The White Flag Democrats’ grand new scheme: A war “surtax”
Three top House Democrats are proposing a “war surtax” to fund the Iraq war.
“If the president really is concerned about stopping red ink, we are prepared to introduce legislation which will provide for a war surtax for that portion of military costs that are related to our military actions in Iraq,” Rep. David Obey, the Wisconsin Democrat who chairs the House Appropriations Committee, says, according to Reuters.
The Politico reports members of the Democratic leadership say they’ll oppose any spending bills that don’t include a plan to end the 4-year-old conflict. Under the surtax proposal, taxpayers would pay extra taxes — ranging from 2% to 15% based on income — designed to raise $140 billion a year for the war effort.
Ways and Means ranking GOP member Jim McCrery shoots it down:
Ways and Means Ranking Member Jim McCrery (R-La.) issued the following statement today in response to a Democratic proposal to impose a new surtax of up to 15 percent to pay for the costs of the War on Terror.
“This proposal would be detrimental to our economy and our national security. It has become clear over the past year that the Majority’s response to any public policy issue is to raise taxes, but this is ridiculous. Trying to coerce the American people into cutting and running from Iraq with the threat of an astronomical tax increase is cynical and transparent.”
Nothing screams impotence louder than a desperate, last-ditch effort to tax the war on terror to death.
***
The House Dems are stalling. This is how they support the troops:
Frustrated by the stalemate over Iraq, House Democrats spelled out a strategy that would stall action on President Bush’s 2008 war budget and rely on incremental funding to sustain troop operations in until next spring.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates outlined an almost $190 billion request last week for the military in Iraq and Afghanistan over the coming year. But House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey (D., Wis.) said this morning that he had “absolutely no intention” of reporting out a bill this year to fund “any such request that simply serves to continue the status quo.”
Instead, Democrats appear likely to provide short-term funding in the range of $40 billion to $50 billion to sustain overseas operations as part of final House-Senate negotiations on a pending budget bill covering the Pentagon’s core costs for the fiscal year that began Oct. 1. The Senate is to take up that measure today, and the appropriations leadership is hopeful a House-Senate agreement can be sent to the White House before Thanksgiving, when a final decision will have to be made about ensuring troops in the field have adequate funds.
See continuing coverage of developments in Iraq, including an interactive map of day-to-day events in Iraq and a tally of military deaths.
Rep. John Murtha (D., Pa.), who manages the defense bill, said this could be done either in the form of an expanded transfer authority within the core bill, which totals about $459.6 billion, or with added emergency funds.
Absent some action, the Army’s operations funds would run dry in early January, but if Congress were to add $40 billion to $50 billion in emergency funds, it would be enough of a cushion to avoid major disruptions.
Such “bridge funds” have been used in the past to help finance the war, but in those cases, Congress felt it was necessary to add money because the administration had not submitted a full-year request. What’s changed now is that the White House is poised to ask for the full sum it thinks it needs in 2008, but Democrats, trying to force more change in U.S. policy, are proposing to hold back most of the request.
Brian Faughnan crunches the numbers:
Is it really wise to propose a series of mammoth tax increases at a time when the economy is slowing down and the federal fiscal picture is improving so dramatically? And even if Democrats are confident that their tax increases won’t harm economic growth, it’s worth remembering that the taxpayer burden is higher than it has ever been before…while Democrats pitch this as a shared sacrifice to pay for the war, that claim doesn’t hold water. Even they know that money is fungible, and they have proposed huge spending increases. Legislation passed by the Democratic Congress calls for an increase in federal spending of $21 billion in 2008, and $190 billion over the next 5 years. SCHIP will add to federal spending and so will an education reauthorization, farm programs… you name it.
It would be gratifying if Congressional leaders simply admitted that they want to spend far more than Republicans, and that they will need huge tax increases to do so. That type of candor would be refreshing.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- Wake up America-I question their patriotism
- Stop The ACLU » Blog Archive » Democrats Propose To Tax Iraq War
- Desperate Democrats Part Number….Oh Whatever: UPDATE, Pelosi Nixes war tax idea at Conservative Times--Republican GOP news source.
