Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
OK substitute Dem, Repub, Ind, Socialist,Communist it doesn't matter in these types of discussions if you disagree with one side they are automatically (insert your favorite attack (hypocrite, tool of big business etc.). Life doesn't work that way.
Nope. I already defined 'hypocrite' on this thread. Simply not agreeing with someone does not make you a hypocrite.
Here it is one more time: Insincerity by virtue of pretending to have qualities or beliefs that you do not really have
Repubs pretend to be for the troops, but today they proved beyond any shadow of a doubt that they are insincere in their support. They proved they don't give a rip about the troops.
I don't thnik it takes alot of reserch to see that democrats when in power during the last decades have been the party of cuts in military spending.A large part of clintons deficit reduction was cuts were in military spending.
Republicans made it clear that they must break the HC bill. They said if they can break the bill, they can break Obama, and one said this week that they will do whatever it takes, even if it means lying on the busy street to stop traffic. Apparently they chose to not lie on the street themselves and get hit by a bus, because it is so much easier to throw the troops under the bus instead. And that is exactly what they did.
The funding for troops is a separate bill from healt care.
Nope. I already defined 'hypocrite' on this thread. Simply not agreeing with someone does not make you a hypocrite.
Here it is one more time: Insincerity by virtue of pretending to have qualities or beliefs that you do not really have
Repubs pretend to be for the troops, but today they proved beyond any shadow of a doubt that they are insincere in their support. They proved they don't give a rip about the troops.
Ok that also applies to everyone involved. Things are no nearly as balck and white as you would like to pretend. This is called politics every party, including the one you belong to participates in it.
I am not sure who you are to determine sincerity and what beliefs people really have. I have yet to master the ability to look into a persons soul.
And the Dems pretend to be so concerned about the troops today but didn't give a rip about them in 2007. See how this works? And before you say you are not a Dem, I don't care. This country has a 2 party system. If you are a Republican by your definition above, you are a hypocrite, if you are Dem you are also a hypocrite by the definition above. If you still insist you are neither, please share your party affiliation and I will show you instances of possible hypocrisy.
The funding for troops is a separate bill from healt care.
Yes, except apparently for most Senate Republicans, who voted against the Pentagon funding bill only as a way to slow down or stop the health care bill.
They are, indeed, separate issues - separate bills.
But to give you an idea of the twisted thinking on the part of one Senate Republican, Mississippi Senator Thad Cochran " ... secured 45 earmarks -- line items that he directed to military contractors and bases in his own state -- worth $167 million in a piece of legislation he opposed, according to an independent analysis by Taxpayers for Common Sense ... " and then he voted against the bill! Source
Yes, except apparently for most Senate Republicans, who voted against the Pentagon funding bill only as a way to slow down or stop the health care bill.
They are, indeed, separate issues - separate bills.
Yes, exactly. I didn't mean to say the two bills are one and same. Reepubs threw the troops under the bus in order to break the HC bill, which in turn is intended to break Obama.
It seems to me that the most common reaction from those on the right participating in this thread is something along the lines of "Hey, the Democrats did it." Examples: "The dems did do this, Obama was one of them who did!" and "Or is it OK if for Dems to deny funding and not OK for Republicans to use the same tactic?"
To answer the last question above, no, it's not right for either party to deny funding to our troops when we are engaged in war. I don't have any problem with Congressional actions to increase or decrease military funding - including specifically funding for personnel - unless we are at war at the time; nor do I have any problem with Congress cutting specific military programs.
But I do have a problem when a significant percentage of one party in the Senate, for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with military funding, choose to vote against a military funding bill that includes funds for troops during a time of war.
And I am heartened to see that no one from the right has said in this thread that what the Republicans attempted to do was the right thing to do. Hopefully voters will remember that now neither party can legitimately say that their party has sole custody of the "we support the troops" claim, since actions speak louder than words.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
