Democrats & Liberals Archives

Two Ways to Stop the War

I’m upset with Democrats that we elected to Congress in order to stop the Iraq War. They come up with pointless resolutions giving the “sense of the Congress” and making suggestions of ideas Bush may consider, if he so wishes. The only way to stop the Iraq War is through our tax system. Everyone knows that Congress controls, or should control the purse.

One senator who has finally decided to do something through funding is Senator David Obey:

Obey plans fight over war funding. House Appropriations Chairman David Obey (D-WI) said today that he will not report out a war supplemental spending bill this year unless the White House makes drastic changes in its Iraq strategy. Obey demanded three conditions: 1) the White House would have to establish a goal to end U.S. involvement in the country, 2) ensure that troops receive adequate downtime between deployments, and 3) begin a “broad scale diplomatic offensive” involving other countries in the region.

The White House says it wants $190 billion. According to a recent Washington Post/ABC News Poll, 66% of Americans want Congress to either reduce somewhat or reduce sharply the $190 billion.

Even so, too many Democrats say "OK," which is a ridiculous way to win a political argument. Obey's approach is brilliant. You want money? Tell me what for. If I (Congress) don't like what you plan to use the money for you don't get the money. Very simple.

But will all the other Democrats go along? I hope so.

Obey is on another tack, as well. The Iraq War is the first in America's history where most Americans do not suffer in some way because of the war. Only troops and their families suffer, and they suffer immeasurably. There are no taxes to pay for the hundreds of billions of dollars thrown away in pursuit of a mirage. As a matter of fact, our illustrious president insisted that we pay for the Iraq War with tax cuts.

Bush is promising a veto on a child health care bill because it is too expensive. Compared to what? His $190 billion Iraq-War supplemental?

The previous article also said that Obey will soon unveil a “surtax,” designed to raise $140 billion to $150 billion. Obey said:

We need to stop pretending that this war doesn’t cost anything.

If each of us had to pay a surtax to maintain the war, I am sure that many war boosters will change their tune. The majority against the Iraq War will swell.

Hurray for Obey! He's offering 2 excellent choices for getting out of Iraq.

Posted by Paul Siegel at October 2, 2007 5:30 PM
Comments
Comment #235028

Paul, Oh, yes, and please recommend that the surtax to fund the war be attached to tobacco sales, this group of Americans seems to be Democrats favorite target both targeting them for taxes others don’t have to pay, and funding Children’s health care insurance out of their incomes so, when they get Emphysema or COPD, they will be sure to be broke and die quickly as paupers. This group should be good for another 10 to 20 billion over 10 years for Iraq. It’s not like anyone intends to use their cigarette taxes to help them quit smoking, after all.

I mean, why surtax everyone, when when you can just surtax the people you really don’t like, smokers? Less political fallout, and you can argue the tax will break their addiction; doesn’t matter that it’s not true. Democrats say a border barrier won’t significantly slow illegal immigration too. We all know that’s a lie as well.

And why try to end US military involvement in Iraq when your party’s leading presidential candidates won’t campaign on a promise to pull out? Isn’t that the party shooting its potential party leader in the foot, so to speak?

Rep. Steny Hoyer (D) got up before the Press Club this last week and lied through his teeth when he said to the public every Democratic Bill has been subject to PayGo. A number of Democratic Bill’s this year had within them, exemptions from PayGo.

So, what’s a few more lies more or less from Democrats in office. David Obey is simply seeking to tax increases. At least he is being mostly honest about it. Not that the revenues would be targeted specifically for Iraq spending - that’s the deceptive portion.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 2, 2007 6:12 PM
Comment #235037

CUT THE FUNDING.

Posted by: the libertine at October 2, 2007 6:57 PM
Comment #235042

CUT THE FUNDING. Now that’s a typical left wing nut job statement. Cut the funding more troops die.

Posted by: KAP at October 2, 2007 7:23 PM
Comment #235044

“We need to stop pretending that this war doesn’t cost anything.
If each of us had to pay a surtax to maintain the war, I am sure that many war boosters will change their tune. The majority against the Iraq War will swell.”
Posted by Paul Siegel at October 2, 2007 05:30 PM

Wait just a minute Paul. We keep pretending that national health care won’t cost anything. Perhaps President Obey should have placed the burden on tobacco users…hell, they aren’t real people anyway. It’s hard to imagine this man Obey dictating anything to the CIC. Chairman Obey has over-reached a little I think. I am sure his view of ever greater tax burdens will be popular with the liberals however. Do you suppose that Hillary will take orders from congress also?