- The Daily Conservative
- The Democrat party solution for the Iraq war? Raise taxes. | BitsBlog
- Wonkette
- Old War Dogs
- white pebble » The return of the Hippies
- The Mahablog » Tots and Taxes
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: White Flag Democrats
JustOneMinute
» David Gregory To Host Meet The Press (While Hiding From It)
Belmont Club
» A self-made hellHotline On Call
» Obama Records Radio Ad For LA House HopefulNewsBusters.org
» Four Years Later, Kerry Admits He's a LiberalPoliPundit.com
» US Capitol Visitor Center OpensPower Line
» Newly-Discovered Ballots Boost FrankenHotline On Call
» The Fix: Martinez To RetireWeekly Standard
» Gregory to Meet
How can they continue to be so cosmically clueless again and again and again?
All they have to do is vote to de-fund the war and it’s done, so if you want to end the war, DO IT. Judging from the congressional approval ratings, the American people have figured this out. The ones who are tired of them continuing to fund the war aren’t happy. The ones who are tired of them complaining aren’t happy. The result? My shoe size exceeds their approval rating.
Until you’re gutsy enough to de-fund the war, shut up and keep writing the checks to the Department of Defense.
Silly, Silly Dems. and the march goes on since Jan. headus upus rumpus maximus.
If they want to raise more money shouldn’t they LOWER taxes? That is what has worked best in the past…
God help us.
So transparent. So bizarre.
YAY, shout it from the mountain tops EVERY TIME they increase taxes or propose ANOTHER tax increase.
Eventually even those suffering from BDS will get the message that these Dems in Washington will never have enough of your money. Taxocratic Congress is what we have now.
Hillary ‘Tax’ Clinton is their frontrunner.
shout it out. . . Democrats are taxing as much as they can. Democrats tax tax tax tax tax tax tax.
Sorry, but it’s an easy idea to defeat politically with the 3 TRILLION dollar budget that they already have (why do they need MORE?).
Are these the same democrats who;
…….. yup.
Their #1 goal all along is to do anything within their power to turn as many Americans as possible against Bush - because they claimed that the ‘burden was not shared to all Americans.’
First, they wanted to re-instate the military draft, and now, this tax.
That’s it. Let’s tax the very service-members that are in the line of fire even more. They’re not sacrificing enough. So much for our pay raise.
Hey Dems! If this is how you show your support for the troops…PLEASE STOP.
Maybe Congress would sacrifice their pay raises retroactively from the point that they authorized the war and for the next five years.
Yeah, that will happen…not.
The taxes we pay now already fund the War. The only reason the morons are floating the proposal is the same reason some of the left unhinged in Congress proposed reinstituting a draft - to make the War effort more unpopular than it is.
Just like there was no necessity for the resumption of a draft, there is no necessity for a war tax. This is low level gutter politics. If not enough people are against something, make it hurt them in the pocketbook or in their homes.
These folks in Congress have not a care in the world for the well being of the Country. Their focus is on their pocketbooks, and those coffers are filled by the left wing money machines run by George Soros. Not sure if most folks know this, but whatever is left over in campaign contributions is a politician’s money to keep. They do not have to forfeit it to the treasury, they do not have to turn it over to the party, it is theirs.
The left hates America. The left sides with Americas enemies. The left hate our troops. They hate Jews and Christians. They can hide behind whatever they want, but they hate us period! They side with Islamonazis, with dictators Chavez, Castro, and Mugabe. They and their Che T-shirt wearing children would side with flesh eating zombies if it meant the destruction of America. They only love their power.
Two problems with that:
1) The democrats don’t know a thing about economics, and Marxism doesn’t count.
2)If it wasn’t a story in Media Matters, then they probably haven’t read it and taken it out of context yet.
blaise:
Of course it has. Lower taxes mean people have more income to spend, which in turn boosts tax revenue from business, etc. It really is a simple concept.
