Just to set the record straight on Mike McNulty, my congressman, he voted “no” with Kucinich, Waters, Woolsey, etc., NOT with the Blue Dogs or the Bushites.
…
Sounds like Mike wants the war to end yesterday, doesn’t it?

Thank you, Dev, I was suspecting the same thing, since McNulty co-sponsored a “leave Iran alone!!” bill like, over a year ago maybe?

His/our district has already had enough returning coffins. I have written several letters over the past few years to our junior senator (who’s now running for pres) asking why she couldn’t see things as clearly as one not-so-famous rep…

I am very proud of him and of Pelosi too!

Just to set the record straight on Mike McNulty, my congressman, he voted “no” with Kucinich, Waters, Woolsey, etc., NOT with the Blue Dogs or the Bushites.

Here’s the statement he put out today:

In the spring of 1970, during my first term as Town Supervisor of Green Island, I testified against the War in Vietnam at a Congressional Field Hearing in Schenectady, New York.

Several months after that testimony, my brother, HM3 William F. McNulty, a Navy Medic, was killed in Quang Nam Province.

I have thought — many times since then — that if President Nixon had listened to the voices of reason back then, my brother Bill might still be alive.

As a Member of Congress today, I believe that the Iraq War will eventually be recorded as one of the biggest blunders in the history of warfare.

In October of 2002, I made a huge mistake in voting to give this President the authority to take military action in Iraq. I will not compound that error by voting to authorize this war’s continuation.

On the contrary, I will do all that is within my power to end this war, to bring our troops home, and to spare other families the pain that the McNulty family has endured every day since August 9th, 1970.

Sounds like Mike wants the war to end yesterday, doesn’t it?

Can’t argue with it. FWIW, here’s Wayne Gilcrest’s (R-MD) rationale for voting in favor of it.

Gilchrest Statement on his vote Friday on the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Bill

“My vote today on the emergency supplemental appropriations bill was based on two principals.

First, we cannot jeopardize funding for our troops in the field in the middle of a combat mission. This funding was critical to the safety and security of our troops and I would find it unconscionable to vote against this funding.

Second, setting a timeline for the eventual withdrawal of U.S. combat forces from Iraq provides a strategic advantage to the U.S. in the Middle East where our troops are currently caught in the crossfire of a civil war between an Iranian-backed Shiite government and the Saudi/Syrian-supported insurgency that are using the U.S. presence there to promote terror and instability in Iraq.

The bill establishes a series of benchmarks— proposed in January by President Bush — that Iraqi leaders would have to meet for U.S. troops to remain in Iraq. However, after August 2008, the bill’s provisions still allow U.S. forces to remain in Iraq if their mission is limited to protecting U.S. diplomatic facilities, U.S. citizens, or other U.S. troops; if they are engaged in targeted operations limited to killing or capturing members of al Qaeda or other global terrorist organizations; or if they are engaged in training Iraqi security forces.

In the end, this was a very difficult decision and I am far from satisfied by all the provisions in this bill. But this vote sends a message to our troops that we will never jeopardize the funding that they need in the middle of a combat zone, and it sends an important message to the region that the United States will not be a permanent occupying force in Iraq. Most importantly, it sends a message to the Malliki Government and the Iraqi people that the onus is shifting to them.

I will continue to closely follow this bill as it moves on to the Senate and back to the House for final passage.”

Here’s the statement he put out today:

In the spring of 1970, during my first term as Town Supervisor of Green Island, I testified against the War in Vietnam at a Congressional Field Hearing in Schenectady, New York.

Several months after that testimony, my brother, HM3 William F. McNulty, a Navy Medic, was killed in Quang Nam Province.

I have thought — many times since then — that if President Nixon had listened to the voices of reason back then, my brother Bill might still be alive.

As a Member of Congress today, I believe that the Iraq War will eventually be recorded as one of the biggest blunders in the history of warfare.

In October of 2002, I made a huge mistake in voting to give this President the authority to take military action in Iraq. I will not compound that error by voting to authorize this war’s continuation.

On the contrary, I will do all that is within my power to end this war, to bring our troops home, and to spare other families the pain that the McNulty family has endured every day since August 9th, 1970.

Sounds like Mike wants the war to end yesterday, doesn’t it?

it’s good they stopped opposing liberals voting for it but they then have to make sure their actions are marketed to the media and not allow the GOP to spin it as a narrow vote

Jane, I know that “pork” was put in the bill to get some Dems to vote for it. [A really bad and sleazy idea, in my opinion, particularly since it provided the Chimp with an opportunity to point this out.]

Any word on who the recipients of this “largess” are?

The leaders of both houses seem to be really on top of their game. Perhaps it is not as simple as it might first appear. I live near D.C. so maybe I am starting to catch the delusional disease that is so prevalent in the area. Nevertheless, here is an off the wall scenario. The “so called pork” are indeed worthwhile items that will subsequently be put in stand alone bills later. They were inserted at this time in order to get the Republicans to complain about them, and for the most part that was their major complaint. Pelosi knows she has enough to get the bill passed but not enough for a veto. Dummy will fall for it and veto funds for the troops. The Democratic rebound is to strip the “pork” and lay it on the Republicans to now give enough support to over ride a veto. Otherwise the pResident as well as the Republicans look foolish and clearly don’t care about the troops – just control. The urinary pResident now is pissing on the troops. I repeat, I may be getting delusional, but…