Oh Gee Thank's President Obama For Letting Us Keep Our Own Money!!!!!

Oh Except For:

Liberals Try to Prevent Pelosi From Bringing Tax Bill to the Floor

Reps. Peter DeFazio (D-OR), Jim McDermott (D-WA) and Jay Inslee (D-WA) are crafting a letter to share with the House Democratic Caucus that would try to prevent the Speaker from bringing the tax bill to the floor.

They hope to get 60 signatures on their letter (which is still being drafted) and then force a vote in the caucus. DeFazio says he thinks that if a majority of House Democrats are against this compromise, they shouldn't bring it to the floor.

In other words, they are seeking a majority of the majority to move this and a senior House democratic source indicates they don't know if they have a majority of democrats, saying they haven't whipped this yet.

In an interview with Fox, DeFazio criticizes the president and says a majority of the House Democratic Caucus does not support the tax rate compromise. "There does not seem to be a majority of the Democrats who support the deal negotiated by Vice President Biden," DeFazio said. "So we want to have a record vote in the caucus on a resolution that says this resolution should not go to the floor without a majority of Democratic votes."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So what is this? Why does the Obama Administration think we need to pay for all this wreckless spending?

How about this new Concept? SLASH SPENDING!!!!! I dont want to pay to find out the Mating Habit's of the "Porcupine Caribou" etc, etc....

I dont want to fund all these idiotic programs. I dont even live in these people's districts. I never voted for any of this bullshit and I am tired of paying for all this shit!

Dingy Harry Reid Has To Go....

From His Arrogant Attitude....



To His Constantly Being Wrong On EVERY Issue....



To His America Hating Stance, And Distain For Our Troops....



To His "The War Is Lost" Comment....





Every One But Harry Is Wrong....

Harry Reid And the "Negro" Comment
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sorry but Harry Reid's mouth has gotten to big to fit both his feet in. If this was a Republican that said this the Democrat's would drag he/she out of Congress by the ear and kick him/her down the stairs. Can we say "Double Standard" yet again? Harry Reid is irrespossible and wreckless in his attitude, behavior, and comments and he must go. By The Way, What The Heck Is "Negro Dialect"?

Obama Not Crediting Troops For Stability In Iraq

Obama Disgracefully Benefiting From Iraq Success

Isn't it enormously ironic that Barack Obama now finds himself the unintended beneficiary of the Iraq surge that he so vocally — and wrongly — opposed?

It seems that Obama's untimely calls for a withdrawal timetable have lingered long enough to have some merit in the eyes of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

Al-Maliki told Der Spiegel, a German magazine, that U.S. troops should withdraw from Iraq "as soon as possible, as far as we are concerned. U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be the right timeframe for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes."

Assuming al-Maliki said it, and there has been some dispute, it doesn't make Obama right — even now. But it's hard to imagine al-Maliki would be saying anything helpful to Obama's campaign today if the United States had followed Obama's disgraceful surrender policy instead of implementing the surge in 2007, over his strenuous objections.

Obama Democrats have been adamantly opposed to our intervention in Iraq from the beginning, including when they voted for it for political expediency and then later claimed they were duped into it.


NBC’s Andrea Mitchell (Of All People) Blasts Obama for ‘Fake Interviews

Even purple-stained Iraqi fingers, symbolizing the advent of democracy in Iraq, didn't stir an ounce of empathy, much less sympathy from these capital-D Democrats, who persisted, undeterred, in their demands for retreat, regardless of the consequences.

It seems in this life, anyway, there never will be accountability for those Democrats who opposed this operation every step of the way (following their initial fraudulent support) and continue to do so, no matter the state of the "facts on the ground."

Their mentality is always the same, and we see it rearing its head again on Iran, which by all accounts is dangerously close to producing a nuclear weapon. They believe it's always better to negotiate and that the enemy with whom we are to negotiate must always be given the benefit of the doubt — especially against the sinister United States.

Iran, they believe, has legitimate grievances, just like the 9/11 terrorists, who may not have attacked us had we addressed those concerns. So we must always begin with a presumption of the enemy's good will, then sweet-talk, then cave — anything to avoid violence and at any cost.

Think I'm exaggerating?

