War foe may block funding (No shortage of funds for zottage)

The Washington Times ^ | 10/03/2007 | S.A. Miller

[LM_Guy]

Rep. David R. Obey, chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, yesterday threatened unilaterally to block President Bush's $189 billion emergency war-funding bill to force a U.S. pullout from Iraq and called for levying a surtax to cover the war's costs.

Mr. Obey, breaking with the Democratic leadership that has failed repeatedly to end the Iraq war, said unless Mr. Bush establishes a goal to abort combat operations in Iraq by January, he would act alone to cut off war spending.

"Future generations should not be saddled with paying for an ill-advised war in Iraq that seems to be never-ending," said the Wisconsin Democrat, who could use his powerful post to lock up the funding bill in committee. "If this war is important enough to fight, then it ought to be important enough to pay for."

The proposed income-tax surcharge — a progressive tax ranging from 2 percent to about 15 percent — would net $150 billion a year to cover the cost of the war in Iraq, said Mr. Obey.

The 4½ years of war has cost a total of about $450 billion.

Mr. Obey's proposals did not target the war in Afghanistan, which he said was a justifiable war because the Taliban supported al Qaeda before the September 11, 2001, terrorist attack.

"It is to draw a meaningful line in the sand," said Rep. Jim McGovern, Massachusetts Democrat and an outspoken war critic. Mr. McGovern and Rep. John P. Murtha, Pennsylvania Democrat, were at Mr. Obey's side when he announced the surtax plan.

The tax plan got a cool reception from Democratic leaders in both chambers. But they were open to cutting off war funds, a politically dangerous stance gaining acceptance, especially in the Senate.

"Just as I have opposed the war from the outset, I am opposed to......

[LM_Guy]

"If this war is important enough to fight, then it ought to be important enough to pay for."

Boy, I agree with that statement completely !!

Stop charge carding the WOT onto the backs of our children. It is time for the GOP to return to Fiscal Conservatism.

[TheDon]

ZOT!

[shankbear]

Troop killing bastard.

[misterrob]

How about cutting all of the nanny-state programs first since they do nothing to keep America safe whereas killing Muslim terrorists and their state sponsors does.

[misterrob]

You have one of the top ten tag lines ever.....

[LM_Guy]

You not killing the troops by paying for the war, just the opposite. There will be more funds available to buy additional and much needed equipment and supplies.

Please see post
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1905913/posts?page=14#14

On the impacts of the lack of funding on our total national defense posture.

[steel_resolve]

"If this war is important enough to fight, then it ought to be important enough to pay for."

Boy, I agree with that statement completely !!

And yet you find nothing wrong with Obey attempting to cut off wars funds. Do you see the oxymoron in that statement? BTW, you're a retard.

[Badeye]

Obey doesn’t have the guts to do this in the end. Watch and see.

And if I’m wrong, it will only reinforce the notion Democrats can’t be trusted on national defense issues, or with providing for the troops.

[bmwcyle]

Why don’t we send you to the desert without your wallet or ATM card?

[LM_Guy]

Forcing RINO Bush to pay for the war instead of running up massive deficits is a good thing, but you are name calling S.O.B.

[LM_Guy]

I want this war payed for and not charged. Quit be a RINO who wants to deficit spend everything we need.

[LM_Guy]

“Obey doesn’t have the guts to do this in the end. Watch and see. And if I’m wrong, it will only reinforce the notion Democrats can’t be trusted on national defense issues, or with providing for the troops.”

You are probably very correct in your assessment, and Pelosi will make him back down.

[xjcsa]

Dear LM_Guy,

Bite me. Then go back to the DUmp. Moron.

Sincerely,

xjcsa

P.S. Raising marginal tax rates does not raise revenue. If anything, there should be a tax rate cut to stimulate additional revenue.

[Billthedrill]

It is time for the GOP to return to Fiscal Conservatism.

By raising taxes. Right.

[TornadoAlley3]

CSPN 2 now....voting on Feingold Amendment to withdraw troops by June 30, 2008....voting now.

[TornadoAlley3]

Mrs. Clinton....aye.

[pabianice]

Treasonous Democrats: The Republican Election Commercial Gift That Keeps Giving

[TornadoAlley3]

Yes-28 No-68

[Badeye]

‘You are probably very correct in your assessment, and Pelosi will make him back down.’

I don’t think Pelosi has as much political power as previous Speakers, as the Hoyer ‘rebellion’ last fall demonstrated pretty conclusively. And I doubt even if she was to try and pressure Obey she would do so publicly, if for no other reason than moveon.org and the midget at dailykos would target HER.

[M. Dodge Thomas]

Yup. The question isn’t “raising taxes”.

We did that when we went to war.

The question is, are we raising them on ourselves, or on our childern and grandchildren - plus interest.

[dynachrome]

Cut the bloated welfare budget. Cut taxes. And the revenue rolls in. Reagan and the current President proved that just cutting taxes increases revenue. Just think if the ‘pubs had had the balls to cut the entitlement programs what would be happening in the economy now.
If you are advocating raising taxes ala Obey to pay for the WOT, you are in the wrong forum.

[dynachrome]

Zot Happened!

