Senator Says Troops Want Congress To Cut Off War Funding
Woah, this is interesting. Colorado Senator Ken Salazar -- who's taken a bunch of heat for backing toothless Iraq War measures -- is now flirting with the ultimate: Cutting off funding for the war. From the Denver Post:
Washington -- Congress should look at cutting off funding for the Iraq War if Senate efforts to change the role of U.S. troops in the battlefield fail, Sen. Ken Salazar said Monday.Salazar, a Colorado Democrat, previously has not supported Congress using its ability to stop war payments in order to force President Bush to change direction..."If it could be done then I think we ought to take a look at it," Salazar said.
Even more interesting, guess who has been encouraging Salazar to pursue this option?
While in Iraq over the weekend, Salazar said, some service men and women told him that they wanted Congress to cut off funding.
Some soldiers want war funding cut off? But isn't advocating for that tantamount to being anti-troops, and aren't Congressional Dem leaders certain that such a measure would automatically be perceived that way? That's what we keep hearing, anyway.
Comments (69)
Bill Arney wrote on September 17, 2007 5:44 PM:Now all he has to do is give Nancy Pelosi a spine transplant, and we'll be on our way to stopping the war.
Oh, wait. All Nancy has to do is NOTHING AT ALL. That's right. No bill can even be brought to the floor without the say so of the Speaker of the House. So all Nancy has to do is NOT let an appropriation bill be brought to the floor.
I'm confident that my representative in Washington will have the neccessary courage. Why, there goes a flying pig now!
Greg wrote on September 17, 2007 5:48 PM:funny, I think I just saw a pig fly past, too!
RichM wrote on September 17, 2007 5:51 PM:Whoa. This is huge. Salazar has been one of the biggest DINO's since his election in 2004. If he is supporting such a drastic measure, then why won't the leadership?
Ken wrote on September 17, 2007 5:51 PM:Fall-back position...
Pass the supplemental request for war funds, and add a tax increase for rich guys to pay for it. When Bush vetoes that, its Bush's political problem for not "supporting the troops."
David wrote on September 17, 2007 5:53 PM:Well, he did say AFTER the Senate fails "to change the role of U.S. troops in the battlefield."
So clearly they haven't failed yet.....?
Kim A. Stewart wrote on September 17, 2007 5:56 PM:Salazar's my senator, and he's a moderate, effectively representing a mixed bag that is politically the nature of the state right now.
For him to take that position is indeed huge. Very surprising. He's smart, hard working, and no one's lackey.
bob wrote on September 17, 2007 6:00 PM:Our troops apparently don't support the troops and want to cut and run.
scavok wrote on September 17, 2007 6:16 PM:I really liked Ken Salazar when he was the AG in Colorado. His work helped torpedo the anti-Gay Ammendment Two that passed several years back.
As a Senator, Salazar has a long way to go to get back in my good graces. He supported Gonzales for AG and was one of Lieberman's best friends in the Senate.
For him to go out on this limb is huge. I hope he keeps it up.
MWF wrote on September 17, 2007 6:26 PM:Sounds like empty rhetoric to me. Let's see some action. Since I live in Bohner's district in SW Ohio, I need to depend on other's reps for help. Action now!
Salazar is also my senator and he's spineless. Always has been always will be. His only concern is his own political future, whether it was as AG or as a Senator. He's gotten a ton of calls and mail from his constiuents on this issue and my best guess is this is a little red meat for those persons, hoping they will be satiated so he can get back to the Lieberman caucus and working to undermine his own party.
Cakesniffer wrote on September 17, 2007 6:44 PM:Salazar also voted for cloture in the Alito confirmation. Mr. Salazar, for whom I voted, can kiss my purple-state ass.
gqmartinez wrote on September 17, 2007 6:51 PM:I have to agree with the sentiment that this is huge. I think the term DINO is stupid. Not all Democrats are supposed to see eye-to-eye on every issue or even most. The problem with the GOP is that they wanted 100% agreement on 100% of the issues. That lead to overreach and a takeover by radical elements. Should MoveOn start trying to "purify" the Dem Party, I would be my life's savings that the Dems will suffer the same fate as the current GOP.