When you tax people more, they have less to spend, and the unnecessary expenses (clothes shopping, entertainment, etc.) is usually the first chopped from the family budget.
But the notion of allowing people to keep MORE of the money they earn is blasphemous to the Democrats educated in the Karl Marx school of Economics. If they let us keep our money, how will Hillary’s redistributionist vision ever become a reality? How will they ever be able to take from you in order to buy more votes?
They read, too?
But don’t question their patriotism, or support of the troops.
What we need is a weekly show devoted to how spineless and greedy the dems in congress are. It would keep us all focused and on task.
Let’s be clear: our troops are winning against terrorists. The real enemy is right here at home.
I wonder if we know anyone with the ability to stream a live weekly show about such a topic???
I don’t get it. If 70% of the country wants funds cut off, and that is something the Legislature can do without actually doing anything, then why are they doing all of these ridiculous stunts. Why don’t they just announce that they will no longer fund this war? This appears to be the way the public wants them to go anyway.
This afternoon, I’ve been adding links to Iraq-related news items to the front page over at The Victory Caucus. They’re most all about the success of the surge. The Dems are playing with fire - the surge is succeeding, and IT’S BEING REPORTED IN THE MEDIA. Americans don’t like losing wars. The more they push back the date of funding the troops, the more they risk looking stupid because of our military’s success, and the more they risk alienating those center & right of center Americans who want to see us leave Iraq because we have won.
bunch of crapweasles!
Well, they all wanted Democrats in the Congress. They got them. Now it’s time to pay. It would make sense to me to vote someone other than a democrat into office and volunteer to pay extra to the government. That way, if one month you can’t pay, you’re still okay. Best bet, is to pay some now, and bank the rest, so when your heroine Hillary becomes President, you can pay even more. Who would want to vote for someone who will take food off your table and steal from your wallet? Apparently, many want it that way.
Hey, he’s getting advice from an 80 year old cockroach. What can you expect. Direct from his site.
My favorite philosopher is Archy the Cockroach. He was a character invented in the 1920s by a writer named Don Marquis.
http://obey.house.gov/HoR/WI07/Archys+Corner/Archys+Corner.htm
Archy on Taxes
Archy on War
Even if the War ser tax went through, you think they’d spent it on the war? Hell no, they need it for socialized medicine, and $5,000 for each baby born!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Did Murtha ever apologize for libeling that soldier? How can they criticize Rush Limbaugh with Murtha in the room. Perhaps he wasn’t in the room, probably hiding under his desk.
The democrats have no soul, no conscience and no guts. Like Mike Volpe said, if they really feel that way, and its not all politics, just defund the war. Cowards.
I know the Democrats think the answer to everything is to raise taxes, but good grief, a war surtax? Who votes for these morons?
I have an idea, we’ll call it a treason tax!
1. 1/4 of all the Democrap Congress paycheck amounts get docked every payday to upgrade the VA hospitals.
2. a 50 percent tax fee on the monthly administration operations of all leftist anti-American groups.
3. A new 25 percent tax against the collective wealth and estimated property value of all Hollywood bastards.
As for Harry Reed and Nacy Pelosi, they can live in a damned tent and wear a barrel.
I live in Mass. And I meet clowns on a daily basis that openly admit to voting for people like this. Then complain about taxes being so high. You try to reason with them, and it’s like banging your head on a wall. It is fun when they realize they aren’t gonna convert you though. I love that look of defeat in their eyes. Accomplishment.
I was in the Post Office the other day, and an idea came to me. We have special stamps for all kinds of things, breast cancer, etc., that people can purchase for a little more than a regular First Class stamp. Is there any way to offer a stamp in honor of our soldiers and or vets, in honor of their service to this great Country? Monies raised could be used for Veteran services, scholarships for soldiers or their families, or “something” else benefiting our military men and women, on top of what is already provided. As Americans, we really have not been asked to sacrifice anything for this war. I am in full support of our military, whether active or retired, and think this would allow each of us, to our own abilities and at our own choosing, a way to raise money, while supporting our troops. We don’t need to raise taxes, we need to get control of our fiscal policies and priorities. That includes everyone, Republicans and Democrats alike. I have vowed to not vote a straight Republican ticket ever again, unless the person running is a true Republican. If a Republican nominee acts like a Democrat, either through their fiscal or social policies, I will just vote for the Democrat and cut out the middleman.