Posted by: Jim at October 2, 2007 7:25 PM
Comment #235045

Cut the funding.

It is that simple. Forget resolutions. Cut the funding.

Provide enough to withdraw troops, and for a contingent to protect the embassy. How Bush chooses to spend those minimal funds is up to him. If he wants to endanger the military by keeping them there, well, that is his choice.

Cut the funding.

Posted by: phx8 at October 2, 2007 7:45 PM
Comment #235049

With ratings for congress lower than whale crap you say cut funding. You democrats really want to cut your own throats. It looks better and better for a good independent to throw his hat into the race for the white house. I’m all for ending the war in Iraq but cut funding is pure stupidity and political suicide.

Posted by: KAP at October 2, 2007 8:26 PM
Comment #235050
Cut the funding more troops die.

Would you care to explain that jump of illogic?

If the war isn’t funded, the soldiers come home…if they’re home, they’re not being shot at, bombed, and or having to put up with IEDs…just your run of the mill traffic accidents and murderous spouses.

Posted by: Rachel at October 2, 2007 8:31 PM
Comment #235051

KAP, there are billions in funding for Iraq that could be cut without impeding our soldier’s mission one iota. Problem is, our politicians would have 1) identify those funds, as in multi-year machine and auto leases for sums 3 and 4 times greater than their purchase price, and 2) surgically fund the Iraq effort.

But, that is not the goal, to save taxpayer’s dollars, the goal is politics, and saving the taxpayer’s a few billion is not sexy enough to win elections.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 2, 2007 8:34 PM
Comment #235054

Rachel
Cut funds bring the troops home just to send them right back when all hell brakes loose over there. More troops die.
David
The military has paid a ridiculous price for equipment even when I was in 30 years ago. If those idiots in Washington haven’t stopped it by now they never will, besides where do you think they get their compaign money from.

Posted by: KAP at October 2, 2007 8:51 PM
Comment #235060

KAP would have said.I dont like Louis XVI,but cutting off his head,(IS TAKING IT TO FAR).

Posted by: the libertine at October 2, 2007 11:32 PM
Comment #235069

Paul,

Obey is playing this smart as hell. He knows this will go nowhere but maybe, just maybe this will wake up a few people about the cost of this GD war!

This would also be a great time to reintroduce a military draft bill. It’s wake up time.

I wish Obey was Speaker rather than Pelosi. Pelosi has been a major let down. As has Reid in the Senate. They both need to be sent packing.

Posted by: KansasDem at October 3, 2007 12:39 AM
Comment #235072

“If the war isn’t funded, the soldiers come home”

Rachel,

It’s not that simple. Without a “binding” resolution limiting what funds are allocated for, the CinC can order the Pentagon to divert funding wherever he deems necessary.

If we Dems do this the wrong way we’ll end up with a new generation of MIA’s! And quite possibly an increase in war dead. I can’t sleep well with that. I think realistically it will take at least 12 months to get out, more likely 18 months.

Posted by: KansasDem at October 3, 2007 1:04 AM
Comment #235077

They need to cut the funding. It’s that simple.
We could have our troops home within a years time.

Oh, and FYI (if anyone was wondering), this country had a surtax imposed during WWII, and during Vietnam, so this is actually nothing new.

Posted by: Adrienne at October 3, 2007 2:28 AM
Comment #235081

The best way to end the war is to achieve a good result in Iraq - i.e.win, which is what is happening now - finally. The surge is working, but progress is fragile. Leading Dems have figured this out and are not going to jeapardize it. That is why all the candidates who might really be president next year are backing away from the extreme position,except through meaninless gestures to their more radical base, you know, the guys who have not gotten the word.

Morale among the troops in Iraq is good. That is why they are so rarely asked their opinion by those wishing quick withdrawal. Some of those tv news shows should come out and talk to them a little more. Sure, they would rather be someplace else because conditions are harsh and dangerous, but the Dem attempt to paint troops in Iraq as victims is silly.

The whole pull out debate is OBEd by the new Iraq strategy that came out in January. Real progress is being made AND the troops will begin to come home because of it. That is the way to end a war - by winning it.

Those who insist on hating Bush can still do so. In 2005/6 conditions deteriorated. Even I had some doubts in January. We still are not out of the woods, but we have found the path. After we get the job done, Dems can cut funding and brag about it if they so desire.

