Thursday, February 07, 2008

Murtha Still Demanding Defeat

Aging Democrat Representative from Pennsylvania’s 12th Congressional District, John Murtha, known for his anti-war stance towards the current Republican led war, still demands the Troops be withdrawn, even though he admits the ‘Surge’ has been working.

Representative Murtha said today that he is preparing legislation that would give President Bush the war funding he wants this year, but on the condition that troops leave Iraq by the end of the year.

Murtha, chairman of the House defense appropriations subcommittee and feeling confident he has the necessary votes to pass his proposed spending bill, and who has no trouble packing bills with needless pork, said he will propose that the House vote this March on the spending measure, asking for other conditions on the Troops funding besides a mandated withdrawal date.

Other Democrats have indicated they desire to wait to hear from General David Petraeus, Commander of U.S. Forces in Iraq, before approving the funding. Murtha indicated he doesn’t want to wait for General Petraeus before starting his next round of anti-war legislation.

Said Representative Murtha,
"What I told General Petraeus is you can't continue to spend money like he's spending it over there. The public is fed up with it."

Murtha, once named in a lawsuit brought by United States Marines that he accused them publicly of having "killed innocent civilians in cold blood," once took an unusual step in clarifying his earlier comment that he felt the “surge was working,” after having said he felt “most encouraged by changes in the once-volatile Anbar province, where locals have started working closely with U.S. forces to isolate insurgents linked to Al Qaeda.”

Informed that his earlier proposals of a Viet Nam style bloodbath likely would occur should he win his withdrawal demands, Murtha simply replied,
"Many have threatened that there will be chaos, a bloodbath, when the United States redeploys from Iraq, and this in fact may be the case. If they continue to choose to spill blood, it will not be on the conscience of the United States."

If America suffered another devastating terrorist attack after his proposed retreat, whose conscience he would consider that one?

Since the Democrat Party assumed power in January 2007 and Rep. Murtha assumed the helm of the House defense appropriations subcommittee, funding for our Troops in harm’s way has been toyed with by Murtha in order to force a withdrawal of Troops, even though there were clear signs of their winning and the Troop Reinforcement, more commonly known as “the surge” was achieving remarkable success.

Failing in that endeavor, he proposed Troops funding be held in two month increments, with Congress caving in December and funding quarterly, leading to this latest round of funding votes.

Asked if they felt supported by the American public, a dozen or so Troops in Iraq replied “yes,” with helicopter pilot Chief Warrant Officer Mary Rone adding it was ‘superficial.’
"I think sometimes soldiers feel like possibly people back home are not thinking about it, and I think that's the biggest form of not supporting, is forgetting what's going on,” said CWO Rone.

In May 2007, a petition of nearly 3,000 signatures from American Troops was delivered to Congress basically begging them to support the Troops efforts in Iraq who desire to finish the job they started, believing they have made a difference and desiring to defend America from further attacks as we saw on September 11, 2001.

Apparently, Representative John Murtha has decided to ignore the very Troops he claims to support in their defense of America.


Rightwingsnarkle said...

"...a petition of nearly 3,000 signatures from American Troops was delivered to Congress"

Hey, that's almost as many as have been killed in the invasion and occupation of Iraq.

LewWaters said...

Perhaps you should research how many Military died under your butt buddies watch, snarkle. Find out how many met their fate while Clinton's were at the helm.

Feel free to report back.

Rightwingsnarkle said...

Hmmm, that comment makes even less sense than usual, which is quite a feat for you.

What exactly is your point? That there were more casualties from 1993-2000 than from 2000 to present? Or less?

And whether the number is higher or lower, what's your point?

Finally, your use of the term "butt buddies" is grammatically incorrect in this context, since you've used the plural form of buddy, and it appears that you intended to use the possessive form.

So, too, with your use of the name Clinton's, which I assume you meant as the Clintons (both husband and wife). Again, you mixed up the plural and possessive forms, only this time you did it the other way around.

Is English your second language?

Anywhoozle, more soldiers and Marines have died in this wasteful and wrong-headed invasion and occupation than apparently signed some stupid petition that seems to mean so much to you.

And you want to keep tossing more of your brothers and sisters in arms into the inferno for no reason other than your own sad delusions.

LewWaters said...

Of course it doesn't make sense to you. I didn't expect it to. In order for it to make sense, you'll have to increase your I.Q. beyond your waiste size.

When do you lay out your considerable Military experience?

Ready to compare 214's?

Rightwingsnarkle said...

I'll tell you all about my experience with Mortuary Services after you've explained what your point was in your first response.

Freaking idiot.

LewWaters said...

Once again, snarkle, you show your incompetence. Give it up, son, you ain't that good.

Bill Smith said...

Great article - Murtha Needs to GO! He is a disgrace. Cross posted your post with credit and a link back on

We need you to join our Roll Call of Vets / Friends Against Murtha!

LewWaters said...

Done Bill. Thanks for the invite.

Feel free to cross post anything I have that may help.