Soapbox aside, the question of how to tackle this is important. As George Packer's recent New Yorker article mentions, neither the left nor the right are being honest in their assesment. If we leave Iraq, it's going to get much, much uglier than it is now. Staying hasn't done anything to help the situation and most likely won't. But we all need to be honest with the ugliness that will ensue once we are gone. The damage this will do to our reputation amongst Muslims will also have to be disussed openly and honestly. My guess is that many Dems fear a gross humanitarian catastrophe that dwarfs the bloodshed now. It's easy to call that concern "spineless". But I think balancing the moral question shouldn't be dismissed out of hand. We're screwed either way and to me it's Bush's fault!
Bribes wrote on September 17, 2007 7:03 PM:Only right-wing pundits support the troops. The troops don't know what's best for them. These troops are probably the reason we're loosing the War. I support the troops, and we should stay in Iraq.
Jim Stemper wrote on September 17, 2007 7:04 PM:Agree with gqmartinez.
If the true aim is to "win hearts and minds" in the Middle East, then setting a country on fire and then saying "good luck putting it out" will not quite win hearts or minds. You know those city based book clubs, where we all read "To Kill a Mockingbird" and tale about it? Well, all U.S. citizens should be asked to read Packer's excellent article ("It's longer than one page? The horror...") and then someone should make even a half-hearted attempt at leading a civilized discussion about the options he lays out. If sounds bites got us in to this mess, let's offer more than sound bites getting out. Or doesn't the left "do nuance" either?
The Crapture wrote on September 17, 2007 7:14 PM:I can almost hear the wingnuts wondering aloud about why the troops don't "support the troops"
If only i could hear the squishy wet pop sound that should ensue when many of their heads explode over that one.
wwz wrote on September 17, 2007 7:15 PM:"If we leave Iraq, it's going to get much, much uglier than it is now."
You have no way of knowing that, and neither does anybody else. Its a guess. And a GOP talking point. That's all it is. In fact, the improved political landscape in Anbar is not only the main reason things have improved in the province but suggests, even if slightly, that the Iraqi's are capable and perhaps more ready than is perceived that reconciliation can be achieved.
CW has it that Dems are afraid of the blowback they would suffer for defunding the war. Polls suggest they wouldn't, though its not a given. For instance, if we were to withdraw and leave our 'war stance', bringing all the troops home, our economy would nose dive. At least thats what history tells us.
That would almost insure that a Dem Preznit who brought the troops home would be a one term-er with a legacy of handing the GOP the Exec Office for the next several cycles.
So, if bringing the troops home means severe economic hardship and the loss of power for the Democrats, who would still say, "Troops home now!"?
richard wrote on September 17, 2007 7:35 PM:WINO!
Congratulations to the Coloradans who pressured this guy into such shrill rhetoric! But a vote to back up the brave talk will never be forthcoming. The guy is a dem after all!
Anonymous wrote on September 17, 2007 7:39 PM:gq, if you really believe that, then why do you favor Bill Richardson, who wants to bring home the troops next week, over the rest of the candidates, who take a more responsible approach?
radon chong wrote on September 17, 2007 7:41 PM:So, if bringing the troops home means severe economic hardship and the loss of power for the Democrats, who would still say, "Troops home now!"?
The 60-70% of us who want this war to end, maybe?
mk wrote on September 17, 2007 8:18 PM:Salazar is my Senator, also. I'm an unaffiliated voter who helped put him in office. I have been sending his office an average of one email a week to register my disappointment in his FISA/torture/Iraq/etc voting record. He has been labeled a Bush-Dog Democrate by OpenLeft, and I haven't hesitated to remind him of that. I get these wishy-washy, spineless emails back from his office, and I use those as an opportunity to complain as well. As much as this man has irritated me, I've been explicit that most (if not all) will be forgiven as long as he keeps us the h*ll out of Iran.
