is there any point mentioning british politics...do any of you care...does anyone care about the resignations and sacking cuz of their so called allowance...bet until you google it no one here would have even heard of it
sometimes I hate being the only one on this side of the pond...
Politics Thoughts, Theories and Ponderables
Moderator: Priests of Syrinx
-
Big Blue Owl
- Posts: 7457
- Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 7:31 am
- Location: Somewhere between the darkness and the light
I am interested! In fact, one of my favorite things is Yes, Minister and Yes, Prime Minister, where all of the comedy is derived from the factual goings-on in British politics. It's not only hilarious, but a very revealing and truthful look behind the scenes.
So anyway, yeah, love to chat about British politics, and since we have you, Scottish politics in particular.
So anyway, yeah, love to chat about British politics, and since we have you, Scottish politics in particular.
(((((((((((((((all'a you)))))))))))))))
I think that Daniel Hannan totally ROCKS, and he tells it like it is.schuette wrote:is there any point mentioning british politics...do any of
you care...does anyone care about the resignations and sacking cuz of
their so called allowance...bet until you google it no one here would have
even heard of it
sometimes I hate being the only one on this side of the pond...
He's the Brits' version of our Glenn Beck.
I have nothing but respect for the man. Even if he is a conservative.
Our politicos could learn a thing or two from him.
He's actually warning us (Yanks) STILL about what's ahead if we go down
the road we are, as you have already.
He had the balls to tell Parliament so, and I believe every word of it.
Don't start none...won't be none.
THIS HEROINE WAS TORTURED FOR MONTHS BY HAVING HER FEET
BEATEN UNTIL THEY BROKE, HER LEGS AND ARMS, BROKEN.
SHE NEVER GAVE THE NAZI ANY INFORMATION. BY BRIBE, SHE
ESCAPED. HER LIFE WAS SAVED. SURVIVING CHILDREN OF THE
CHILDREN SHE SMUGGLED OUT OF WARSAW GAVE TESTIMONY, BUT
AL GORE GOT THE NOD.
SUCH IS THE INTEGRITY OF THE NOBEL PEACE PRIZE.
The prize doesn't always go to the most deserving!
It goes to those who want to push the agenda.
See below and you will see why:
Irena Sendler
There recently was a death of a 98 year-old lady named Irena.
During WWII, Irena got permission to work in the Warsaw Ghetto, as a
Plumbing/Sewer specialist. She had an 'ulterior motive.' She KNEW
what the Nazis' plans were for the Jews (being German.)
Irena muggled infants out in the bottom of the tool box she carried and
she carried in the back of her truck a burlap sack (for larger kids.) She
also had a dog in the back that she trained to bark when the Nazi soldiers
let her in and out of the ghetto.
The soldiers, of course, wanted nothing to do with the dog, and the
barking covered the kids/infants noises.
During her time of doing this, she managed to smuggle out and save
2,500 kids/infants. She was caught, and the Nazis broke both her legs,
arms and beat her severely.
Irena kept a record of the names of all the kids she smuggled out and
kept them in a glass jar, buried under a tree in her back yard.
After the war, she tried to locate any parents that may have survived it
and reunited the families. Most, of course, had been gassed.
Those kids she helped got placed into Foster family homes or adopted.
Irena was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.
She was not selected.
Al Gore won, for a slide show on Global Warming.
May she rest in peace.
BEATEN UNTIL THEY BROKE, HER LEGS AND ARMS, BROKEN.
SHE NEVER GAVE THE NAZI ANY INFORMATION. BY BRIBE, SHE
ESCAPED. HER LIFE WAS SAVED. SURVIVING CHILDREN OF THE
CHILDREN SHE SMUGGLED OUT OF WARSAW GAVE TESTIMONY, BUT
AL GORE GOT THE NOD.
SUCH IS THE INTEGRITY OF THE NOBEL PEACE PRIZE.
The prize doesn't always go to the most deserving!
It goes to those who want to push the agenda.
See below and you will see why:
Irena Sendler
There recently was a death of a 98 year-old lady named Irena.
During WWII, Irena got permission to work in the Warsaw Ghetto, as a
Plumbing/Sewer specialist. She had an 'ulterior motive.' She KNEW
what the Nazis' plans were for the Jews (being German.)
