If you were a Member of Congress, Would you have voted For or Against the Budget?

[MadBadger]

This question was proposed by a non-donating member yesterday for a potential poll. I had thought about making one, so I am. Would you have voted for or against it?

[Political Heretic]

1. People voting against - why?

[Earth_First]

2. $130 billion for Iraq/Afghanistan

[Political Heretic]

4. Ooooooooh. I was only thinking about all the amazing domestic priorities

[Earth_First]

5. According to DK it would also increase the amount of troops in Afghanistan to 78,000 by 2010

which is nearly a 100% increase to the current level.

THAT is why.

[MADem]

8. Yeah, we should just leave the Taleban to their own devices, that's the ticket!!

So they can continue to do shit like this:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article6022878.ece

[tekisui]

10. We've been there 8 years, so far.

Why should we think anything will change with an escalation?

[MADem]

36. Didn't you listen to Obama's speech on the subject?

We've been BARELY THERE for the last eight years, because all of the assets were in Iraq.

We haven't been IN Afghanistan, we've been in fucking KABUL.

Obama's plan has an entirely different focus. It won't be easy but it's a smarter way of dealing with this mess.

[tekisui]

68. We'll see.

I see it as an expansion of a failed policy. The objectives are still vague and open-ended. I see more no-end-in-sight, and more wasted money and lost lives.

[EFerrari]

14. Right. And funding an escalation is going to change the Taliban?

How, exactly?

[MADem]

37. Why don't you read Obama's speech on the subject if you're really interested.

I can't believe people are acting all "surprised" about this shit. Ewww, an ESCALATION!!!! "How, exactly?" Come off it.

Where was the griping back in JULY of last year when he proposed this course of action?

I guess all the YES WE CAN-ing drowned the man out, is that it?

I didn't hear any griping about this when Obama first brought it up. But now, all of a sudden, the sky is falling.

Funny, that.

[EFerrari]

40. Than YOU were the one who wasn't listening because plenty of us

disagreed THEN and have been joined by more who still disagree NOW.

Griping, my granny.

[MADem]

47. Funny--he wasn't my first choice. You probably wouldn't have liked mine any better,

but I actually listened to the policy speeches all around, and understood clearly where the candidates stood on the issues.

I'm astounded, too, at those who claim not to have known, but still insist they "disagreed then."

Whatever. Griping, your granny, grampa and great-uncles!

[EFerrari]

49. Strawman to dismiss our CONTINUING objections as inattention.

[MADem]

51. No. Just because you make a statement doesn't make it true.

You've proved that many times already.

[EFerrari]

52. When you have nothing, attack the poster. And here's a pre-election link.

Take it for a part of the whole:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5108321

[MADem]

54. No one is "attacking" you. You're a bit hypersensitive and touchy.

You're also coming off as a professional complainer.

You want "change?" Get off your ass and work for it. Stop griping.

All politics is local, ya know.

I don't know what universe you live in, but unless you're talking about some foreign election, that's not a "pre-election link."

We elected Obama in November of last year. Your link is dated February of this year.

Whatever. :crazy:

[EFerrari]

57. Not at all. I never dated nor married Obama, I just voted for him.

Searching DU is like pulling teeth but I'm sure it isn't my imagination that Obama promised to escalate Afghanistan or that DUers objected to it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3560056

[Earth_First]

20. I'm so sick and tired of fighting radical Islam over vicious religious views

Christians and Catholics beat women and children RIGHT HERE IN AMERICA!

Fucking shit, I loathe religion!

[MADem]

35. You can't pretend any equivilency.

Catholics beat women? I'll be needing a link for that. They tell them what to do, sure (and the women are free to leave the faith if they'd like), but beat them? I read the papers, I live in a predominantly Catholic region....I think I would have noticed some of that going on.

Half the population of America is not locked in their homes, prevented from going anywhere without their husband or father escorting them, under penalty of being held down and beaten until they scream for mercy in the street.