Posted by: Jack at October 3, 2007 3:33 AM
Comment #235082

International Blogger Day for Free Bumra ( 4 October 2007)


We would like to inform, in fact request you to know about the brutality and information blackout in Crisis Burma recently.

( for further information : http://www.ko-htike.blogspot.com)

Junta is so cruel and wicked neglecting outside world. But international pressure have been getting higher through local bloggers and internet users. So now they are targeting all people including bloggers, internet cafe, journalists, even to those who carrying camera and handphones. ( what a worst in this 21st century)

The fact is that defenseless people are suffering and struggling apparently behind the international watching windows now. Junta cut down all blogspot service, even the whole internet system . In that sense , we would urge you to promote your freedom for those of unfortunate Burmese civilians by campaigning International Blogger Day ( 4 Oct 07) for Free Burma as follows.

http://www2.free-burma.org/index.php


We world request you to make know the rest of the world on behalf of those who have no more information freedom and severely suppressed not to talk and speak out the world.

We do hope a lot for your help on behalf of Burmese Google and Blogspot users.


Regards,
Burma changer ( on behalf of Free Burma campaign)

Posted by: burma changer at October 3, 2007 4:45 AM
Comment #235084
Cut funds bring the troops home just to send them right back when all hell brakes loose over there. More troops die.

Still very illogical and unexplained…if the US troops aren’t in Iraq, they aren’t being killed…Iraq was cobbled together by the British Empire from a whole bunch of warring factions…nothing has changed…plus çe change, plus çe même chose!!

And the word is “breaks”; we’d certainly like to put the “brakes” on the Iraq War spending…

Posted by: Rachel at October 3, 2007 7:44 AM
Comment #235086

Wars cost money and lives. that is the nature of any war. The cost of winning a war is always higher than the cost of losing a war both in terms of money and lives. Those are facts.

The war in afghanistan is costing money and lives also. so, if money and lives are the primary concern for the anti-victory crowd stop being a hypocrite and apply your arguments to afghanistan also.

Posted by: The Griper at October 3, 2007 8:54 AM
Comment #235095

The war tax is actually a great idea.
Bush supporters are all about a free war. Let’s see them stand in there when they actually have to contribute some cash - heaven forbid.

Posted by: Schwamp at October 3, 2007 10:09 AM
Comment #235098

I agree, a war tax IS a good idea. I think it should be a national sales tax, or other across the board tax, however. A draft would even be more effective.

As to the cut the funding idea, if there were the votes on the Republican side of the aisle, that would’ve been done. It’s been tried and failed.

The stupidity of the Republican position is to cut all funding or continue to fully fund this stupid policy. Both positions are beyond stupid. Look for a Democratic supermajority elected in Congress in 08.

It is sad that soldiers will die and Iraq will descend further into chaos because of Republican obstinance and political posturing.

Posted by: alien from the planet zorg at October 3, 2007 11:00 AM
Comment #235102
The cost of winning a war is always higher than the cost of losing a war both in terms of money and lives.

The Iraq War is already lost..there is no viable point at which we could say the US “won” the war…so continued money and lives are being wasted…get out now.

Posted by: Rachel at October 3, 2007 11:19 AM
Comment #235112

Paul, the reason why the dems aren’t listening to you is b/c Bush is b*tch slapping them on the Iraq War. Contrary to what many of you believe, the American people, who are not fond of this war, DO NOT want to lose and they don’t think it is lost. The Petreaus report confirmed that the surge is (indeed) working and the Dems atrocious attacks on the General made them and their leaders (Moveon.org crowd) look ba(aaaa)d; real bad in many American’s eyes. Sorry, but some of you have to accept the fact that we are winning, we will win and (some of you) made the wrong choice to bet against our military just to get at our President. Get over it and “move on” (pun intended)…

Posted by: rahdigly at October 3, 2007 12:08 PM
Comment #235128

Jack, The Griper, and Rahdigly,
The American people are no longer interested in the Neocon Pyrrhic Victory in Iraq that those on the right continue to advocate for. Btw, those still irrationally pipe dreaming about this war should really listen to Cheney circa 1992. In fact, Dick ought to listen to the former Dick asking how many additional American lives such a “quagmire” would be worth. His answer: “Not very damn many.” Amazingly he even seemed interested in what such an occupation would cost in money, way back then!