Irena muggled infants out in the bottom of the tool box she carried and
she carried in the back of her truck a burlap sack (for larger kids.) She
also had a dog in the back that she trained to bark when the Nazi soldiers
let her in and out of the ghetto.
The soldiers, of course, wanted nothing to do with the dog, and the
barking covered the kids/infants noises.
During her time of doing this, she managed to smuggle out and save
2,500 kids/infants. She was caught, and the Nazis broke both her legs,
arms and beat her severely.
Irena kept a record of the names of all the kids she smuggled out and
kept them in a glass jar, buried under a tree in her back yard.
After the war, she tried to locate any parents that may have survived it
and reunited the families. Most, of course, had been gassed.
Those kids she helped got placed into Foster family homes or adopted.
Irena was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.
She was not selected.
Al Gore won, for a slide show on Global Warming.
May she rest in peace.
Don't start none...won't be none.
-
Walkinghairball
- Posts: 25037
- Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 9:42 pm
- Location: In a rock an roll venue near you....as long as you are in the Pacific Northwest.
-
Walkinghairball
- Posts: 25037
- Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 9:42 pm
- Location: In a rock an roll venue near you....as long as you are in the Pacific Northwest.
The following has been attributed to State Representative Mitchell Kaye from GA. This guy should run for President one day...
NEW PREAMBLE TO THE CONSTITUTION
"We the sensible people of the United States, in an attempt to help everyone get along, restore some semblance of justice, avoid more riots, keep our nation safe, promote positive behavior, and secure the blessings of debt-free liberty to ourselves and our great-great-great-grandchildren, hereby try one more time to ordain and establish some common sense guidelines for the terminally whiny, guilt ridden, delusional, and other liberal bed-wetters. We hold these truths to be self evident: that a whole lot of people are confused by the Bill of Rights and are so dim they require a Bill of NON-Rights."
ARTICLE I: You do not have the right to a new car, big screen TV, or any other form of wealth. More power to you if you can legally acquire them, but no one is guaranteeing anything.
ARTICLE II: You do not have the right to never be offended. This country is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone -- not just you! You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc; but the world is full of idiots, and probably always will be.
ARTICLE III: You do not have the right to be free from harm. If you stick a screwdriver in your eye, learn to be more careful; do not expect the tool manufacturer to make you and all your relatives independently wealthy.
ARTICLE IV: You do not have the right to free food and housing. Americans are the most charitable people to be found, and will gladly help anyone in need, but we are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation after generation of professional couch potatoes who achieve nothing more than the creation of another generation of professional couch potatoes ..
ARTICLE V: You do not have the right to free health care. That would be nice, but from the looks of public housing, we're just not interested in public health care.
ARTICLE VI: You do not have the right to physically harm other people. If you kidnap, rape, intentionally maim, or kill someone, don't be surprised if the rest of us want to see you fry in the electric chair.
ARTICLE VII: You do not have the right to the possessions of others. If you rob, cheat, or coerce away the goods or services of other citizens, don't be surprised if the rest of us get together and lock you away in a place where you still won't have the right to a big screen color TV or a life of leisure.
ARTICLE VIII: You do not have the right to a job. All of us sure want you to have a job, and will gladly help you along in hard times, but we expect you to take advantage of the opportunities of education and vocational training laid before you to make yourself useful. (AMEN!)
ARTICLE IX: You do not have the right to happiness. Being an American means that you have the right to PURSUE happiness, which by the way, is a lot easier if you are unencumbered by an over abundance of idiotic laws created by those of you who were confused by the Bill of Rights.
ARTICLE X: This is an English speaking country. We don't care where you are from, English is our language. Learn it or go back to wherever you came from! (Lastly....)
ARTICLE XI: You do not have the right to change our country's history or heritage. This country was founded on the belief in one true God. And yet, you are given the freedom to believe in any religion, any faith, or no faith at all; with no fear of persecution. The phrase IN GOD WE TRUST is part of our heritage and history, and if you are uncomfortable with it, TOUGH!