Then explain Obama's statements shortly after the 9/11 attacks, reported in the Hyde Park Herald Sept. 19, 2001: "We must also engage, however, in the more difficult task of understanding the sources of such madness. The essence of this tragedy, it seems to me, derives from a fundamental absence of empathy on the part of the attackers: an inability to imagine or connect with the humanity and suffering of others. Such a failure of empathy . . . most often . . . grows out of a climate of poverty and ignorance, helplessness and despair."

If Obama's own words aren't enough to convince you of his reckless appeasement mentality, let's look at the position of one of his senior advisers, Richard Danzig. According to the U.K.'s Daily Telegraph, Danzig told the Center for a New American Security, "Winnie the Pooh seems to me to be a fundamental text on national security."

Meanwhile, while the U.S. has reached out in sacred diplomacy to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the dictator has thumbed his nose at us, defiantly refusing to discontinue his uranium enrichment program. I suppose we need more empathy for him, too.

As we speak, Obama struts around Iraq with his signature arrogance and bereft of the shame he's earned for his insistence we withdraw in defeat there, pretending that history's repudiation of his surrender policy is a vindication of his prescience and wisdom. And they tell us President George W. Bush will never admit his mistakes!

How strangely paradoxical it would be if Barack Obama were to sail into the presidency on the strength of his own failures. Crazier things have happened.

Story Here

As Surge in Iraq Succeeded, Embedded Reporters Receded

American Heroism Goes Unreported in Iraq
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
What an arrogant SOB! According to Obama it was the "Sunni Awakening" that is responsible for the Stability on the ground in Iraq, NO!! The Troops did NOTHING! According to Obama. Is this Lunatic completely out of his mind? 10 out of 18 Provinces have been handed back over to the Iraqi's, they are getting their Political **** together, and if it wasnt for our Troops and the Surge, NONE of this would be going on. Did the Sunni's kill Zarqowi? NO! Did the US Troops? YES! Did the Sunni's take back Fallujah? NO! Did the American Troops? YES! Did the Sunni's take back Al Anbar Province, Baghdad, Diwaniyah, Ramadi, Mosul, Karbala? NO! Did the US Troops? YES! Is Barack Obama that out of touch with reality? YES!!!

And having to be reminded that he isnt the President yet on his whirlwind world tour, is the height of arrogance at it's worst!

US Troop Death's Overall Iraqi Death's Drop To All Time Low

BAGHDAD, June 1 - U.S. troop deaths in Iraq fell to their lowest level last month since the 2003 invasion and officials said on Sunday improved security also helped the country boost oil production in May to a post-war high.

U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Iraq's oil minister credited better security for the two milestones, which illustrated a dramatic turnabout in the fortunes of a country on the brink of all-out sectarian civil war just 12 months ago.



"We've still got a distance to go but I think lower casualty rates are a reflection of some real progress," Gates told reporters in Singapore. "The key will be to continue to sustain the progress we have seen."

American generals have stressed that the security gains are both fragile and reversible. That was shown in March, when an Iraqi government offensive against Shi'ite militias in southern Basra sparked a surge in violence in the capital and other cities, catching U.S. and Iraqi officials off guard.

The U.S. military said 19 soldiers died in May, the lowest monthly death toll in a five-year-old war that has so far claimed the lives of more than 4,000 American soldiers.



Oil Minister Hussein al-Shahristani told Reuters in an interview that the improved security had helped Iraq, which has the world's third-largest oil reserves, raise oil production to a post-war high of 2.5 million barrels per day in May.

Iraq's oil industry, hit by decades of sanctions, war and neglect, was a vulnerable target for saboteurs after the U.S. invasion. Attacks on pipelines quickly destroyed any hopes of using Iraq's vast oil reserves to fund its reconstruction.

The military says violence in Iraq is now at a four-year low following crackdowns by U.S. and Iraqi forces on Shi'ite militias in southern Basra and Baghdad and on al Qaeda in the northern city of Mosul, its last major urban stronghold.

"In May we have exceeded for the first time a 2 million barrels per day export rate. In production we have exceeded 2.5 million bpd," Shahristani said.

The number of Iraqi civilians killed in May also fell, to 505, after reaching a seven-month high of 968 in April, figures compiled by the interior, defence and health ministries showed.