What's your solution, if you're 'tired' of this? Abandon them? Say "Fuck ya'll bitches, I got mine?"

The idea in Afghanistan is to let the AFGHANS do the bulk of the enforcing. The multinational forces are there for training and backup at the outset, with a goal to fading into the background and focusing on infrastructure improvement and people-to-people aid. We've got to start somewhere, though. These women deserve better than that crap.

[EFerrari]

42. That's so laughable. We're going to train policemen and soldiers

and miraculously undo centuries of the command structure of a whole culture.

No, we can't.

[MADem]

50. You're proud of not paying attention, apparently.

"The command structure of a whole culture" is not going to be undone.

The idea is to work WITH the existing tribal structure, and do the flies with honey approach. All politics is local.

But then, you'd know that if you bothered to have a look at what the plans were instead of deriding everything as "laughable."

What's laughable is your smug lack of knowledge, actually.

[EFerrari]

53. Do you really believe that a layer of US dollars is going to change this culture?

It won't. No matter what insults you type. As soon as the dollars run out, so will the influence.

But, thanks for attacking me instead of thinking about the problem.

[MADem]

55. Keep saying stuff like that. It shows you clearly have NO idea what his plans are.

And pointing out that you don't know what Obama has in mind is NOT an "insult."

Again, no one's "attacking" you. Pointing out that you don't know what Obama has planned is not an attack, but I cannot help but notice that you do tend to say that any time gaps in your knowledge base are noted.

[EFerrari]

60. Do you have any awareness at all of what you post here?

lol

[MADem]

61. I'd ask you--"LOL"--the very same question. nt

[uppityperson]

48. So do all sorts of people with all sorts of religions and none.

I loathe fundamentalists and I loathe abusers.

[Wind Dancer]

44. Have you seen this?

Afghan Women's Rights may be Severely Restricted by New Law

A new Shia family law signed by Afghan President Hamid Karzai sometime last month, but not yet published, would severely restrict women's rights in Afghanistan. Karzai, according to news sources, signed the bill to court the Hazara vote in the upcoming presidential election. The law has not yet been published, but according to The Guardian contains provisions that would restrict women from leaving their homes, working, going to school, or obtaining medical care without their husbands’ permission. The law also includes a provision that women cannot refuse their husbands sex and a provision that grants child custody only to men. Ustad Mohammad Akbari, leader of the Hazara party, told The Guardian that the law gives women the right to refuse sex with their husbands if they are ill or have a "reasonable excuse" and allows women the right to leave their homes without permission in an emergency.

Shinkai Karokhail, a woman MP who worked against the legislation, told The Independent UK that the law "is one of the worst bills passed by the parliament this century….It is totally against women's rights. This law makes women more vulnerable."

http://www.feminist.org/news/newsbyte/uswirestory.asp?id=11613

[MADem]

56. Yes, it's horrible. SECSTATE Clinton learned about this from the Finns and our

government is working (with others who are equally outraged) on getting this law deep-sixed.

Karzai, friend of Bush, getting prickly and feeling constrained under Obama (because Obama's demanding results and not buying off on his happy talk), signed that law because he wants the votes of the minority (small total percentage of the population) of the Shi'a come election day. It's a horrible thing, the details are not fully "out there" but it basically turns women into slaves, from all reports. Like Iran, but on steroids.

The Afghan women (who are a minority but have a percentage of guaranteed seats) in the loya jurga shit bricks. They're concerned, and they're not happy. It's showing them how tenuous their "rights" are, without someone to stand up for them until they can consolidate their power and influence and reintegrate into the society in decisive fashion.

[Political Heretic]

19. That is concerning. However -

This increase, was explained to be non-combat increase primarily, with the objective of training Afghan policy and military.

To me, this might be slightly different than a pure combat focused military escalation.... ?

Thoughts?

[MADem]

38. Stop making sense.

You'll ruin the poutrage, and the feigned surprise that Obama intends to prosecute a course of action he's been discussing for over a year.

