The Democrats insist that they support the troops, but they don't seem to care about how things on the ground are going. When given the chance to meet with General Patraeus, who is in charge of Iraq, they balked, except one lone Democrat: Senator Carl Levin. Carl Levin is also the only Democrat, besides Senator Lieberman of course, who is insisting that it would be absolutely wrong to cut off funding for our troops. Yesterday, he said this:
We're not going to cut off funding for the troops. We shouldn't cut off funding for the troops...
Senator Levin's statements are in opposition to Senator Reid's, who said he wants to cut off the funding for the troops:
"We're not going to vote to cut funding, period," Levin said. "But what we should do, and we're going to do, is continue to press this president to put some pressure on the Iraqi leaders to reach a political settlement...We're going to fund the troops. We always have," Levin said. He added, "We're very strong in supporting the troops..."
[...]Reid, D-Nev., said last week that if Bush rejects the Democrats' legislation, he would join with Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., one of the party's most liberal members who has long called to end the war by denying funding for it. Reid's latest proposal would give the president one year to get troops out, ending funding for combat operations after March 31, 2008.
I truly appreciate Senator Levin's commitment to our troops. It takes a lot of backbone to oppose the radical, anti-war leftists in the Democratic Party (just ask Senator Lieberman), and he should be publicly commended.
Comments (15)
There's more Republican vot... (Below threshold)1. Posted by epador | April 9, 2007 7:18 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
There's more Republican voters who will vote for Levin in Michigan than there are in Nevada who'll vote for Reid.
QED
1. Posted by epador | April 9, 2007 7:18 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on April 9, 2007 19:18
2. Posted by Scrapiron | April 9, 2007 9:18 PM | Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
Why would a democrat talk to the General that is trying to upset their Surrender deal with the terrorists? They all talked to their friends the terrorist leaders and it was rather effective. Ten (10) American soldiers were immediately killed to satisfy the democrats lust for blood of Americans. I still don't understand why the democrats just don't go over and shoot the soldiers themselves. Same result, dead soldiers at the hands of the democrats.
2. Posted by Scrapiron | April 9, 2007 9:18 PM |
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on April 9, 2007 21:18
3. Posted by wavemaker | April 9, 2007 10:27 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
But Reid was against stopping funds before he was for it.
He must be getting coaching from Jawwwn.
3. Posted by wavemaker | April 9, 2007 10:27 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on April 9, 2007 22:27
4. Posted by nikkolai | April 9, 2007 11:01 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Is there a more pathetic member of the senate than Reid? What a punk.
4. Posted by nikkolai | April 9, 2007 11:01 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on April 9, 2007 23:01
5. Posted by jp2 | April 10, 2007 12:36 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Correction, again:
Lieberman is not a member of the Democratic party.
5. Posted by jp2 | April 10, 2007 12:36 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on April 10, 2007 00:36
6. Posted by Jay Tea | April 10, 2007 6:17 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
jp2, Lieberman WAS a Democrat until he was literally driven out. In fact, he was one of the most liberal Democrats and (you might recall) the VP nominee in 2000. But he had the temerity to disagree with the Party Line on one issue, so he had to go.
He just had the ill grace to not quietly shuffle off into oblivion.
That was the point, by the way. Lieberman is an example of what happens to Democrats who don't obey the dictates of the nuts running the show and don't obey every single dictate.
J.
6. Posted by Jay Tea | April 10, 2007 6:17 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on April 10, 2007 06:17
7. Posted by WildWillie | April 10, 2007 8:59 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I thought is was disgraceful the way the republican party in the senate turned on Lott when he paid tribute to Thermun. Very tacky and I am not a Lott fan. I thought it was equally disgraceful how the dimmer party particularly dem. senators turned their back on Joe Liberman in his time of need. Carl Levin is doing the proper thing by trying to take politics out of the troop support equation. Reid is hurting his party. So, I am in full support of Reid to continue. ww
7. Posted by WildWillie | April 10, 2007 8:59 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on April 10, 2007 08:59
8. Posted by kim | April 10, 2007 9:01 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Is the same thing happening tribally in Waziristan as in Anbar? If so, why?
===============================
8. Posted by kim | April 10, 2007 9:01 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on April 10, 2007 09:01
9. Posted by kim | April 10, 2007 9:02 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Maybe Nancy did some good after all.
====================
9. Posted by kim | April 10, 2007 9:02 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on April 10, 2007 09:02
10. Posted by Peter F. | April 10, 2007 1:44 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
OK, where is the Carl Levin that I know, and what have you done with him.
Appreicate your thoughts, Mr. Levin, but your position on the GWOT and GW2 have been wonky at best.
I'd take naything he says with a grain of proverbial salt.
10. Posted by Peter F. | April 10, 2007 1:44 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on April 10, 2007 13:44
11. Posted by marty arrowsmith | April 10, 2007 2:28 PM | Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
It is clear that Bush and his war criminals care less about the troops on the ground than anyone else. All they care about is oil and their profits (halliburton stock and value has outpaced all of wall street by quite a bit since this horror started).
How does bush care? No armor, stop-loss, not enough troops to begin with, lost focus on afghanistan, walter reed, etc, etc, etc.
Pork on the spending bill. It is considerably less than when the loser pig republiCANTS rubber stamped this atrocity last year.
The only morons in the world who think that death and destruction are a good thing (and therefore think the war criminals Bush and Cheney are good) are the sad deluded souls who visit this site and read this crap.
Ignorance is Strength
War is Peace
Why do you right wing conservatives hate America so much?
Wake Up.
11. Posted by marty arrowsmith | April 10, 2007 2:28 PM |
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on April 10, 2007 14:28
12. Posted by Peter F. | April 10, 2007 2:51 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Why do you right wing conservatives hate America so much?>/i>
Correction: We just hate what you liberal nut jobs are trying to do it: non-binding resolutions, admitting defeat and submitting to our enemies, fair trials for terrorists, Congressional attempts to usurp the Constiutional powers of the executive branch, etc. etc, etc...
12. Posted by Peter F. | April 10, 2007 2:51 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on April 10, 2007 14:51
13. Posted by WildWillie | April 10, 2007 3:12 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Peter F., I agree. All the democratic party is a non-binding, politically correct, my favorite color is plaid king of life. ww
13. Posted by WildWillie | April 10, 2007 3:12 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on April 10, 2007 15:12
14. Posted by John S | April 10, 2007 7:23 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
All Joe has to do is wake up tomorrow and decide he's going to caucus with the Republicans. Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell would never cut funding off to troops in combat.
And Reid won't either as long as Joe is around.
14. Posted by John S | April 10, 2007 7:23 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on April 10, 2007 19:23
15. Posted by kim | April 11, 2007 8:04 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
George Soros just put 2% of his fortune into Halliburton stock. Why don't you do the same, marty?
=====================================
15. Posted by kim | April 11, 2007 8:04 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on April 11, 2007 08:04