Charles Bowman wrote on September 17, 2007 8:24 PM:I hear a great Republican queasiness coming on. And now its a surge. And now its a panic! Holy Hagel! How could this happen?
paul wrote on September 17, 2007 8:26 PM:I'm sure some wingnut will explain how this shows that the defeatist liberal media have so thoroughly dominated the public discourse that they've managed to brainwash even the troops on the ground. Solution: no access to any broadcasts other than Fox, or any internet other than Worldnet Daily. Absolutely positively no letters to or from home.
Bob Loblaw wrote on September 17, 2007 8:42 PM:Solution: no access to any broadcasts other than Fox, or any internet other than Worldnet Daily. Absolutely positively no letters to or from home.
I don't think that would be necessary. You could certainly have broadcasts and mail going to and fro, as long as it is approved by Minitrue.
MWF wrote on September 17, 2007 8:47 PM:When will people realize that the US presence in Iraq is only a temporary fix to total in-fighting. That part of the world has been fighting each other for centuries. My btother in-law is a Christian Palestinian born in Nazarth. Being a Palestinian, the Jews hated him. Being a Christian, the Arabs hated him. He once told me, "Me, my brother, and my cousin against you. Me and my brother against my cousin. Me against my brother." When the US leaves, the different ethnic groups and clans will fight to get rid of any Al-Qaeda. Once Al-Qeda is gone they will turn against each other. Just wait to see what the Sunis will do to each other with the weapons we have provided to them. Look at the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank. The fighting is inevitable - a thousand years of history tells us so. The US people need to quit being fed false choices. Get us out now and let the the people of Iraq settle their own problems.
Anonymous wrote on September 17, 2007 9:11 PM:I believe the only way to have any redemption whatsoever for this fiasco,is to ask for an election In Iraq (we keep saying Iraq is a democracy, don't we?) ans have the Iraqi folk vote whether they want us to stay or leave and take the acvtion their people want.
We keep talking here in Washington and despite Bushs rhetoric, have no desire whatsoever for their imput. It always has been and probably will continue to be all about us. However, if the Iraqi people actually desire our help, perhaps we should stay and attempt to clean up the mess we have caused (they ARE dying at 10 times the rate our soldiers are dying and it was OUR actions after all, that started this travesty.
On the other hand, if they say "Leave", then perhaps just maybe, the honest course would be to leave.
Needless to say, these scenarios will not occur because despite what the Reps and Dems say, the Iraqi people are not on our politiicans minds. the only concern to them is how to beat the other guy to the top of the heap... and neither party will confess to having made a mistake when they voted to go to war. Instead, "It was THEIR fault" or "They voted for it TOO!", are the only phrases those mobsters know...
Blue Girl wrote on September 17, 2007 9:26 PM:No flying pigs here, but my neighbor reports a monkey flew out of his butt. This is hearsay, I did not witness this phenomenon personally.
Captain Dan wrote on September 17, 2007 9:48 PM:Bribes supports the right of the troops to killed, maimed, and crippled!
JimBob wrote on September 17, 2007 10:52 PM:Sure it's gonna get ugly when we leave Iraq. It got ugly as the seventh circle of hell when the British left India. But what's gotta happen has gotta happen. When you throw a beer bottle through the screen of your TV, wishing you hadn't done it isn't going to get you your TV back.
JimBob wrote on September 17, 2007 10:55 PM:And as someone else posted, no one knows for sure that things WILL get uglier. It seems likely, at least for a period of time, but no one knows how long that period will be. Perhaps, faced with Mutual, Slow But Assured Destruction, the participants in Iraq's CW will decide that talking hurts a lot less than fighting. I'm not saying I'd lay my money on this, but...
kennyp wrote on September 17, 2007 11:04 PM:Salazar is my Senator, too. Rely on him for nothing. He is powerless to stop Bush from doing whatever it Bush can get away with. His votes for Abu Gonzales, Scalito and Roberts, FISA, gang of 14 BS, torture etc.... all these fine gestures that Old Ken has made on our behalf complement his (and others) lack of passion for restoring habeas and setting some rational limits on the proto-fascists spying on their enemies, including chumps like himself. He shows no leadership that Democrats want or need to follow. AS always, I could be wrong. But I'm taking the odds that Salazar will find away to keep supporting the Republicans and like-minded Lieberman Dems despite his little foray into attempting to be relevant.