NEW PREAMBLE TO THE CONSTITUTION
"We the sensible people of the United States, in an attempt to help everyone get along, restore some semblance of justice, avoid more riots, keep our nation safe, promote positive behavior, and secure the blessings of debt-free liberty to ourselves and our great-great-great-grandchildren, hereby try one more time to ordain and establish some common sense guidelines for the terminally whiny, guilt ridden, delusional, and other liberal bed-wetters. We hold these truths to be self evident: that a whole lot of people are confused by the Bill of Rights and are so dim they require a Bill of NON-Rights."
ARTICLE I: You do not have the right to a new car, big screen TV, or any other form of wealth. More power to you if you can legally acquire them, but no one is guaranteeing anything.
ARTICLE II: You do not have the right to never be offended. This country is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone -- not just you! You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc; but the world is full of idiots, and probably always will be.
ARTICLE III: You do not have the right to be free from harm. If you stick a screwdriver in your eye, learn to be more careful; do not expect the tool manufacturer to make you and all your relatives independently wealthy.
ARTICLE IV: You do not have the right to free food and housing. Americans are the most charitable people to be found, and will gladly help anyone in need, but we are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation after generation of professional couch potatoes who achieve nothing more than the creation of another generation of professional couch potatoes ..
ARTICLE V: You do not have the right to free health care. That would be nice, but from the looks of public housing, we're just not interested in public health care.
ARTICLE VI: You do not have the right to physically harm other people. If you kidnap, rape, intentionally maim, or kill someone, don't be surprised if the rest of us want to see you fry in the electric chair.
ARTICLE VII: You do not have the right to the possessions of others. If you rob, cheat, or coerce away the goods or services of other citizens, don't be surprised if the rest of us get together and lock you away in a place where you still won't have the right to a big screen color TV or a life of leisure.
ARTICLE VIII: You do not have the right to a job. All of us sure want you to have a job, and will gladly help you along in hard times, but we expect you to take advantage of the opportunities of education and vocational training laid before you to make yourself useful. (AMEN!)
ARTICLE IX: You do not have the right to happiness. Being an American means that you have the right to PURSUE happiness, which by the way, is a lot easier if you are unencumbered by an over abundance of idiotic laws created by those of you who were confused by the Bill of Rights.
ARTICLE X: This is an English speaking country. We don't care where you are from, English is our language. Learn it or go back to wherever you came from! (Lastly....)
ARTICLE XI: You do not have the right to change our country's history or heritage. This country was founded on the belief in one true God. And yet, you are given the freedom to believe in any religion, any faith, or no faith at all; with no fear of persecution. The phrase IN GOD WE TRUST is part of our heritage and history, and if you are uncomfortable with it, TOUGH!
This space for rent
H/T to JammieWearingFool.com
Good News:
President With 'Muslim Roots' Declares
America a Muslim Country
Nothing like completely letting loose with where you're coming from.
A day after "revealing" his Muslim roots, President Barack Hussein Obama
now claims America can be seen as a Muslim country.
Hey, what about the separation of mosque and state?
In an interview with Laura Haim on Canal Plus, a French television station,
Mr. Obama noted that the United States also could be considered as ?one
of the largest Muslim countries in the world.? He sought to downplay the
expectations of the speech, but he said he hoped the address would raise
awareness about Muslims.
?And one of the points I want to make is, is that if you actually took the
number of Muslim Americans, we?d be one of the largest Muslim countries
in the world,? Mr. Obama said. ?And so there?s got to be a better dialogue
and a better understanding between the two peoples.?
So he wants dialogue with Muslims, but as for Republicans, they can forget it.
Of course, Roger L. Simon points out an inconvenient truth for President
Hussein.
I guess it depends on what your definition of ?one of? is. According to
Wikipedia, the US ranks thirty-eighth with a Muslim population of some
4.5 million (about one and half percent of our population). Indonesia is
first at over two hundred and seven million.
Our leader goes on to remonstrate with our citizenry about educating
ourselves about Islam, which is, in his words, a religion that has
always ?evolved along with progress.? I suppose that?s true if you
disregard women?s rights, gay rights and the basic democratic need for
the primacy of state law for all citizens, not to mention a host of other
values we could group under the rubric of the Enlightenment.
The problem with Obama?s implication that we are not educated about
Islam is that he is dead wrong. Many of us now are - by necessity. We
know the difference between Medina and Mecca Korans (and their views
of jihad), between Sunni and Shiite and so forth. We also know what
dhimmi law is? and taqqiya.
