Another Outrage

[BOBOT]

Is there nothing this administration won't stoop to?

http://tinyurl.com/yapgo4

 

[shiny]

No! Its things like this, putting unrelated items into bills, that cause all kinds of problems.

 

[brewer12345]

Hahahahaha...

Apropos of nothing, here is an amusing (if crude) bit from The Rude Pundit:

"Sympathy For Mrs. Haggard's Ass: A Haiku:

Gayle always wondered
Why Ted said, "Jesus enters
Us through our back doors.""

 

[lets-retire]

1) It's not the administration, it is the Congress. If the Congress members aren't smart enough to know what they are voting for do they really deserve to be in Congress. The Dems objected in closed door talks, but somehow it didn't get brought up or leaked during when the bill was put to the open Congress. Sounds kind of like "I voted for it, before I voted against it." Or was it the other way around.

2) The US military is not an "occupying" force, we have been asked to stay by the Iraqi government.

 

[brewer12345]

2) The US military is not an "occupying" force, we have been asked to stay by the Iraqi government.

Millions of Iraqis seem to think otherwise.

Of course our puppet gummint over there asked us to say. They have the life expectancy of a mayfly once we leave.

 

[donheff]

1) It's not the administration, it is the Congress. If the Congress members aren't smart enough to know what they are voting for do they really deserve to be in Congress.

I know nothing about the genesis of this particular provision but I do know that items like this don't magically materialize in an appropriations bill. Do you know who put it in and why? If not, you should not assume it isn't the administration.

 

[windsurf]

Billions down the f'ing drain (into pockets and you can trace the lines into the pockets) and idiots are voting down school levies here b/c they are po'd about high taxes.

 

[lets-retire]

I know nothing about the genesis of this particular provision but I do know that items like this don't magically materialize in an appropriations bill. Do you know who put it in and why? If not, you should not assume it isn't the administration.

From the article:
"The clause was inserted by the Republican side of the House Armed Services Committee over the objections of Democratic counterparts during a closed-door conference, "

Yup sounds like it was the administration to me. :

Edited to add: The administration can request things be added, but it is up to the members of the Congress to add them.

 

[Zoocat]

When we discover something outrageous like this, we have to let our congress know that we are outraged. When's the last time you emailed or wrote a letter to a member of congress and really let them know what you think? If they don't think we are on their tails, then they get even more lazy because they think we are all stupid and don't read the news!

 

[Mr._johngalt]

because they think we are all stupid and don't read the news!

Unfortunately, they would be correct, for the most part.

JG

 

[BOBOT]

When we discover something outrageous like this, we have to let our congress know that we are outraged. When's the last time you emailed or wrote a letter to a member of congress and really let them know what you think? ...

Several times in the last year. I rarely get more than a form letter back, if that, since my positions are usually opposite of those of "my" representatives.

 

[FinanceDude]

1) It's not the administration, it is the Congress. If the Congress members aren't smart enough to know what they are voting for do they really deserve to be in Congress. The Dems objected in closed door talks, but somehow it didn't get brought up or leaked during when the bill was put to the open Congress. Sounds kind of like "I voted for it, before I voted against it." Or was it the other way around.

2) The US military is not an "occupying" force, we have been asked to stay by the Iraqi government.

Good points.........