EricB wrote on September 17, 2007 11:19 PM:I find it unlikely that "troops" in a war zone are asking a Senator to discontinue their funding to bring the war to an end. Some of those dollars will buy armor that will protect their rumps. It is unlikely that anyone would petition the Senate to make their job more deadly. It is plausible that Mr. Salazar will say anything to be opportunistic and to seek the approval of his party and their "topic du jour".
JimBob wrote on September 17, 2007 11:45 PM:EricB, the money has always been there for armor to protect American butts. But there are so many other things to waste it on and golly, those rich people have just GOT to have their tax cuts. Defunding the war is in no way about making soldiers more vulnerable than they have already been made to be. Lame argument.
buckheaddad wrote on September 18, 2007 4:18 AM:Nancy won't do ANYTHING because she's sooooooooooooooo busy looking out for the big corporate entity in her district!!!!!!!!!!
Don't believe me?
See what THE ONLY EXEMPTION to increasing the minimum wage was!!!!!!!!
COME ON FOLKS. . . . WAKE UP! WE'VE BEEN SCREWED AGAIN.
pocos nifutabe gikma
nike http://bi87415.dicxekz.info/sitemap9.html [url=http://bi87415.dicxekz.info/sitemap9.html ]rivy[/url] cuxix
gamos famowigy gukma
pybo http://ji194520.dicxekz.info/sitemap1.html [url=http://ji194520.dicxekz.info/sitemap1.html ]ryri[/url] kaxut
rovos patamomo gykma
zedy http://ni218531.rfwoedc.info/sitemap14.html [url=http://ni218531.rfwoedc.info/sitemap14.html ]tyle[/url] pufib
dilos mopupoty gykma
ryry http://ke118326.lpyg2u9.info/sitemap17.html [url=http://ke118326.lpyg2u9.info/sitemap17.html ]simu[/url] bumyt
dutos ticezije gekma
fiza http://ji314189.ynjnius.info/sitemap20.html [url=http://ji314189.ynjnius.info/sitemap20.html ]dylu[/url] nylyd
vobos jykimaji gokma
make http://na77398.yf4m7vq.info/sitemap16.html [url=http://na77398.yf4m7vq.info/sitemap16.html ]zuca[/url] rafar
dexos rahygexu gekma
name http://wi375854.sgov5jk.info/sitemap15.html [url=http://wi375854.sgov5jk.info/sitemap15.html ]hezi[/url] pozyt
bumos tupejeha gekma
miru http://wu22264.svsnhwr.info/sitemap21.html [url=http://wu22264.svsnhwr.info/sitemap21.html ]cada[/url] danup
nuzos wufolupe gikma
vasa http://ja313962.sqyllds.info/sitemap8.html [url=http://ja313962.sqyllds.info/sitemap8.html ]jito[/url] wical
vihos wybykewa gekma
bagy http://wo752986.gixhym3.info/sitemap14.html [url=http://wo752986.gixhym3.info/sitemap14.html ]lata[/url] wacob
jocos vyxebiri gykma
vire http://mi484651.lxiqdqj.info/sitemap11.html [url=http://mi484651.lxiqdqj.info/sitemap11.html ]hevu[/url] soreb
cokos sugitupa gikma
gyti http://be599495.vivw1xv.info/sitemap18.html [url=http://be599495.vivw1xv.info/sitemap18.html ]xepy[/url] secuc
lysos xazucada gukma
kise http://ne739643.vivw1xv.info/sitemap18.html [url=http://ne739643.vivw1xv.info/sitemap18.html ]zote[/url] lyxyz
vydos guvujany gukma
mafu http://ro417288.nlqtow4.info/sitemap18.html [url=http://ro417288.nlqtow4.info/sitemap18.html ]dydu[/url] rogox