Now I suppose if the GOP uses Hussein's words against him it will be
what, hate speech? Anti-Muslim bigotry?
Let me also see if I get this straight:
Although we're an 85% Christian nation, if someone has the temerity to
call this a Christian nation - they're roundly condemned and excoriated by
the secular left. Hussein calls this a Muslim country and trust me,
you won't hear a peep from the left.
They'll just ridicule us for being paranoid.
Is it any wonder why President Hussein hasn't condemned the Muslim
killer of the Army recruiter?
Good News:
President With 'Muslim Roots' Declares
America a Muslim Country
Nothing like completely letting loose with where you're coming from.
A day after "revealing" his Muslim roots, President Barack Hussein Obama
now claims America can be seen as a Muslim country.
Hey, what about the separation of mosque and state?
In an interview with Laura Haim on Canal Plus, a French television station,
Mr. Obama noted that the United States also could be considered as ?one
of the largest Muslim countries in the world.? He sought to downplay the
expectations of the speech, but he said he hoped the address would raise
awareness about Muslims.
?And one of the points I want to make is, is that if you actually took the
number of Muslim Americans, we?d be one of the largest Muslim countries
in the world,? Mr. Obama said. ?And so there?s got to be a better dialogue
and a better understanding between the two peoples.?
So he wants dialogue with Muslims, but as for Republicans, they can forget it.
Of course, Roger L. Simon points out an inconvenient truth for President
Hussein.
I guess it depends on what your definition of ?one of? is. According to
Wikipedia, the US ranks thirty-eighth with a Muslim population of some
4.5 million (about one and half percent of our population). Indonesia is
first at over two hundred and seven million.
Our leader goes on to remonstrate with our citizenry about educating
ourselves about Islam, which is, in his words, a religion that has
always ?evolved along with progress.? I suppose that?s true if you
disregard women?s rights, gay rights and the basic democratic need for
the primacy of state law for all citizens, not to mention a host of other
values we could group under the rubric of the Enlightenment.
The problem with Obama?s implication that we are not educated about
Islam is that he is dead wrong. Many of us now are - by necessity. We
know the difference between Medina and Mecca Korans (and their views
of jihad), between Sunni and Shiite and so forth. We also know what
dhimmi law is? and taqqiya.
Now I suppose if the GOP uses Hussein's words against him it will be
what, hate speech? Anti-Muslim bigotry?
Let me also see if I get this straight:
Although we're an 85% Christian nation, if someone has the temerity to
call this a Christian nation - they're roundly condemned and excoriated by
the secular left. Hussein calls this a Muslim country and trust me,
you won't hear a peep from the left.
They'll just ridicule us for being paranoid.
Is it any wonder why President Hussein hasn't condemned the Muslim
killer of the Army recruiter?
Don't start none...won't be none.
H/T to Cranky @ sixmeatbuffet.com
If I Could Spell ?Shadenfroyd".....
June 5th, 2009 at 8:29 am by Cranky
...I?d have a daily post of people who had no clue that Hope ?n? Change?
would come out of their own pockets.
Today?s spotlight would be on Bill Gates? baby, Microsoft:
[Microsoft Corp. Chief Executive Officer] Ballmer is one of 10 U.S.
software company executives pushing back against the tax proposals in
meetings today with White House officials including Jason Furman, deputy
director of the National Economic Council, and the heads of congressional
committees such as House Ways and Means Committee Chairman
Charles Rangel, a New York Democrat.
In the ?no kidding? department:
?It makes U.S. jobs more expensive,? Ballmer said in an interview.
?We?re better off taking lots of people and moving them out of the U.S. as
opposed to keeping them inside the U.S.?
Obama, on May 4, proposed outlawing or restricting about $190 billion in
tax breaks for offshore companies over the next decade.
Only somebody as inexperienced as a college student or stupid as a
celebrity couldn?t see this coming.
If I Could Spell ?Shadenfroyd".....
June 5th, 2009 at 8:29 am by Cranky
...I?d have a daily post of people who had no clue that Hope ?n? Change?
would come out of their own pockets.
