In reversal, GOP balks at war funding

News Type: Event — Seeded on Tue Jun 16, 2009 10:02 AM EDT

Article Source: The Hill.com

us-news, war, republicans, troops, national-security, appropriation

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."

Published to:

Catch22's Column, All of Newsvine
Groups: DemGuys, Global War on Terror, Left of Center, Political Analysis,
Regions: none

What's this?

Who's leading the conversation?

This visualization below allows you to see the impact that each user has on the current conversation. The top row contains the group of users who have had the most impact, the 2nd row the group of users who have had the 2nd most impact (et cetera). Users with similar impact are grouped together, and the average score of the group is shown to the left of the group. The author of the article is also shown on the left, in their corresponding group. Each user's score is based on the number of comments the user has made plus the number of votes their comments have received. The scores are calculated relative one another, so while their absolute value is not particularly important, their relative difference does indicate a larger difference in impact on the conversation.

2.0

{"commentId":7669562,"authorDomain":"paulI"}

Paul I

This clearly would be a protest vote against formally recognizing that funding for the wars is part of the budgeted expenditures. It is so much easier to declare that the cost of war is unknowable but necessary and then to leave it out of the budget. Now if we could get to the part about Iraq paying off the cost of the war from oil revenues in gratitude to their liberators...

{"commentId":7669562,"threadId":"604612","contentId":"2935403","authorDomain":"paulI"}

1 vote

#1 - Tue Jun 16, 2009 10:31 AM EDT

{"commentId":7670241,"authorDomain":"Catch22"}

Catch22

This clearly would be a protest vote against formally recognizing that funding for the wars is part of the budgeted expenditures

Maybe. Is that what the GOP is claiming? It might be more credible if they admitted that this approach to funding the war was implemented when the GOP controlled the Presidency and the Congress.

{"commentId":7670241,"threadId":"604612","contentId":"2935403","authorDomain":"Catch22"}

1 vote

#1.1 - Tue Jun 16, 2009 10:58 AM EDT

{"commentId":7669935,"authorDomain":"TR966"}

TR-421173

Republicans are preparing to vote en bloc against...

Anything and everything put forth by the President, or any other Dem. What else is new, the "Party of NO".

http://www.democrats.org/page/content/partyofno

{"commentId":7669935,"threadId":"604612","contentId":"2935403","authorDomain":"TR966"}

2 votes

#2 - Tue Jun 16, 2009 10:46 AM EDT

{"commentId":7672537,"authorDomain":"christopher-calbat"}

Sgt C USMC

Oooh I 'm not going to forget THIS one come election day. First the GI bill being too generous, now it not being worthwhile to fund a war that they've endorsed ? Good luck GOP. Let me know how that military voter bloc looks on the exit polls.

You know, I elected you to Congress. But come to think of it...I don't think I'm going to pay you! How's THAT sound ?

Clipped to The Warriors Way.

{"commentId":7672537,"threadId":"604612","contentId":"2935403","authorDomain":"christopher-calbat"}

1 vote

#3 - Tue Jun 16, 2009 12:23 PM EDT

{"canLink":false,"threadId":"604612","isPrivate":false}

CATCH22

Backyard

In reversal, GOP balks at war funding

Published to:

FUN STUFF:

COMPANY STUFF:

LEGAL STUFF: