I have a question about the $87 billion ??? Someone refresh my memory.

[kentuck]

Did they have two votes on the $87 billion? It was my impression, at least I thought I had read, that the vote for the first $87 billion was defeated because Bush and the Repubs did not want to take back the taxcut on the top 2% to pay for it? Then they had a second vote where it was simply added to the deficit and Kerry and Edwards voted against it. Is that not correct? And because of that vote, they were accused of not giving body armor to the troops? But the troops had already been sent to Iraq without body armor?? Help me out here.

[Massacure]

1. The $87 billion had a slush fund that Bush could spend as he pleased

Kerry supported a similar version but without the slush fund.

[Eric J in MN]

2. Yes, that is correct (though you need to change miilion to billion`

in your title.)

George W. Bush threatened to veto either bill if Congress was planning to make part of it a loan.

[kentuck]

3. Duh....thanks !

:)

[clydefrand]

4. Wasn't it the other way around

If it was a loan, then it didn't have to be repaid and that's why Kerry opposed it. He didn't think we should have to pay for it unless Bush rescinded the tax cut for the wealthy to pay for it.

[Eric J in MN]

5. Two of the issues about the bill.

1) Should tax cuts on the rich be reversed to pay for it.
2) Should part of the money be a loan to Iraq.

Kerry was more concerned with issue 1. He voted for an $87 billion bill which reversed the tax cuts for the rich.

Bush was more concerned about issue 2, and threatened to veto any version which made part of the money a loan to Iraq.

[kentuck]

6. That's how I remember it also....

?? Why is it so distorted??

[ciaobox]

7. I still don't understand the defense either.

Maybe Kerry thinks it's too complicated to tell the whole story. But basically you have the story straight. So in actuallity, Bush was AGAINST the $87 billion before he was FOR it.

[kentuck]

9. "Bush was againstthe $87 billion before he was for it."..

That's an excellent way to put it.... :)

[fishface]

8. Freetards forget that * threatened to veto it because

it contained increased funding for veterans.
CNN glossed over that fact but here's the link.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/10/21/sprj.irq.congress.iraq.ap/

[bush equals idiot]

10. In other words.

Kerry stood up for the 260 million Americans who were getting screwed. While Bush was busy not giving our troops the body armour, armoured humvees, and all the military requests for equipment the commanders had wanted in the first place.

And then donated over 60 billion dollars of our money to Iraq, only the second richest oil producing country in the world.

[ClassWarrior]

11. That about sums it up.

Also, Bush threatened to veto the first bill with the tax cut relief AND loan guarantees from Iraq (remember the oil wells??). The second put the entire bill on the backs of average US taxpayers - and they STILL haven't provided body armor, armored vehicles, etc.

23.

[ClassWarrior]

12. Summing up: tax cuts for the wealthy are more important to Junior*...

...than the safety of our troops.

23.