Today?s spotlight would be on Bill Gates? baby, Microsoft:
[Microsoft Corp. Chief Executive Officer] Ballmer is one of 10 U.S.
software company executives pushing back against the tax proposals in
meetings today with White House officials including Jason Furman, deputy
director of the National Economic Council, and the heads of congressional
committees such as House Ways and Means Committee Chairman
Charles Rangel, a New York Democrat.
In the ?no kidding? department:
?It makes U.S. jobs more expensive,? Ballmer said in an interview.
?We?re better off taking lots of people and moving them out of the U.S. as
opposed to keeping them inside the U.S.?
Obama, on May 4, proposed outlawing or restricting about $190 billion in
tax breaks for offshore companies over the next decade.
Only somebody as inexperienced as a college student or stupid as a
celebrity couldn?t see this coming.
Don't start none...won't be none.
New Immigration Laws:
(Read to the bottom or you will miss the message?)
1. There will be no special bilingual programs in the schools.
* * * * * * * *
2. All ballots will be in this nation?s language.
* * * * * * * *
3.. All government business will be conducted in our language.
* * * * * * * *
4. Non-residents will NOT have the right to vote - no matter how long they
are here.
* * * * * * * *
5. Non-citizens will NEVER be able to hold political office.
* * * * * * * *
6 Foreigners will not be a burden to the taxpayers. No welfare, no food
stamps, no health care, or other government assistance programs. Any
burden will be deported.
* * * * * * * *
7. Foreigners can invest in this country, but it must be an amount at least
equal to 40,000 times the daily minimum wage.
* * * * * * * *
8. If foreigners come here and buy land? options will be restricted.
Certain parcels, including waterfront property, are reserved for citizens
naturally born into this country.
* * * * * * * *
9.. Foreigners may have no protests; no demonstrations, no waving of a
foreign flag, no political organizing, no bad-mouthing our president or his
policies. These will lead to deportation.
* * * * * * * *
10. If you do come to this country illegally, you will be actively hunted.
When caught, you will be sent to jail until your deportation can be
arranged. All assets will be taken from you.
Do those sound like strict immigration proposals?
They sure do to me.
There's only one problem:
These are the current immigration laws of
MEXICO.
Chew on that for a while....
(Read to the bottom or you will miss the message?)
1. There will be no special bilingual programs in the schools.
* * * * * * * *
2. All ballots will be in this nation?s language.
* * * * * * * *
3.. All government business will be conducted in our language.
* * * * * * * *
4. Non-residents will NOT have the right to vote - no matter how long they
are here.
* * * * * * * *
5. Non-citizens will NEVER be able to hold political office.
* * * * * * * *
6 Foreigners will not be a burden to the taxpayers. No welfare, no food
stamps, no health care, or other government assistance programs. Any
burden will be deported.
* * * * * * * *
7. Foreigners can invest in this country, but it must be an amount at least
equal to 40,000 times the daily minimum wage.
* * * * * * * *
8. If foreigners come here and buy land? options will be restricted.
Certain parcels, including waterfront property, are reserved for citizens
naturally born into this country.
* * * * * * * *
9.. Foreigners may have no protests; no demonstrations, no waving of a
foreign flag, no political organizing, no bad-mouthing our president or his
policies. These will lead to deportation.
* * * * * * * *
10. If you do come to this country illegally, you will be actively hunted.
When caught, you will be sent to jail until your deportation can be
arranged. All assets will be taken from you.
Do those sound like strict immigration proposals?
They sure do to me.
There's only one problem:
These are the current immigration laws of
MEXICO.
Chew on that for a while....
Don't start none...won't be none.
-
Big Blue Owl
- Posts: 7457
- Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 7:31 am
- Location: Somewhere between the darkness and the light
-
Big Blue Owl
- Posts: 7457
- Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 7:31 am
- Location: Somewhere between the darkness and the light
Hey, why would the Reps (almost all) vote against supporting the troops. remember in 2004, Bush did his best to make a snide remark about John Kerry when he refused to vote yea for the same type of thing. Now, suddenly it's patriotic to do the very thing they lambasted a few Dems for a few years ago. 
-------------------
WASHINGTON - Congress is on its way to giving President Barack Obama what could be its final emergency war-spending bill, an annual budgetary sleight-of-hand that since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, has cost the nation nearly $1 trillion.
The Senate is to move to the $106 billion measure Wednesday, a day after the House narrowly passed the bill over the objections of nearly all Republicans and several dozen anti-war Democrats.