Posted by: Adrienne at October 3, 2007 1:40 PM
Comment #235166

I guess I am one of the rare consevatives who doesn’t feel we can win the war. Nothing against our troops its just that unless they find a way to exterminate Islam, that country will just revert back to the blood letting the moment we leave.

I really don’t have the answer for what our best strategy is but I do sense that the dems are desparatly trying to get us out of there quickly so that the blood bath that follows will happen under Bush which will be his fault for pulling out.

Posted by: Carnak at October 3, 2007 6:04 PM
Comment #235206

Libertine

Nobody here is on meth. Everybody wants to come home, but most are willing to do their duty until they get the job done. You may think the war is lost. Not everybody over here has gotten that word. On the contrary, for example in Haditha, which was “lost” the Marines have made great progress. They are working with Iraqi and Iraqis are working with them.

I know some people say that this was just a lucky break. I suggest you tell that to the Marines who created the conditions for that luck.

Nobody wants us to stay any longer than we have to. Troops will begin to come home soon BECAUSE of our success.

You guys will figure out that things have changed in a couple of months. Then you can say it was all luck.

Posted by: Jack at October 4, 2007 3:13 AM
Comment #235243

Jack, don’t waste your time. Libertine has been banned and won’t be permitted to respond.

Posted by: Watchblog Managing Editor at October 4, 2007 1:48 PM
Comment #235332

Paul Siegel - I greatly appreciate your fact

driven commentary, an most certainly is a special treat to read.

Thanks for being so dedicated an up front.

_

Posted by: -DAVID- at October 5, 2007 4:42 AM
Comment #235541

nyc musician is raising funds and awareness of the fallen soldiers and their families—tshirts and the first song are up at www.benwarrenmusic.com—20 percent of funds go to assist families and soldiers trauma and medical needs—please send in your stories.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE For more information, contact: BIOYA Entertainment 632 East 11th Street Suite #26 New York, NY 10009 Phone: Rebecca Greenberg 646-637-8584 Ben Warren 646-924-8488 Email: benwarrenmusic@gmail.com New York City, NY – September 19, 2007-BEN WARREN, NYC MUSICIAN, RECORDS SONGS ABOUT SOLDIERS WHO HAVE FALLEN IN IRAQ. Every two weeks, starting October 2, 2007, Warren will compose a song from information provided by the friends and families of the soldiers. Warren will record a song every two weeks from varying regions of the United States, starting with the Midwest. He will also record a song about active soldiers and also one about a veteran of war. Warren wants to give a voice to our fallen soldiers in a way that will bring long-term awareness to the overall effects of war. He feels the ones who have sacrificed for our country need a vehicle to share their experiences and should be focused on. “As our politicians argue over the best way to (effectively) end this war and bring our troops home, I wanted to focus on the toll the war has taken on our soldiers and their families.” Warren said when asked to comment on the political nature of the project. The Midwest song will be released on October 2, 2007. The South region song will be released on October 16, 2007. The active soldiers song will be released on October 30, 2007. The veteran’s song will be released two days after Veterans Day on November 13, 2007. The West coast song will be released on November 27, 2007. The East coast song will be released on December 11, 2007. The final song, in remembrance of the families during the Holidays will be released on December 25, 2007. Besides radio airplay, all songs will be released on Ben Warren’s blog at www.benwarrenmusic.com Ben Warren was a member of well-known NYC group ‘Whats Up’ (with Jason Paige) whose debut album “Stand Up” was produced by legendary Chic bassist Bernard Edwards, as well as a successful solo-artist with albums “Famous”, “Manifest Destiny” and “Dead at Disneyland” With his sophisticated lyrics he has established himself as a respected artist in the alternative pop arena. He garnered national recognition by covering multi-platinum artist Eric B And Rakim’s song “Microphone Fiend” on “Famous.” Ben Warren is an artist of BIOYA Entertainment, an independent label that promotes the careers and longevity of artists who make a difference. To be considered all interested parties should send their information to BIOYA Entertainment in a timely manner. All information, documents, pictures and videos sent should be labeled with what category/region it belongs to. Due to the large amount of material we receive please send photocopies that will not need to be returned in manila envelopes with the name of the region on the front and back of the envelope. For more information, contact: BIOYA Entertainment 632 East 11th St. Suite #26 Tel: Rebecca Greenberg 646-637-8584 Ben Warren 646-924-8488 Email: benwarrenmusic@gmail.com ###

Posted by: rebecca at October 7, 2007 8:08 PM
Post a comment