primitives name names

[franksolich]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3329822

Oh my.

autorank  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Fri May-23-08 01:44 AM
Original message

BUSH Supporting Democrats in Senate - 20 Say Yes to War - names
   
"The United States Congress needs to pass a responsible war funding bill that does not tie the hands of our commanders," Bush said.--Reuters, 5/22

WHO IN THE SENATE COLLABORATED WITH THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF TO KEEP THIS MURDEROUS WAR GOING?

ALL OF THE REPUBLICAN SENATORS except McCain and Coburn, who were absent.

How did the DEMOCRATS DO?

Here are the Democrats who support the Bush war and those who don’t

U.S. Senate

the table posted by the naming primitive wouldn't transfer here in copying-and-pasting, but anyway, the Democrats named as supporting the "Bush war" are:

Akaka of Hawai
Baucus of Montana
Bayh of Indiana
Carper of Delaware
Casey of Pennsylvania
Dorgan of North Dakota
Inouye of Hawaii
Johnson of South Dakota
Levin of Michigan
Lincoln of Arkansas
McCaskill of Missouri
Nelson of Florida
Nelson of Nebraska
Pryor of Arkansas
Rockefeller of West Virginia
Salazar of Colorado
Stabenow of Michigan
Tester of Montana
Webb of Virginia

--which makes 19, not 20.  The primitive arithmetic, again.  The primitive forgot Mikulski of Maryland.

And then the primitive forgot Biden of Delaware, which makes.....21.

No matter what a primitive says, things never add up.

There is NO excuse for funding this war. Funding supports Bush and war supporters, the “YEA’s” are Bush supporters. Shame on them. It’s going to take more than one election to keep up this.

Over 4,000 killed in battle, 120 suicides a week for vets of Iraq, 60,000 vets with PTSD (not treated well at all), 40,000 with major injuries, and more suffering for family members -- ENDING THE WAR PROTECTS THE TROOPS.

1.2 million dead Iraqi civilians (due to civil chaos), 5.0 million Iraqi orphans – is this what we call liberation?

Another big win for the ANTI-LIFE PARTY. BE PRO-LIFE, OPPOSE THE WAR

MADem  (1000+ posts) Fri May-23-08 01:50 AM
Response to Original message

1. Did Obama not vote?
   
That McCaskill vote is a bit, er, surprising.

autorank  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Fri May-23-08 01:55 AM
Response to Reply #1

2. Not to me, none of the YEAs surprise me.
   
Obama was campaigning.

They come up with their excuses, like Levin, Webb, McCaskill, and they go on their merry way not taking any responsibility for all the death and suffering. There will be a horrible judgement of history coming very soon for these willing supporters of the war.

Bush and the Republicans are responsible for starting the war but anyone voting to support it with funding is responsible for the events.

They're just so high and mighty, they justify their collaboration with Bush in myriad ways.

But it all comes down to self deception.

The supporters are made men and women of "The Money Party" - it's all about them and their lust for whatever gets them through the night.

Sad day, another of many.

It's a medium-sized bonfire, mostly primitives wailing in rage and despair against other Democrats.

[Rebel]

Funny, I didn't see Obama's name in either list. I thought this was an important issue for him?

[Sonnabend]

Obama was campaigning.

[Splashdown]

Casey, from PA, is the empty suit they ran to beat Santorum. He's probably more conservative than Specter, which ain't saying much. Of course he had to vote yea.

And Biden, to use a quote from the Band of Brothers series, has his head so far up his ass that the lump in his throat is his nose. He votes one way and talks another.

[dandi]

120 suicides a week for vets of Iraq

Another damned DUmmy lie. That weekly figure was calculated from one year's total (2005) and counted all veterans nationwide.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/13/cbsnews_investigates/main3496471.shtml

It's one thing to recognize it as a problem to be addressed - it does need attention - it's another entirely to bastardize the figures for poltical gain.

[FlaGator]

Funny, I didn't see Obama's name in either list. I thought this was an important issue for him?

That would lock him in on a position and he can not allow that to happen. To say that he is against the war when running for President is one thing. To actually vote against it will lock him in to a course of action before the general election. He may need to pander to the conservatives and an actual voting record may hinder the pandering process.

[Rebel]

That would lock him in on a position and he can not allow that to happen. To say that he is against the war when running for President is one thing. To actually against it will lock him in to a course of action before the general election. He may need to pander to the conservatives and an actual voting record may hinder the pandering process.

Just wondering why the Dems attacked John McCain as being anti-troop when he was absent as well. They said nothing about the Obama moron.