The democrats: if they can’t retreat from it or tax it, they won’t have anything to do with it.
We must remember that in the sociocrats eyes, ‘It’s their money’ and they will allow you to have enough for sustenance and no more. The sheeple liberals that follow don’t seem to understand that
‘If you have money left after you pay your taxes you are ‘RICH’ and haven’t been paid your ‘fair share’.
I wonder what Hilly (Stalin in Drag) will have to say? Eh? Or remember (How can we fool ‘em today?)
How are they finding enough stupid Americans to vote these people into office? I suspect many of them are watching Oprah and Jerry Springer instead of FOX News or listening to talk radio.
I wish they would stay home instead of vote if they’re not going to educate themselves about important issues.
God help us all!
The Democrats running the show in Congress have very little backbone, and Bush is kicking their collective ass on Iraq (from a political point of view). They were presumably elected to end the occupation of Iraq (we already won the war over 4 years ago) and bring the troops home. They failed because they are weak and ineffective, and, as a result, they have an 11% approval rating. So, what do they do? Cheap political move that has no chance of succeeding (the surtax)…pathetic. I’m so sick of both parties I can’t stand it.
Question for supporters of the continued occupation of Iraq though. Do you consider yourselves fiscal conservatives? Do you believe in a balanced federal budget? Hate to say it, but we had a budget surplus when Bush 43 took office. We now have a huge deficit, in part due to the costs of the occupation of Iraq. For anybody watching the terrific documentary on WWII by Ken Burns, you know that Americans at home made huge sacrifices for the war effort from rationing, to war bonds, to leaving home to work in the factories producing the instruments of war. Other than the guys and gals on the ground (and their families of course), none of us have made any sacrifices in the current conflicts. I don’t think a war surtax is the answer, but as an ardent fiscal conservative, we should all be willing to pay for the so-called war on terror and demand a balanced budget from Bush/Cheney and Congress…but maybe that’s just me.
Talk about ‘dumbingdown’ the folks. How low can these Dems go? It has to be a bottomless pit because I cannot believe more people are screaming from their own party to knock this shit off and get working on the real issues of the day. I hope they are voted out in the next two rounds. This group of imbeciles have got to go.
I’ll start paying a tax for specific governmental expenditures when they first show me the books proving that every dime collected for said effort was accounted for in the right ledger column. I’m really sick of paying a “whatever” tax to have it funneled to something else. Beside we already pay a tax for war, it’s called federal income tax. This is a federal war. Not sure how these masterminds in Congress can’t understand this.
Serious question here…can anyone remember the last time a Dimwitocrat had correct “assumptions” regarding taxes, either raising or lowering them?
Have they not been provably wrong about every position they have ever taken regarding taxation?
Why would any intelligent person…ever…believe…Oh! I just answered my own question.
birdlady79~
We don’t need the government to, as private citizens, do things to help support the troops. There are many organizations that already to that. Here are just a few:
AnySoldier.com (provides a link between our deployed Armed Forces and the average American - Support Junkies can request mailing addresses for a deployed “contact” for the purpose of sending letter mail and care packages)
Soldier’s Angels (”Soldiers’ Angels mission is to provide aide and comfort to the men and women of the United States Army, Marines, Navy, Air Force and the Coast Guard and their amazing families.”)
Soldier’s Angels “Project VALOUR-IT” (providing voice-activated laptops to wounded)
Fisher House (”Supporting America’s military in their time of need, we provide “a home away from home” that enables family members to be close to a loved one at the most stressful time — during hospitalization for an illness, disease or injury.”)
