(Senator) Grassley says Democrats are "disingenuous" on defense spending

[sabra]

http://www.radioiowa.com/gestalt/go.cfm?objectid=98439E1F-EC31-02F3-7C368B3D6CE2428C

Grassley says Democrats ae "disingenuous" on defense spending

Partisan bickering already surrounds President Bush's proposed budget for 2008 as Congressional Democrats focus on the billions the Republican president suggests spending on the military. Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley, a Republican, says the full defense budget is in the neighborhood of 662-billion dollars.

Grassley says "Probably 550-billion of that would be spent if we had total peace around the world, just to maintain a defense establishment because a strong national defense is the best bulwark that we have for peace." Bush's budget includes 174-billion dollars for Iraq through 2008. Grassley looks at it as something of an insurance policy.

Grassley says "We call it the Department of Defense but it's a department of peace because if you have a strong national defense, you're more apt to ward off people attacking you and putting your life, Americans' lives in danger." He says Democrats are "talking out of both sides of their mouth" when it comes to military spending.

Grassley says "There isn't a Senate Democrat who may be raising questions about the war in Iraq, always say 'We support the troops' and they're committed to putting whatever money it takes to support the troops in Iraq." He says Democrats are being disingenuous if they say they're behind America's soldiers 100-percent while they're also trying to pare back funding the Department of Defense.

[Demeter]

1. How Much More Peaceful The World Would Be

if America couldn't afford to stick its nose in everywhere....

[Virginia Dare]

2. "it's a department of peace"

ha, ha, ha, that's a knee-slapper chucky, not with the murderous bunch of thugs that are in charge right now. Who is it that's being disingenuous now?

[unpossibles]

5. I wonder if he's ever heard of George Orwell....

I'll just go ahead and say that I doubt it.

[Parche]

3. democrats and military

Let me see, FDR won WWII and he was a Democrat
Clinton had 8years of peace
Jimmy Carter brokered the peace talks with Egypt and Israel


The only one that screwed up was LBJ

[redqueen]

4. What... he expects us to just take his word for it?

Suuuuuure... we'd be spending all that even with total peace... riiiiiight, buddy!

:rofl:

What the hell are these people smokin?

http://www.raisingkaine.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=7000

[rodeodance]

6. send that old bull out to the pasture

[CornField]

15. We tried... and we'll be trying again soon

He's one of those politicians who walks around the state with the "good ole boy" air to him. Fortunately, Iowans finally seem to be waking up to the fact that the good ole boys may not have the people's interests at heart.

[KansDem]

7. This is all they have...

The GOP has catapulted the propaganda that they are the party of military defense. Yet, we know this is patently false. But, since this is all they have, they continue to paint the Dems as "soft on defense." Yesterday's Senate vote attempted to show Dems as "disorganized" and unable to overcome the military plans of their beloved Führer. Now they attempt to describe the Dems as not being very frank with the American people with regard to defense spending...something the GOP hasn't been since 1994. Say, GOP!!! Think we ought to find out what happened to all the billion$ that are missing from YOUR defense spending budgets?

[sandnsea]

8. See What Repulicans Are - LIARS

The whole bunch of them. It is always about political points with them. They don't care about anything except getting money to their rich buddies and destroying everything that would keep them from doing that. Cutting military spending on things like nuclear weapons and star wars has nothing to do with the troops and Grassley knows it.

[Solly Mack]

9. Bottom-line. Cutting veteran benefits? Not supporting the troops

Not having the needed equipment even after billions of dollars have been spent?
Not supporting the troops.

Sending the troops off to die for lies?
Not supporting the troops.

Continued support for a war of lies?
Not supporting the troops.

Sending troops with PTSD back to combat?
Not supporting the troops

Covering up for a lying President?
Not supporting the troops

Allowing a President to get away with a torture policy?
Not supporting the troops


2 years ago my husband was measured for fitted armor. A vest that would be tailored made to his size so the fit would be more protective...he just now got his vest. Just now. After 2 years...2 long years.

Having to wait for gear that will save lives?
Not supporting the troops.

Cronyism and favors to defense contractors?
Not supporting the troops.

Allowing contractors to get away with war profiteering?
Not supporting the troops

[AndreaCG]

12. I'm glad your husband is still alive to wear it.

[Solly Mack]

13. I hope he doesn't have to wear it anytime soon

He went to Iraq with a Vietnam era flak vest..and was lucky.

[Miss Chybil]

10. Bullshit.

Bring them home and it won't cost so much.

[gratuitous]

11. Blow it out your ass, Mr. Grassley

Don't hand me that "peace" jive. Maybe you're used to talking to your caucus cronies and the idiots who vote for you, but I don't dig what you're trying to lay down.

Go ahead and whine, but be sure to go first.

[damntexdem]

14. Well, dis un is no genius.

But he does want to reward his little friends in the MI complex.