single year. And yet, you guys now suddenly decide it's a problem.

My understanding that this wasn't an earmark but rather money that was supposed to have gone to the DOD but ended up being diverted to the Dem's pet projects.

Correct me if I'm wrong on this.

If you read the story in the OP, it shows a fundamental misunderstand of how the budget process works. The money is allocated piece by piece. There isn't some big pot set in the middle of the room which is then divided up. It sounds like they're basing the claim that money was diverted from to specific projects because the Pentagon didn't get the amount they were asking for on certain provisions in the bill.

 

[RodISHI]

How lovely making a monuments and paybacks are more important than making sure our troops have what they need.

Mr. Wheeler said that senators took most of the cash for the projects from the "operations and maintenance" or O&M accounts.

"These are the accounts that pay for troop training, repairs, spares and supplies for vehicles, weapons, ships and planes, food and fuel," Mr. Wheeler said.

Raiding those accounts to fund big-ticket projects the military does not want, but that benefit senators' home states or campaign contributors, amounts to "rancid gluttony," he said.

I agree "rancid" to the core.

 

[xsited1]

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

I don't think these folks approve:

Most recent casualties | Faces of the Fallen | washingtonpost.com

 

[Fatality]

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

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Pretty lame stuff. This President has been AWOL when it comes to helping our kids in the Military. So this stuff just doesn't surprise me at all.

 

[concept]

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

Hey, endangered mice need to live too.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

What exactly did you expect from a group of people who could care less about our troops unless they can exploit them for political gain.

The continued foot dragging by Obama over troop increases, the cutting of military funding to divert money to pet projects and the continued call for the retreat of America from Afghanistan by the left wing loons is indicative of a pattern of behavior that make it quite clear where this Administration stands.

They are patently anti-military....as expected. I guess we will have to wait for another Republican President to be elected ....who will have to go in and take out the world's trash. It's obvious some have the backbone for it...and some don't. That's nature.

 

[Lycurgus]

It's Incredible, disgusting, disgraceful and plain ole sickening!

All those supporting the spending of funds in this fashion (for Kennedy) should just resign and do our nation a favor!

 

[mudwhistle]

These sorts of things are the bill every single year. And yet, you guys now suddenly decide it's a problem.

My understanding that this wasn't an earmark but rather money that was supposed to have gone to the DOD but ended up being diverted to the Dem's pet projects.

Correct me if I'm wrong on this.

If you read the story in the OP, it shows a fundamental misunderstand of how the budget process works. The money is allocated piece by piece. There isn't some big pot set in the middle of the room which is then divided up. It sounds like they're basing the claim that money was diverted from to specific projects because the Pentagon didn't get the amount they were asking for on certain provisions in the bill.

Actually it is a defense fund that the DOD draws from. Seems both parties have abused this fund...in a similar manner that they've abused the Social Security fund. They've been borrowing from it with no intention of paying it back.

 

[Polk]

My understanding that this wasn't an earmark but rather money that was supposed to have gone to the DOD but ended up being diverted to the Dem's pet projects.

Correct me if I'm wrong on this.

If you read the story in the OP, it shows a fundamental misunderstand of how the budget process works. The money is allocated piece by piece. There isn't some big pot set in the middle of the room which is then divided up. It sounds like they're basing the claim that money was diverted from to specific projects because the Pentagon didn't get the amount they were asking for on certain provisions in the bill.

Actually it is a defense fund that the DOD draws from. Seems both parties have abused this fund...in a similar manner that they've abused the Social Security fund. They've been borrowing from it with no intention of paying it back.

There is no "defense fund". The Department of Defense is funded on an annual basis just like every other agency.

 

[L.K.Eder]

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

what a complete hack job as expected by the washington times.

example, they left out the bolded part when quoting wheeler.

In 30 years on Capitol Hill, I never saw Congress mangle the defense budget as badly as this year. Despite that, I see signs that we might be on the cusp of a change for the better.

here is wheeler's opinion without moonie spin:

Winslow T. Wheeler: Support Our Troops: The Senate Porkers' Approach

edit: and here is his opinion about the budget in 2007, to be passed in the lame duck season. just for the much needed perspective

Winslow T. Wheeler: The 2007 Defense Budget May Not Be What You Think

 

[mudwhistle]

There is no "defense fund". The Department of Defense is funded on an annual basis just like every other agency.

Yes, and money is put into to the fund on a regular basis. It has to be voted on every so often to keep it going. Unlike their pay raises that have to be voted down to keep them from going into effect every year.

Mr. Wheeler, who conducted the study, compared the Obama administration's requests for funds with the $636 billion spending bill that the Senate passed. He discovered that senators added $2.6 billion in pet projects while spending $4 billion less than the administration requested for fiscal 2010, which began Oct. 1.

Mr. Wheeler said that senators took most of the cash for the projects from the "operations and maintenance" or O&M accounts.

"These are the accounts that pay for troop training, repairs, spares and supplies for vehicles, weapons, ships and planes, food and fuel," Mr. Wheeler said.

Raiding those accounts to fund big-ticket projects the military does not want, but that benefit senators' home states or campaign contributors, amounts to "rancid gluttony," he said.
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/oct/15/troop-funds-diverted-to-pet-projects/

What were you saying about there not being any defense funds? Nothing dedicated to specific needs?