[Political Heretic]

62. I'm not a fan of mocking people's concern either. "Poutrage" is idiotic and classless.

Let's just talk like adults for once.

[MADem]

64. It's accurate.

And it isn't "mocking." I'm fucking tired of the continuous excoriation of the President. There's absolutely nothing wrong with disagreeing with his course of action on a given issue, but using emotionally laden words like "traitor" and "sold out" to me, are POUTRAGEOUS, and the actions of the real "classless" people up in here.

You're not going to find adult discussion from the O-hating crowd, who are, often as not, the former "Hillary hating" crowd, and the same people who said things like "He's only saying that to get elected." Er, no, he isn't. He meant that shit. Now they're whining because they didn't listen, or believe.

It's hugely ironic that I didn't support the guy in the primary, and yet I see so many fucking idiots--and that IS what they are--who painted their OWN hopes and changes on the guy, and who failed to listen to the words coming out of his mouth. Then, they have the NERVE to get mad at Obama....because THEY didn't listen....or, dare I say, "BELIEVE."

[Political Heretic]

65. You know, even if that were true - its still childish and classless.

One lesson that our parents apparently forgot to teach us, including mine since I didn't learn this until much later in life,(heh, in fact I'm still learning it) is this:

Being right is not necessarily the same thing as doing the right thing.

So just because you're "right" (if you are) doesn't making you "right" in terms of how you behave.

Sometimes, someone just has to volunteer to be the first one to grow up and stop acting like a child.

[MADem]

66. Well, my mileage varies.

I think you have to point out when people are maligning someone unfairly. Not play the "Can't we all just get along" game.

But hey, you're entitled to your view. As I am mine.

[EFerrari]

43. There was an article floating around here last week that showed

that combat units were going to be renamed. So, yes, there will be a slight difference.

[Political Heretic]

63. What artilce? And what do you/did the article - mean?

Meaning its just a smoke screen to do the same exact mission under a different name or what?

I'm open-minded here. I started as positively disagreeing with Obama on Afghanistan since clear before we elected him. But then I listened to his entire press conference announcing his Afghanistan strategy and I walked away still feeling some disagreement but also feeling like I could see someone who clearly wasn't just warmongering for the purposes of profiteering like the Neocons in Iraq. He had a very holistic view about the region, combing training of the countries own security forces with mulit-lateral aid and diplomacy combined with infrastructure development, etc.

It seemed to be a much more nuanced strategy than just "war war war!"

Also, I have perhaps a very uncomfortable question, and that is this: I am honestly worried about the deterioration of Pakistan, aren't you? I'm not saying military action is the answer. I don't know what the answer is per se. But used to say "bring them all home now!" and that may still be the right answer. But the deterioration of conditions on the afghan border and inside Pakistan really scares the crap out of me. Like this is a big deal. It can't just be left to do its own thing...

Thoughts?

[EFerrari]

67. I'm not really sure but it looks like renaming combat units

as something else is meant to mask the fact that more will stay there than we're meant to know.

As far as Pakistan goes, I agree that country is actually our biggest challenge. It's a dysfunctional mess. But, any threat of American force will only make it worse, not better. The international community needs to step up and it may be that the US shouldn't even take a leadership role because the anti-American feeling there will only stall any negotiation. Not what anyone wants to hear, I know, but it's the truth.

[MadBadger]

3. The Kucinich Reasoning: because it had war funding in it.

But that would mean they would vote for it if Obama had done separate war funding like Bush used to.

[Odin2005]

7. They are whiny Naive Pacifists that worship Kucinich?

[tekisui]

9. Are those who support the funding Bloody Warmongers who worship Petraus?

I would have voted for it, because its needed, but the war funding and war expansion is disgusting. Your description of anti-war issue-actives is belittling.

[Occam Bandage]

12. The question isn't those who oppose the funding, it's those who oppose the entire bill

because war funding is contained in it. There's a difference, and the failure to see that difference is the primary reason why I would call them "whiny," among other things.