U.S. officials credit the turnaround in security to President George W. Bush's decision to send 30,000 extra troops to Iraq, a rebellion by Sunni tribal leaders against al Qaeda, and a ceasefire by anti-American Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr.



In Iraq's more stable south, about 500 Australian troops pulled out of their base in the city of Nassiriya, signalling an end to Australia's combat mission in the country.

Australia, a close U.S. ally, was one of the first countries to commit troops to the Iraq invasion, but Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and his Labour party won election last November largely on Rudd's campaign promise to bring the troops home this year.



The war is also a big issue in the U.S. presidential election, with Republican nominee John McCain vowing not to withdraw troops until the war is won, and his Democratic opponents Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton promising to bring them home as soon as possible.

Baghdad and the United States are negotiating a new deal that will provide a legal basis for U.S. troops in Iraq when their United Nations mandate expires at the end of the year.

Iraqi government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said in a rare statement on the talks that they were at their early stages, but he acknowledged there were differences between Iraq and the United States over what should be included in the agreement.

"The Iraqi side has a vision and their draft differs from the American side and their vision," he said.

Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki meanwhile asked France to supply sophisticated weaponry during a visit by French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner on Sunday.



Story Here
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
But...But...But... I thought the War was Lost? That's what the Democrat's keep telling us! So the Iraqi Troops are taking on more of the Security, and learning how to defend thier own Country thank's to our's and the Coalition Troops. And a HUGE THANK YOU to Austrailia :-) And a Big WAY TO GO TROOPS!!!!

SENATE STABS TROOPS IN THE BACK AGAIN, HARRY REID "FIND MONEY SOMEWHERE ELSE"

Senate Blocks Two-Fold Democratic Proposal to Withdraw US Troops and Fund the War in Iraq

FUND THE TROOPS....FUND THE TROOPS....FUND THE TROOPS....FUND THE TROOPS....



The Senate on Friday blocked a Democratic proposal to pay for the Iraq war but require that troops start coming home.

The 53-45 vote was 15 votes short of the 60 needed to advance. It came minutes after the Senate rejected a Republican proposal to pay for the Iraq war without strings attached.

The Republican measure failed by an identical vote.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said the only way to get troops the money was to approve the restrictions outlined by Democrats.

"Our troops continue to fight and die valiantly. And our Treasury continues to be depleted rapidly, for a peace that we seem far more interested in achieving than Iraq's own political leaders," said Reid, D-Nev.

Republicans said Democrats were being irresponsible.

"We need to get our troops everything they need," said Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. "We need to get it to them right now."

Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said this week that if Congress cannot pass legislation that ties war money to troop withdrawals, they would not send Bush a bill this year.

Instead, they would revisit the issue upon returning in January, pushing the Pentagon to the brink of an accounting nightmare and deepening Democrats' conflict with the White House on the war.

In the meantime, Democrats say, the Pentagon can eat into its $471 billion annual budget without being forced to take drastic steps.

"The days of a free lunch are over," said Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Thursday that unless Congress passes funding for the war within days, he will direct the Army and Marine Corps to begin developing plans to lay off employees and terminate contracts early next year.

Gates, who met with lawmakers on Wednesday, said he does not have the money or the flexibility to move funds around to adequately cover the costs of the continuing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"There is a misperception that this department can continue funding our troops in the field for an indefinite period of time through accounting maneuvers, that we can shuffle money around the department. This is a serious misconception," Gates told reporters at the Pentagon.

As a result, he said he is faced with the undesirable task of preparing to cease operations at Army bases by mid-February, and lay off about 100,000 defense department employees and an equal number of civilian contractors. A month later, he said, similar moves would have to be made by the Marines.

Some members of Congress believe the Pentagon can switch enough money to cover the war accounts, Gates said. But he added that he only has the flexibility to transfer about $3.7 billion, which is just one week's worth of war expenses. Lawmakers, he said, may not understand how complicated and restrictive the situation is.

Story Here

UPDATE:

Reid keeps Senate In Session Over Thanksgiving Holiday

Hey Reid! How about funding the Troops while you are at it asshole?

Story Here
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In a few days the Troops will start running out of money. Right while they are winning. I am so pissed right now I cant stand it. Time to make phone calls again.