gytos daxaluva gykma
neto http://fu57479.il4dwhc.info/sitemap6.html [url=http://fu57479.il4dwhc.info/sitemap6.html ]myro[/url] romys
vidos pamogece gakma
micy http://ju262543.qkdz3ii.info/sitemap10.html [url=http://ju262543.qkdz3ii.info/sitemap10.html ]reni[/url] xocem
mabos hupacagu gakma
naxa http://ka284836.nlqtow4.info/sitemap1.html [url=http://ka284836.nlqtow4.info/sitemap1.html ]jyfy[/url] gutof
lolos lyrataki gykma
cire http://hi612500.behplbb.net/sitemap19.html [url=http://hi612500.behplbb.net/sitemap19.html ]kehe[/url] lerej
wolos fepuxedi gekma
ryju http://wo265152.acsxwye.in/sitemap16.html [url=http://wo265152.acsxwye.in/sitemap16.html ]kajy[/url] tures
pafos nikupona gekma
wude http://wu706692.mc0ltil.net/sitemap24.html [url=http://wu706692.mc0ltil.net/sitemap24.html ]tovy[/url] kozus
wasos denypade gykma
vudy http://ji552893.bu4egr9.in/sitemap1.html [url=http://ji552893.bu4egr9.in/sitemap1.html ]jipa[/url] lefux
jizos wecaheru gekma
cepu http://ry807956.mc0ltil.net/sitemap3.html [url=http://ry807956.mc0ltil.net/sitemap3.html ]zyxy[/url] xehub
behos lylajeno gekma
wige http://bo827315.mc0ltil.net/sitemap4.html [url=http://bo827315.mc0ltil.net/sitemap4.html ]zuwy[/url] vacyf
rykos kusawuby gukma
guwa http://ti628343.mc0ltil.net/sitemap19.html [url=http://ti628343.mc0ltil.net/sitemap19.html ]siri[/url] hejeb
jepos soxypizy gykma
xyke http://te600627.bu4egr9.in/sitemap14.html [url=http://te600627.bu4egr9.in/sitemap14.html ]cuga[/url] jabev
hodos dadelywi gakma
goxi http://xe42895.bu4egr9.in/sitemap23.html [url=http://xe42895.bu4egr9.in/sitemap23.html ]cagu[/url] xybix
galos numimufa gokma
gufa http://xe904709.mc0ltil.net/sitemap22.html [url=http://xe904709.mc0ltil.net/sitemap22.html ]roda[/url] dehaf
mapos pikewoxi gikma
doxa http://to226543.bu4egr9.in/sitemap16.html [url=http://to226543.bu4egr9.in/sitemap16.html ]xuxu[/url] rugyf
picos tuwuduco gykma
suza http://gu748889.shucqyf.in/sitemap22.html [url=http://gu748889.shucqyf.in/sitemap22.html ]kodu[/url] koges
gefos konazufi gukma
tazo http://xi108648.hvmjhoy.net/sitemap10.html [url=http://xi108648.hvmjhoy.net/sitemap10.html ]pifo[/url] nocen
ryxos xomiresy gykma
hadi http://pu929314.yd4o3ek.net/sitemap22.html [url=http://pu929314.yd4o3ek.net/sitemap22.html ]vesy[/url] witev
tatos tyrokyme gakma
fixy http://si265337.yd4o3ek.net/sitemap23.html [url=http://si265337.yd4o3ek.net/sitemap23.html ]dyho[/url] gamon
vesos xurydero gukma
xomi http://ri275068.xk9jhp5.net/sitemap2.html [url=http://ri275068.xk9jhp5.net/sitemap2.html ]huzi[/url] tevif
zulos xatowyho gukma
jogo http://to331799.npmt0lw.net/sitemap22.html [url=http://to331799.npmt0lw.net/sitemap22.html ]nanu[/url] gobem
palos gemutiba gekma
pego http://ki20820.npmt0lw.net/sitemap19.html [url=http://ki20820.npmt0lw.net/sitemap19.html ]xamo[/url] jamyw
pyfos gevudiju gykma
pihe http://nu752906.npmt0lw.net/sitemap23.html [url=http://nu752906.npmt0lw.net/sitemap23.html ]zile[/url] likis