[tekisui]

16. I see the difference, and I said I would have voted for it.

But, the name calling is unnecessary, imo.

[Odin2005]

29. Single-Issueism is moronic by definition.

[MadBadger]

13. The problem I have with DK's response was that war funding never used to be in the budget

It was a step up for transparency for Obama to put it in the budget, unlike Bush. So does this mean that DK would have voted for the budget if the war funding was separate like it used to be?

[tekisui]

17. I agree with you.

I was happily impressed that the war funding was going to actually be in the budget, and like I said, I support it. I just don't appreciate the belittling names for those who are strongly opposed to war.

[MadBadger]

22. I just ignored the name calling so I could talk to you like an adult

No Problem.

[MadBadger]

26. Though, I do find pacificism to be naive I must say.

[EFerrari]

28. More naive than an escalation in Afghanistan?

[MadBadger]

30. I dont know.

[EFerrari]

32. It's a hard call if those are the choices.

But, given that every war we've waged in my lifetime has been more or less of a net negative, even overlooking the humanitarian cost, I'd say escalation in Afghanistan wins. There is no military solution there and we already know that.

[Odin2005]

31. Ooh boy, are you going to be clobbered by the Naive Pacifists for saying unfortunate truths.

:yoiks:

[Political Heretic]

33. That's a good point.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

24. yeah, so naive not to want more killing. the supreme maturity of war, which is clearly

a victimless & affordable, should rule us all.

[Political Heretic]

27. That's about the most dickhead thing I've ever seen posted.

I'm never going to mock those deeply concerned about our nations violence and proclivity to aggression.

Maybe we need to pass the budget anyway, or maybe we should vote it down - but mocking people that care is fucking stupid.

[Odin2005]

6. For it.

[Occam Bandage]

11. For. It's the most progressive bill in history.

I'm surprised the DK-bots voting against it haven't yet torn out their right eyes and cut off their right ears, really.

[geek tragedy]

15. Voted for it. Voting against universal health care reform

is a true sign of (a) Republican intransigence or (b) purist idiocy.

[Bluerthanblue]

18. there will never be a perfect budget- and this was as good as

it could get given our situation. (IMO)

I don't believe in escalating Afghanistan, but there is no good answer to the situation.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

21. i would be very conflicted to vote for war escalation. nt

[MadBadger]

23. So is that a For or Against?

[La Lioness Priyanka]

25. not sure.

[No.23]

34. Why is pacifism posed as the only alternative to...

imperialist military aggression abroad?

I never cease to be amazed at how many people are willing to buy into this incomplete equation.

Pacifism is NOT the only alternative.

You can be pro-defense without requiring imperialist military aggression as a necessary component of that defense.

But hey, if you don't like the descriptor "imperialist military aggression", let's use one that Obama's insiders like to use:

nation building.

Do we have a right to nation build other countries?

We're spending godzillions of tax payers' dollars to help nation build Afghanistan.

While so many people here are suffering.

Huh?

And this sits well with people who like to use reason to figure things out?

[SemiCharmedQuark]

39. Depends: Would my vote be the deciding vote?

If it was going to pass no matter what, then maybe one might have the luxury of not voting for it. I am curious as to what DK would have done if his vote had mattered.

[ThomWV]

41. I would have voted for it on final passage - the work and objections should predate that.

I think that objections to the budget should be voiced in committee and all the pre-budget finagling that goes on before the final bill hits the floor. By that time I think, in general, its time to go with the flow because if nothing else the work of Government must go on.

[InvisibleTouch]

45. While I can very much respect Kucinich's stance...

...I would have voted for it, myself. Because as I believe Obama himself said, we can't let the perfect be the enemy of the good, and things need to get done.

[rucky]

46. I'd vote against it if I knew it would pass anyways.

yeah, I'm that kind of congress critter.

[Forkboy]

58. Without reading the whole thing I'm not answering.

:)

[CBR]

59. Enemy...Perfect....Good and all that. nt