Intrepid Fallen Heroes Fund (”support for the families of military personnel lost in service to our nation, and for severely wounded military personnel and veterans.”)
Adopt-A-Platoon (”to ensure that deployed United States Service members in all branches of the military are not forgotten by providing needed mail support and to promote patriotism in our schools and communities.” - this is more restrictive than AnySoldier.com - for example, they will not match a married person with a single person)
If those aren’t enough for you, you can check out AmericaSupportsYou.mil (a sort of troop support “clearinghouse”)
Won what? Is killing insurgents winning? Isn’t that what Saddam did–kill insurgents, except he killed Kurdish and Shiite insurgents, while Bush likes to hunt down Sunni and Shiite insurgents? Who is more representative of the Iraqi people, the insurgents or the collaborators in the Green Zone?
Since WMD and democracy proved farcical goals, have the spin goals degenerated to “winning,” as though war were merely a contest in which we root for our team because Americans are competitive sports fans? Iraq is sort of a big gladiator contest to the faux right, I guess.
Cheerleaders:
Go American military go,
Push ‘em back, push ‘em back,
Waaaaaaaaaaaay back.
How do you spell
Israel
I-s-r-a-e-l
Neocons, neocons,
Lieberman is our quarterback,
Holy rollers our stout line.
Push ‘em back, push ‘em back,
Waaaaaaaaaaaay back.
Alphonse~
All I will say is, go to The Victory Caucus and read the items under “Blogs, New Media & MSM”. You don’t even need to read the things from Milblogs like Blackfive. There are articles from WaPo, NYT and even Reuters & the AP. But, I think you really need to read what someone who saw what Saddam did has to say. He makes the differences between us (the U.S.) and the Hussein regime perfectly clear.
Finally, tax money well spent.
Rick, do we really need anti-semites here?
Free speech is fine, even if what he says is stupid, but really…
Alphonse, your poetry sucks! The only good part is the “Waaaaaaaaaaay” part…It sounds a lot like the standard lefty mantra of “Waaaaa, waaaaa, waaaaa!” “It’s not fair….Waaaaa!”
Good grief! Don’t confuse your personal feelings about Bush, the war, WMD’s, and Lieberman with actual provable facts, cool-aid boy! Oops, sorry about that! For a second I sounded a lot like a name-calling lefty…I should have said, Alphonse. My bad!
Oops. I goofed on the linked for The Victory Caucus…
Every time the dems do this their ratings go down….. have they learned nothing?
On the bright side, if they keeep this up, 2008 will see them in the minority and without the executive branch.
right_on, with all due respect my man, there is as much or more name calling and sort juvenile nicknaming, etc. on this site as about anywhere on the blogosphere (including on Kos). This applies to both posters engaging in name calling with one another, as well as silly and immature name calling of political figures and others with whom folks don’t agree. I’s pretty counterproductive to be honest. Hyperbole and ad hominem attacks are signs of weakness in an argument or a political movement or organization. Democrats and all those who are left of center are socialists/communists and hate America? Silly and ridiculous. Some of the stuff I see on this blog in the way of hyperbole and ad hominem attacks is embarrassing and troubling to many of us who consider themselves true conservatives (albeit, in my case, one who is not a member of any party). Paraphrasing Thomas Jefferson: “Love your country, but distrust your government.” (I realize that’s a bit of a non sequitur, but what the hell.)
This all amounts to;
“Taxation WITHOUT representation”
Sigh — these Democrats depress me
dakine
Thanks for the input! It was my obviously poor attempt at being facetious! I guess my frustration at those on the left got in the way of any intellectual musings I might have provided the discussion. I’ll do better.
Gayle, I realize you’re probably trying to be clever and make some sort of point, but to state the obvious (under the assumption that you are a US citizen and have established a domicile in one of the United States), you are represented in Congress by a Congressperson and two Senators. Maybe you’re thinking of your prior life as a British colonist prior to the Declaration of Independence?
Richard, they should make you feel good about yourself, comparatively speaking.
Just remember that conservatives have a moral compass that most liberals cannot even begin to comprehend.
