Senate approves $150B in war funding

Roll Call

NAYs ---3
Byrd (D-WV)
Coburn (R-OK)
Feingold (D-WI)

Not Voting - 5
Biden (D-DE)
Clinton (D-NY)
Dodd (D-CT)
McCain (R-AZ)
Obama (D-IL)

I am very disappointed by a lot of people I respect a lot. I know this is not the appropriation bill, so there is no real money attached, but still, once again, I am happy to see that Feingold voted the right way.

The Dems may change how the war is fought but this war is not going to end.

Curious.

:banghead:

Is this part of the Defence Authorization Bill? In other words, is this 150 million on top of the 200 million that bush is is asking for that will be in the form of a Supplemental??

Ann Flahrerty is such a god awful writer, it's hard to tell what the hell she's talking about.

Or, am I thinking of another one where Bush want's to have himself crowned on the White House Lawn as "KING" sort of like the Rev. Moon was crowned by his Poppy!

Don't tell me they passed this thing. :puke:

Did everybody just skip this:

"While the Senate policy bill authorizes the money to be spent, it does not guarantee it; Bush will have to wait until Congress passes a separate appropriations bill before war funds are transferred to military coffers."

He does not like the hate crime amendment that Kennedy put in it.

Good. Now Dems can say Bush could have had his funding if he'd wanted it.

it authorizes the money to be spent. If it doesn't guarantee it, what happens if it's spent?

"Bush will have to wait until Congress passes a separate appropriations bill before war funds are transferred to military coffers."

Got it, thanks!

If you put it in the budget but then refuse to fund it, that makes it impossible for the Pentagon to plan accordingly and feeds accusations of denying necessary funds to the troops. If they voted yes on this bill, there is no chance that the appropriations bill will even be contested.

:banghead:

Another year of war, another few thousand casualties. Gotta love our "leadership". :sarcasm:

and my goodness, never thought I would ever say, thank you Sen. Coburn for your Nays.

hillary did not vote.

I am done with this. Three Senators and only two "Democrats" could be bothered to not commit another war crime.

He has to come back to Congress to get the actual money.

Burger King logic!

I am sure that Harry knew that....not that it would have mattered looking at the vote.

Congress Quietly Approves Billions More for Iraq War
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat?pid=237751

The Senate agreed on Thursday to increase the federal debt limit by $850 billion -- from $8.965 trillion to $9.815 trillion -- and then proceeded to approve a stop-gap spending bill that gives the Bush White House at least $9 billion in new funding for its war in Iraq.

Additionally, the administration has been given emergency authority to tap further into a $70 billion "bridge fund" to provide new infusions of money for the occupation while the Congress works on appropriations bills for the Department of Defense and other agencies.

Translation: Under the guise of a stop-gap spending bill that is simply supposed to keep the government running until a long-delayed appropriations process is completed -- probably in November -- the Congress has just approved a massive increase in war funding.

The move was backed by every senator who cast a vote, save one.

Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold, the maverick Democrat who has led the fight to end the war and bring U.S. troops home from Iraq, was on the losing end of the 94-1 vote. (The five senators who did not vote, all presidential candidates who are more involved in campaigning than governing, were Democrats Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and Joe Biden and Republicans John McCain and Sam Brownback.)

Said Feingold, "I am disappointed that we are about to begin the 2008 fiscal year without having enacted any of the appropriations bills for that year. I am even more disappointed that we voted on a continuing resolution that provides tens of billions of dollars to continue the misguided war in Iraq but does not include any language to bring that war to a close. We need to keep the federal government operating and make sure our brave troops get all the equipment and supplies they need, but we should not be giving the President a blank check to continue a war that is hurting our national security."


Sounds to me like the front runners of our party are skipping votes that seem to be important to what we want? How is that being a leader, when we want this war to end and they wont even make a vote on it?

Once again, Dennis Kucinich is the only candidate to be a LEADER for the people as he was elected to do. Why do so many people support these other candidates and keep ignoring the guy that said no in the beginning because the war was about oil? Are we really voting for who is best for US?

this (PDF)

we either have to borrow it and add the $150 million to our already outrageous national debt, or print some more money . . . hell of a choice . . .

:eyes: