Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Senator Boxer's floor speech about the new Iraq funding bill.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-25-07 05:22 PM
Original message
Senator Boxer's floor speech about the new Iraq funding bill.
May 24, 2007

In March and in April I voted for emergency spending legislation that would have fully funded our troops in Iraq, but also changed their mission to a sound one. That mission would have taken our troops out of the middle of a civil war, and put them into a support role, training Iraqi soldiers and police, fighting al Qaeda, and protecting our troops.

The President will not agree to that.

As a matter of fact, the President won't agree to any change in strategy in Iraq, and that is more than a shame for the American people; it is a tragedy.

It doesn't seem to matter how many Americans die in Iraq, how many funerals we have here at home, or what the American people think. The President won't budge.

This new bill on Iraq keeps the status quo. With a few frills around the outside, a few reports, a few words about benchmarks. While our troops die.

I understand why this particular legislation is before us today. It's because this President wants to continue his one man show in Iraq. The President doesn't respect this Congress or the American people when it comes to Iraq. He wants to brush us all off like some annoying spot on his jacket.

We have lost 3,427 American soldiers in Iraq. Of those, 731 (21%) have been from California or based in California. There are 25,549 American soldiers wounded.

And today, after several days of worrying and praying, we received the tragic news of the death of Private Joseph J. Anzack JR., 20 years old, of Torrance, California, who was abducted during a deadly ambush south of Baghdad almost two weeks ago.

One member of his platoon, Spc. Daniel Seitz, summed it up this way to the Associated Press: "It just angers me that it's just another friend I've got to lose and deal with, because I've already lost 13 friends since I've been here, and I don't know if I can take any more of this."

And he shouldn't have to. But with this bill, he will.

The first half of this year has already been deadlier than any six-month period since the war began more than four years ago.

In this month alone, 83 U.S. Service members have already been killed in Iraq.

Let me be clear, there are many things in this bill that I strongly support--many provisions that I actually fought for, for our troops, for our veterans, for our farmers, and for the victims of Hurricane Katrina--but I must take a stand against this Iraq war, and therefore I will vote no on this emergency spending bill


Why is it so hard for the rest of Congress to understand this? :-(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
texastoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-25-07 05:35 PM
Response to Original message
1. Political fallout
Edited on Fri May-25-07 05:35 PM by texastoast
I think bills should stand alone. A war funding bill should not have a farm aid provision rider. It allows political opponents to distort the facts to say that Barbara voted against Katrina aid. Such allegations would be accepted as fact by many uninformed voters.

It just helps to keep the entire process very dysfunctional.

That said, everyone elected last November should have voted against the bill. It is a mandate, and SOMEBODY needs to vote their principles.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-25-07 07:45 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. How do we change the rider law?
I know there are many other things to change but I think this corrupts the whole system of lawmaking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
treestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-25-07 07:47 PM
Response to Original message
3. Very interesting to have troops saying that
The repukes often tell us the troops are repuke also, support the war and want their mission supported, yadda, yadda, the usual freeper rhetoric.

Now if they themselves start saying they don't want to be there any more, you've got something to work with to get the war ended.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 09:48 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC