Called Rep. John Murtha's office in response to a United for Peace . . .

[defendandprotect]

msg to call to stop Bush's $102 Billion request for more war funding --
topped by $70 billion more which the Dems are offering ---

According to them, this is what is happening ----

Here's what we know about what they plan to bring up for a vote:
1) On top of the $102 billion requested by the Bush administration, the Democratic Party leadership is proposing to offer an unsolicited, additional $70 billion to cover the first quarter war funding for FY2009. In other words, this will be a whopping $172 billion!

2) This funding will cover the rest of this fiscal year, which runs to Sept. 30th, and go well into the next fiscal and calendar years. This means this would be the last supplemental appropriation voted on before the November elections. If passed, this funding will also carry over into the next presidency and the new Congress.

3) There is speculation that the House version of the funding bill will be "clean" and not have any other items attached to it. If this happens there would be a straight up-or-down vote before it moves to the Senate where additional spending is likely to be added.

4) According to the Democratic leadership, this unconscionable allocation of $172 billion is an attempt to avoid a presidential veto. However, President Bush has promised to veto any war funding bill that exceeds $108 billion dollars.
It appears that the decision to vote on such a massive allocation of new funds now is based on the desire to remove the funding issue from the electoral calendar, allowing Congress to shirk accountability for continuing to fund the occupation and failing to end it. As the country heads into the elections, we believe that every senator and representative should stand up and be counted on the question of this war and how they intend to stop it.


At any rate, I left a message for Pelosi and then called Murtha and the phone was answered by a female who took great exception to the fact that I wanted the troops out --- she was very testy --
and wanted to convince me that no one was making greater efforts to get the troops out than Murtha.

Of course, Murtha has long had a reputation as a Hawk -- pro-military --

She reverted to suggesting that if you want the occupation over and troops brought home and NO MORE FUNDING that that would mean that you'd be voting to leave the troops there with no way to get home!!! Who started this really lame argument? It's desperate!!!

I told her to deprivatize Halliburton and there'd be enough money to bring the tropps home --

That only made her hotter ---

It's amazing that once in a while you really get an insight into what's going on in Washington
and it's frightening!!!

[LakeSamish706]

1. Someone posted the other day that Pelosi was front and center on this....

This is just getting as disgusting as it can get. I thought these thugs were voted in to end the war not continue it for Bush.

[BrklynLib at work]

2. Power corrupts...and great power corrupts absolutely..

[VP505]

3. Your experience with that staffer

only reinforces the notion that those in Washington consider us stupid. They seem not to be able to recognize that they work for US and this is supposed to be a Government FOR the people and BY the people.

[defendandprotect]

4. After years of calling Congress, this was the FIRST time that I had ever

had such an openly negative reaction.

I have a GOP Rep. ---Mike Ferguson --- who sucks ---

When I call there, I know they don't like to hear my position and they will usually go as far
as trying to not take my name or address ... but I've never had a reaction like this one today!

On the other hand, Lautenberg and Menendez I'm fairly happy with ---
can't say that I know how they vote on every issue, but generally when I've checked,
they seem to be there.