The bill provides about $80 billion to maintain defense and intelligence activities in Iraq and Afghanistan through the rest of this fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30. It includes some $10 billion in economic and security aid for those two countries as well as Pakistan and $7.7 billion to combat the flu pandemic.
Obama pushed hard for passage, saying it was crucial to his plans to wind down operations in Iraq in an orderly way while boosting force strength in Afghanistan and providing Pakistan with the military and economic aid it needs to deal with the Taliban insurgency.
The president, who campaigned on a platform of bringing the Iraq war to an end, also sought to placate the anti-war wing of his party by directing that his administration end the practice of emergency spending bills.
Every year since 2001, Congress has approved what are called emergency supplementals, an ad-hoc, unpaid-for approach outside the normal Pentagon budget, to finance military and anti-terror activities. The Congressional Research Service estimates that, with enactment of the current bill, the outlay will approach $1 trillion, with $684 billion for Iraq, $223 billion for Afghanistan and $28 billion for various security programs.
The Obama White House has requested ? through the Pentagon budget ? about $130 billion for war operations in the fiscal year beginning Oct. 1, down from about $149 billion this year.
Near-unanimous GOP opposition
The House vote on the 2009 supplemental took place as it opened debate on 2010 spending bills. On Tuesday it began deliberation on a $64.4 billion bill to finance law enforcement, science, census and Commerce Department programs in 2010. It includes $18.2 billion for NASA, including money for the next generation of human space flight, and $7.4 billion to prepare for the 2010 census.
The 226-202 House vote on the war spending bill was unusual in that Republicans, strong supporters of military spending, were almost unanimous in opposing the bill.
The minority party objected to the inclusion in the final House-Senate compromise bill of $5 billion to secure a $108 billion U.S. line of credit to the International Monetary Fund for loans to poorer countries hit by the economic downturn.
Obama pledged the U.S. commitment at the G-20 meeting in London last April, but Republicans raised strong objections.
"What does a $108 billion global bailout have to do with protecting our troops and giving them the tools they need for victory?" asked House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer of Maryland countered that the past three Republican presidents all supported the IMF and suggested that the GOP was raising the issue "to try to embarrass Democrats" by showing they can't pass spending bills. "We can and we will," he said.
Abuse photos
Republicans also balked at the removal from the final bill of a provision barring the release of photos showing U.S. troops abusing detainees. Obama, in negotiating that removal, gave assurances that he would stop any attempt to make the photos public.
Last month, when the House passed its original version of the bill without the IMF provision by a 368-60 margin, 51 anti-war Democrats opposed it. This time, with only five Republicans voting for it, Democratic leaders managed to reduce opposition within their party to 32.
Among other provisions in the bill:
$534 million for some 185,000 service members who have had their enlistments involuntarily extended since Sept. 11, 2001. They will receive $500 for every month they were held under stop-loss orders.
$10.4 billion for international aid, with $1.4 billion for Afghanistan, $2.4 billion for Pakistan, $958 million for Iraq, $390 million for refugee assistance and $700 million for international food assistance.
$721 million for U.N. peacekeeping operations.
$1 billion for a "cash for clunkers" program in which the government offers rebates to consumers who trade in their old gas guzzlers for more fuel-efficient models.
-------------------
WASHINGTON - Congress is on its way to giving President Barack Obama what could be its final emergency war-spending bill, an annual budgetary sleight-of-hand that since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, has cost the nation nearly $1 trillion.
The Senate is to move to the $106 billion measure Wednesday, a day after the House narrowly passed the bill over the objections of nearly all Republicans and several dozen anti-war Democrats.
The bill provides about $80 billion to maintain defense and intelligence activities in Iraq and Afghanistan through the rest of this fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30. It includes some $10 billion in economic and security aid for those two countries as well as Pakistan and $7.7 billion to combat the flu pandemic.
Obama pushed hard for passage, saying it was crucial to his plans to wind down operations in Iraq in an orderly way while boosting force strength in Afghanistan and providing Pakistan with the military and economic aid it needs to deal with the Taliban insurgency.
The president, who campaigned on a platform of bringing the Iraq war to an end, also sought to placate the anti-war wing of his party by directing that his administration end the practice of emergency spending bills.