It is extremely frustrating to watch our country being taken over by illegals and aliens from whatever planet these crazies are cloned.
Hang in there. GOOD in the end, always trumps Evil!
Rep. John Murtha (D., Pa.), who manages the defense bill…
Could there be anything MORE WRONG than that sentence? Can’t we find him guilty of ABSCAM or something? Jeez….we need to lose him like a bad habit.
dakine~
Your analogy doesn’t wash. If we don’t like how Congress is spending our tax money, we go to the polls every 2 or 6 years to vote on whether we approve of the job they are doing. We have no such option with regard to the UN. I don’t want MY tax money going to that anti-American entity in which the majority of member states aren’t much more than tin-pot dictatorships.
Craig
The good news on Murtha today is that the judge refused to throw out the defamation and slander case against him brought by one of the Marines he accused of murder that has since been cleared of all charges … hope they get a huge chunk of whatever amount they are going after
“Impotence”? You know, that is actually a good descriptor for the Dems, Michelle.
Bush needs to cancel or indefinately delay federally funded construction projects in Nevada, California, Mass, New York, New Jersey, PA, and West VA.
The President of the United States is the most powerful person in the world. It is not as if other Presidents (FDR, Johnson) didn’t know how to play hardball with pimples on the butt-cheeks of humanity like Reid, Pelosi, Lautenberg, Murtha, Byrd, Schumer, Kerry, Kennedy, and Clinton.
From Fox News: House Appropriations Chairman’s War Tax Bill Dead on Arrival
More Taxes! Why didn’t I think of that…
The Jackass party wants to beat Bush at everything including having lower poll ratings.
I suppose you have to tip your hat to the Dems for creativity. How many ways can you undermine the war effort? Is somebody keeping track of all of this so the voters can be reminded how much energy has been wasted on these silly debates?
Speaking of energy, here’s an idea. Waddya say we turn the lights off at the Capital for a year or so, all in the interest of reducing Washington’s huge carbon footprint.
In the meantime, when Hillary gets to the highest office of the land, we may look back with fondness at only a 2% to 15% tax increase. Paying the piper for her ongoing march to national socialism will likely cost us alot more.
uh, ladybug, what are you talking about? Your Congressperson and your Senators, in concert with your President, pass a budget which includes line items for funds to be contributed to the UN pursuant to our obligations as a member of the UN. If you don’t like your taxes going to the UN, then you should get a bunch of like-minded folks to join you in persuading your Congressperson, your Senators and your President to take appropriate action in connection therewith. It wasn’t an analogy BTW. It was a statement of fact. Also, I haven’t checked lately, but I’m pretty sure that the UK, France, Spain, Germany (let’s just say all of western Europe),
Brazil, Mexico…well, you get the idea are not governed by “tin-pot” dictators. Like the UN or not, you’ve got to come a little stronger than that.
Double-M,
I apologize for my language in advance, so if this post violates the profanity rule please delete it.
Somebody needs to take these liberals and just (verbally) b*tchslap them.
I mean it. Enough already. Americans pay taxes so that government institutions can operate. One of those institutions is the military.
I personally think the military is one of the only entities worth funding, and one of the only examples of taxes going towards something worthwhile.
However, a special tax on the war is double taxation.
If insincerity were taxables, liberals would be in the 95% bracket.
I would rather the left be sincere and wrong than insincere and wrong. I can respect sincere people who are wrong. The bottom line is that for liberalism to work, success requires failure.
http://blacktygrrrr.wordpress.com/2007/08/22/for-liberalism-success-requires-failure/
That is why we need a holiday called “Smack a liberal day,” preferrably on April 14th.
Respectfully,
eric
dakine~
No, I don’t like tax money to go to the UN. I write my Congresscritters with some regularity. What I was specifically referring to was MM’s post on the “Law of the Sea Treaty”. It would give the UN taxing authority.
As for what I said about member nations?
