home

Murtha Makes An Argument, But Not In Support of the House Funding Bill

As usual, I speak for me only

Let me first be clear on this - John Murtha is NOT the problem with the House Dems. But his post at Huffington Post is not favorable for the proposed House supplemental funding bill. I think it is actually an indictment:

. . . We must insist that before we send our battle weary warriors back into intense combat, we give them the time they need to rest and reconstitute and the time they deserve to spend with family and loved ones.

During this year, the Bush Administration has requested $1 trillion for the Department of Defense. $9 billion a month is being expended for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan . . . Over 3,200 of our sons and daughters have lost their lives in Iraq and close to 25,000 have been wounded, to include thousands of traumatic brain injuries and hundreds of limb amputations.

. . . Meanwhile in Iraq the situation remains dire. Benchmarks established by this Administration are elusive and routinely ignored.

. . . After four years of incompetence and mismanagement, this Administration must come to the realization that Iraq's civil war can only be solved by the Iraqi people and that stability in Iraq can only be accomplished when U.S. and coalition forces end the occupation and redeploy.

Hard then to justify the House bill's funding of the Iraq Debacle through September 2008 in the face of that Representative Murtha. As you say, Bush routinely ignores benchmarks. He'll certainly ignore the House's.

On a related note, MoveOn proves irony is dead. They have the gall to call anyone else spineless after their rollover:

YOUNG WOMAN: I don't know how he can walk.

MAN: I guess he doesn't drive a car.

OLD WOMAN: He must eat lying down.

ANNOUNCER: They're talking about our Republican Congressman, Jim Walsh. Reliable sources have reported that he's lost his backbone. Last November, America voted to change course in Iraq. We wanted to bring our troops home from a religious civil war.

And we expected Jim Walsh to have the backbone to stand up to George Bush and Dick Cheney, to stand with the leadership in Congress and get us out of Iraq.

Instead Jim Walsh seems to be rolling over in support of George Bush, in support of sending in more troops, sacrificing more lives and more money on this religious civil war.

Has Jim Walsh really lost his backbone? Ask him. Call XXXXXXXXXXXXX. Paid for by the 3.2 million members of MoveOn.org Political Action.

How about an ad about Move On's spinelessness? Chutzpah should be the title of Move On's ad.

< Senate Approves Bill To Repeal Gonzales' Hiring Authority | Rethinking National Security Letters >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Shows why they didn't want him to be the (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by TexDem on Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 01:14:50 PM EST
    Democrat's Whip. He had too much spine for them.

    Another reason.... (none / 0) (#2)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 01:32:02 PM EST
    That and the fact that his history includes being a non idcited co-conspirator.

    Parent
    when you can't attack the message ... (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by Sailor on Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 03:52:11 PM EST
    ... smear the messenger.

    Try dealing with the content and swiftboating smears from 30 years ago.

    Parent

    Pet peeve (none / 0) (#3)
    by TexDem on Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 02:12:29 PM EST
    co - conspirator, the term is self identifying, it doesn't need co- IMHO.

    Parent
    Good on Murtha (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by buhdydharma on Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 03:02:27 PM EST
    what is the saying? A camel is a horse designed by a committee?

    This camel doesn't hunt.

    Can't think of any other metaphors to mix, sorry