Every year since 2001, Congress has approved what are called emergency supplementals, an ad-hoc, unpaid-for approach outside the normal Pentagon budget, to finance military and anti-terror activities. The Congressional Research Service estimates that, with enactment of the current bill, the outlay will approach $1 trillion, with $684 billion for Iraq, $223 billion for Afghanistan and $28 billion for various security programs.
The Obama White House has requested ? through the Pentagon budget ? about $130 billion for war operations in the fiscal year beginning Oct. 1, down from about $149 billion this year.
Near-unanimous GOP opposition
The House vote on the 2009 supplemental took place as it opened debate on 2010 spending bills. On Tuesday it began deliberation on a $64.4 billion bill to finance law enforcement, science, census and Commerce Department programs in 2010. It includes $18.2 billion for NASA, including money for the next generation of human space flight, and $7.4 billion to prepare for the 2010 census.
The 226-202 House vote on the war spending bill was unusual in that Republicans, strong supporters of military spending, were almost unanimous in opposing the bill.
The minority party objected to the inclusion in the final House-Senate compromise bill of $5 billion to secure a $108 billion U.S. line of credit to the International Monetary Fund for loans to poorer countries hit by the economic downturn.
Obama pledged the U.S. commitment at the G-20 meeting in London last April, but Republicans raised strong objections.
"What does a $108 billion global bailout have to do with protecting our troops and giving them the tools they need for victory?" asked House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer of Maryland countered that the past three Republican presidents all supported the IMF and suggested that the GOP was raising the issue "to try to embarrass Democrats" by showing they can't pass spending bills. "We can and we will," he said.
Abuse photos
Republicans also balked at the removal from the final bill of a provision barring the release of photos showing U.S. troops abusing detainees. Obama, in negotiating that removal, gave assurances that he would stop any attempt to make the photos public.
Last month, when the House passed its original version of the bill without the IMF provision by a 368-60 margin, 51 anti-war Democrats opposed it. This time, with only five Republicans voting for it, Democratic leaders managed to reduce opposition within their party to 32.
Among other provisions in the bill:
$534 million for some 185,000 service members who have had their enlistments involuntarily extended since Sept. 11, 2001. They will receive $500 for every month they were held under stop-loss orders.
$10.4 billion for international aid, with $1.4 billion for Afghanistan, $2.4 billion for Pakistan, $958 million for Iraq, $390 million for refugee assistance and $700 million for international food assistance.
$721 million for U.N. peacekeeping operations.
$1 billion for a "cash for clunkers" program in which the government offers rebates to consumers who trade in their old gas guzzlers for more fuel-efficient models.
(((((((((((((((all'a you)))))))))))))))
-
Walkinghairball
- Posts: 25037
- Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 9:42 pm
- Location: In a rock an roll venue near you....as long as you are in the Pacific Northwest.
"What does a $108 billion global bailout have to do with protecting our
troops and giving them the tools they need for victory?" asked House
Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio.
Because JB, all is not what it seems in the tax-n-spend fest.
There's also 5.8B in WASTE that's not being talked about...
BY EITHER SIDE.
Both sides of the aisle are spineless. It's the same ol' blame game.
Remember Obama saying we're not going to "meddle" in Iran's affairs?
It's our duty as a democracy to spread the virtues of freedom and
promote it whenever possible.
Critical tactical mistake, Obama. That chance won't land square in your
lap again.
Congress is a massively corrupt disappointment, Pelosi is the frickin'
devil, and the PRNK is playing nuclear chicken.
You ain't seen nothin' yet.
troops and giving them the tools they need for victory?" asked House
Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio.
Because JB, all is not what it seems in the tax-n-spend fest.
There's also 5.8B in WASTE that's not being talked about...
BY EITHER SIDE.
Both sides of the aisle are spineless. It's the same ol' blame game.
Remember Obama saying we're not going to "meddle" in Iran's affairs?
It's our duty as a democracy to spread the virtues of freedom and
promote it whenever possible.
Critical tactical mistake, Obama. That chance won't land square in your
lap again.
Congress is a massively corrupt disappointment, Pelosi is the frickin'
devil, and the PRNK is playing nuclear chicken.
You ain't seen nothin' yet.
Don't start none...won't be none.