I've moved — check out my new blog at cassyfiano.com!

Redirecting in 10 seconds...
Showing posts with label defeatocrats. Show all posts
Showing posts with label defeatocrats. Show all posts

Wednesday, October 3, 2007

Murtha threatens to withhold funds from "Republican" war

In yet another (unsurprising) move to remind voters that Democrats don't want us to succeed in Iraq, Rep. John Murtha has decided that he wants to withhold funds from this "Republican" war.
Calling Iraq a "Republican" war, an angry Rep. John Murtha today joined several top Democrats in threatening to withhold the nearly $200 billion in emergency military spending that President Bush has requested.

"It is the Republicans in Congress who continue to hand this president a blank check with no policy restrictions for the war in Iraq," said Mr. Murtha, D-Johnstown, who chairs the powerful House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee. "This is their war."

Rep. David Obey, D-Wisc., chairman of the full House Appropriations Committee, said he and Mr. Murtha would try to use their power of the purse to force President Bush to change course.

"I have no intention of reporting out $200 billion," Mr. Obey said.

The chairman also said he will soon introduce legislation for a war tax surcharge for all Americans -- except members of the military and their families -- to cover the conflict's huge costs. The tax, he said, could add as much as 15 percent to the federal income tax bills of the wealthiest Americans, while low- and middle-income Americans would pay about 2 percent.

Mr. Obey predicted that such a tax would collect as much as $145 to $150 billion each year, near the annual price tag of the Iraq war.

"If you don't like the cost," he said, "then shut down this war."

Mr. Murtha angrily denied that their approach would imperil soldiers already on the battlefield, saying Congress could provide enough funds for basic needs through the annual defense appropriations bill currently under consideration.

"We're going to take care of the troops. Period," he said.

Yes, because cutting off the funding to our troops is how they need to be taken care of.

They're really grasping at straws, aren't they? Anything to cut and run, and if they can't get their way, they'll slap a war tax surcharge on us -- that way, they can force us to surrender. Obey said it himself -- if you don't like the cost, shut down the war. The consequences of doing so on our national security and on the people of Iraq are inconsequential to him and the rest of the surrendercrats.

And didn't Murtha just put it perfectly? This really is the Republican war. The vast majority of Republicans are for keeping the United States safe and not plunging Iraq into turmoil, most likely causing civil war and genocide, and giving Iran and Al Qaeda a new safe haven from which they can more easily attack the United States.

The Democrats' war, however, is on the United States itself. They'd much rather we plunged the United States into dhimmitude and all live under Sharia law, as is rapidly happening in Europe. Defend the United States? Please. What could a liberal possibly find that would be worth saving here? They want to ruin everything about this country that is great to turn it into their own elitist and socialist paradise, and have no qualms about letting Al Qaeda and the terrorists win.

He really couldn't have put it any better. Republicans = winning in Iraq. Democrats = surrender.

Hat Tip: Moonbattery

Wednesday, August 1, 2007

But STILL don't question their patriotism!

They really, really support the troops! Really, they do!

These idiots keep blathering on about how they don't want us to win in Iraq, and then get furious when we call them cowards, traitors, and defeatocrats (emphasis mine):

House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) said Monday that a strongly positive report on progress on Iraq by Army Gen. David Petraeus likely would split Democrats in the House and impede his party's efforts to press for a timetable to end the war.

Clyburn noted that Petraeus carries significant weight among the 47 members of the Blue Dog caucus in the House, a group of moderate to conservative Democrats. Without their support, he said, Democratic leaders would find it virtually impossible to pass legislation setting a timetable for withdrawal.

"I think there would be enough support in that group to want to stay the course and if the Republicans were to stay united as they have been, then it would be a problem for us," Clyburn said. "We, by and large, would be wise to wait on the report."

Many Democrats have anticipated that, at best, Petraeus and U.S. ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker would present a mixed analysis of the success of the current troop surge strategy, given continued violence in Baghdad. But of late there have been signs that the commander of U.S. forces might be preparing something more generally positive. Clyburn said that would be "a real big problem for us."

So basically, he is rather blatantly admitting that he doesn't want there to be positive signs of progress from Iraq because it would hurt the Dems politically.

Haven't we conservatives been saying that all along? And now, he just proved us right.

But don't question their patriotism, oh no. It's patriotic to wish for your country to fail, don't you see? It's a good thing for the terrorists who want to attack and kill us to win in Iraq. They love America SO much!

As Misha from Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler says,

Try them, convict them and execute them for treason.

Or, if that’s too rough for you, let’s just cram them into container ships and send them off to whichever totalitarian dystopia they’re worshiping at the moment, because a free country has absolutely no use for them. Whatsoever. They’d probably f*ck up the harvest if we used them as fertilizer.

Hat Tip: Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler

Previous:
Democrats side with terrorists
Did you get your white feathers yet?
Navy SEAL memorial dedicated over liberal protests