[dynachrome]

Bye bye, lmguy.

[Non-Sequitur]

How about cutting all of the nanny-state programs first since they do nothing to keep America safe whereas killing Muslim terrorists and their state sponsors does.

And if the President would propose something like that I'd support it. But it's never been a case of "we need to spend money over here so we need to cut spending over there." Instead it's always been funding the war by running up the deficit.

[darkwing104]

Calling all Kitties....

Please let me know if you want ON or OFF my Viking Kitty/ZOT ping list!. . . don't be shy.

[Non-Sequitur]

Cut taxes. And the revenue rolls in. Reagan and the current President proved that just cutting taxes increases revenue. Just think if the ‘pubs had had the balls to cut the entitlement programs what would be happening in the economy now

There in lies the problem. Revenues have never been higher, and spending has been increasing faster than revenues, so the deficits continue to pile up. The fault lies with the President and the GOP leaders in Congress.

[dragonblustar]

Trolls!

[dynachrome]

“Revenues have never been higher”
Too many ‘pubs think they can buy votes with pork. The dims will always out bid them for the parasite vote.

[Lucky9teen]

[darkangel82]

Zzzap. In after the zot.

[BurbankKarl]

Democrats dont have enough power to do that. They have been in control 10 months and basically have increased funding for Iraq...why their supporters still listen to them is beyond me.

When Hillary gets into office we still wont leave.

[stephenjohnbanker]

LOL

[misterrob]

This war has been fought mostly be deferring the bill for later years and without widespread sacrifice by the American people save for military members and families. I don’t think that raising taxes is ever a good idea but we don’t need to keep spending money like we do either.

[stephenjohnbanker]

Obey is a doctrinaire Marxist. Don’t need his opinion on anything!

Z O T

and

BUMP

[dynachrome]

In honor of the new SP season tonite!

[Squidpup]

Missed the zot

[dirtbiker]

Stop charge carding the WOT onto the backs of our children.

How about "Stop charge carding ENTITLEMENTS onto the backs of our children....

It's either kills these bastards there, or have them kill us here....You choose!

[metesky]

The 4½ years of war has cost a total of about $450 billion.

The federal budget averages about 1 and 3/4 trillion a year, so that's less than 10%. Not to shabby for killing our enemies by the thousands.

[wjcsux]

"If this war is important enough to fight, then it ought to be important enough to pay for."
Protecting the country is mandated by The Constitution. Nanny-State give-aways aren't. End the programs that aren't Constitutionally mandated, and you have the funds to protect the country. I suggest that you educate yourself before posting here.

[vox_freedom]

Not a single response before the Zot!!!
Well done FR Admins.

[JRios1968]

[savedbygrace]

Obey doesn’t give a flip about spending the $150 billion on the war. This isn’t really about that at all.

He wants to free up $150 billion more for Dim vote-buying programs. THAT’S what this is really about.

[reagan_fanatic]

ZOT!

[Mr. Silverback]

"If this war is important enough to fight, then it ought to be important enough to pay for."

Last time I checked, there wasn't a spot on the 1040 form that reads "Check here if you support the invasion of Iraq and don't want to pay taxes." Virtually every American adult is either paying taxes to Uncle Sam tom support the war or is allowing Uncle Sam to borrow some of their money (through witholding) and use it all year until they get their refund. If David Obey (and a drooling traitorous moron like yourself) believe we need more money for Iraq, they can start by eliminating stupid earmarks, the National Endowment for the arts, etc. In fact, they could start by cutting the budget of the legislative branch and show us how patriotic they are.

[Mr. Silverback]

Forcing RINO Bush to pay for the war instead of running up massive deficits is a good thing, but you are name calling S.O.B.

I know you're banned, but let me say this and make sure it's on record: You are either a liar or an idiot who comments on issues he has paid no attention to.

You see, O lying/stupid one, the deficit has not only been reduced under President Bush, it has been reduced so dramatically that it has exceeded his predictions.

[Darksheare]

What a waste of a 2005 vintage...

[Mr. Silverback]

Yup. The question isn’t “raising taxes”. We did that when we went to war. The question is, are we raising them on ourselves, or on our childern and grandchildren - plus interest.

Two questions: Are you aware that the deficit has been reduced under President Bush so dramatically that it has exceeded the performance he predicted?

Do you believe David Obey is trying to help the current fiscal condition and national security of the United States?

[Mr. Silverback]

Instead it's always been funding the war by running up the deficit.

Citation please. Show where deficits have been raised under this President since the invasion of Iraq.

Also, do you believe David Obey is trying to improve the fiscal condition and national security of the United States?

[Mr. Silverback]

Excellent point!

[M. Dodge Thomas]

"Are you aware that the deficit has been reduced under President Bush so dramatically that it has exceeded the performance he predicted?

Do you believe David Obey is trying to help the current fiscal condition and national security of the United States?"

Both are irrelevant to the fact that we have incurred a half-trillion dollar expense at a time when we are running deficits, and passing the bill on to our children.

IMO - and I've been saying this here for years - both the administration and congress - the latter under both parties - have been highly irresponsible in not leveling with the public about what this is going to take, and what's going to be needed to pay for the effort.