That little word “majority” makes all the difference. There are 192 member states. Only 89 are full-fledged democracies. That means 103 are not. Only 46% of member states are “full-fledged democracies”.
What this country needs is a good, old fashioned WAR BOND DRIVE.
I’d buy a War Bond.
Me too.
Me three. There are many ways to help our troops (thanks Miss Ladybug in post #35!) but a war bond drive might bring in wider awareness…
I know you’re being sarcastic but it’s long past time when we should start questioning their patriotsm.
I question the patriotism of any DemocRAT who says they support the troops but wants to pull out without finishing the job or won’t provide funding to complete the job.
Jason over at CounterColumn says all best are off now about not calling the Libs “unpatriotic”. Today, Rush called them “phony patriots”.
AMEN, to Rush…
Assume for a moment that Al Qaeda leadership made public pronouncements that if they did not achieve victory in Iraq by a date certain they would cease all combat/terrorist activities in Iraq and leave forever. And assume that they had the authority and capacity to make that happen. Can any sane person doubt that American soldiers would take aid and comfort from the knowledge that all they had to do was continue the fight until the day victory was given to them? I was an American soldier for a quarter century, I know I sure as heck would have taken aid and comfort from knowing that the enemy was going to quit the fight on a date certain and further that they were already announcing that they had lost. So why do Harry Reid and his fellow surrender democrats think that their pronouncements do not give aid and comfort to the jihadists? Do they not listen to what the enemy is saying in their propaganda videos and posting on their websites? Do they ignore the fact that Al Qaeda is quoting them and using their statements to bolster the flagging spirits of their fighters who are getting their brains beat out militarily? Harry Reid and his surrender democrats should have Robert Bird pull out his well-worn copy of the U.S. Constitution and read Article 3 that defines treason as “giving aid and comfort” to the enemies of the United States and Section 3 of the 14th Amendment that renders any person who has “given aid and comfort to the enemies” of the United States as ineligible to be a member of Congress. Have them read 18 United States Code § 2381 that makes treason (“giving aid and comfort to the enemy”) punishable by death. If Harry Reid were merely unpatriotic in time of peace, he could be ridiculed or ostracized. Being treasonous in time of war merits much more severe sanction.
I would love nothing more than to see every “surrender monkey Congress critter” frog marched off to ”Federal bang me in the butt prison” (to quote the movie Office Space). Don’t know how much more I can take of their reckless disregard for our Military personnel by recklessly endangering their lives by giving hope to our enemies.
Boomer, not only that, but they are endangering ALL of our lives each and every day.
They are more concerned about illegals and terrorist having rights, that are unconstitutional……than its own taxpaying citizens.
Talk about treasonous behaviors?
Regardless ladybug, the US is a member country in the UN and is obligated to provide certain funds in connection therewith. You don’t like it, get it changed. Your original sort of silly statement was “Taxation w/o Representation”. That statement remains factually false and doesn’t advance the discussion.
dakine~
gayle was the one to use the term “taxation without representation”. You said she was wrong because she’s not some pre-American Revolution colonist. I said you were wrong and I still stand by my assessment re: the UN. It’s bad enough we have taxpayer money helping fund that useless institution, but they are going for even more power (as on that other thread I referenced). As soon as “member nations” grant that cesspool taxing authority, it IS taxation without representation because one member state (even a permanent member of the Security Council) can’t change that, no matter what our Congresscritters or President might do or say.
My apologies ladybug. Splitting hairs I guess, but our elected officials make decisions on behalf of the US as it relates to the UN, so I really don’t think the “taxation without representation” argument flies. Sorry, but we’re all being represented in that regard. Obviously though I get your primary point…you don’t like the UN.
If we, The United States of America, submit to having everything we do having to be “pre-approved” by an international body, or we grant an international body the ability to tax us, we are no longer a sovereign nation. It will be the end of the greatest democracy in human history. I hope I don’t have to ever see that. He||, we already have Supreme Court justices citing law/precedent in foreign countries when making rulings that should ONLY pass a test on constitutionality for The Constitution of the United States of America…