Carol Shea Porter: The answer is "no."
Carol Shea Porter (D-NH) says "no" to any more money for Iraq War.
.
At a town hall meeting here in Laconia on Sunday, my Congresswoman, Carol Shea-Porter, to the delight of the mostly Democrat and Independent people in attendance, promised to
"vote against a supplemental (military) budget, and will continue to vote against it."
When Nathaniel Gurien of North Conway asked why some Democrats aren't doing the same, Shea-Porter stated that she thought that it was because if there was no supplemental budget, they
"truly believe that the troops won't get what they need."
She promised that she is doing all that she can do to help persuade them that even without the funds, the troops would still get what they need. She reassured the crowd that she would not waver, but could only do so much as far as other fellow Democrats who still support funding the Iraq War. Nathaniel wondered if it was simply because
"they were simply afraid of being called names."
I found Nathaniel rather interesting in that he appears as frustrated with the Democrats as I am with the Republicans. He noted that
"The Democrats are too afraid of their 2008 prospects to do what we elected them to do in '06."
Not Carol Shea Porter. She assured the forty or so people in attendance that she will continue to work to end the war in Iraq. The one redeeming factor in this for me, such that it is, is that, to her credit, Ms. Shea-Porter is honest about where she comes down on this issue, and will not waver. If only we could find some politicians on our side that could be so reliable on such key issues. Nancy Pelosi must be quite proud of her protoge from New Hampshire...
.
[Note: while coming from opposite ends of the political spectrum, Nathaniel and his wife and I spent some time chatting after the event. While we all disagree on the issues, we enjoyed each other's company. This is how politics should be...]
Comments
Posted by: Randy | September 17, 2007 10:54 AM
Posted by: Ninbus | September 17, 2007 11:12 AM
So Shea-Pompous may be a traitor, but at least she's a consistent traitor. Thrilling. Takes a load off my mind, f'sure.
Ninbus, every single one of those things could be funded in full (or left up to the states or the individual, as appropriate), along with the Iraq war and enough of a surplus left over to make a dent in the national debt, if not for the myriad stupid ways in which the federal and state governments waste money.
Posted by: wolfwalker | September 17, 2007 11:25 AM
Posted by: doug | September 17, 2007 12:05 PM
Military spouse? Did her husband make a deployment? (Psst--the answer would be "NO".) She knows/remembers about as much of what our current military spouses are going through as she gleans off an episode of "Army Wives" on Lifetime--in other words, not a whole lot. Bottom line, her claim of being a military spouse is TECHNICALLY correct, just as my claim of being a Gulf War vet would be TECHNICALLY correct even though I was not in the Gulf during that time period, but was on active duty and in a combat arm.
Try reading Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution sometime--you know, the part where the Congress funds the military. We cut their funds off, we cut THEM off. Some want to call it "slow bleed", yet it's funny how blood from a wounded soldier flows just as quickly when there's no medevac chopper, no way to treat him, and the uparmored vehicles which might have prevented his injury simply weren't available for lack of funds.
And as far as a "either/or" situation, yes, you CAN actually supply items both domestically and abroad if money is spent wisely. How much have liberals wasted in the past 40 years (70, if you include the so-called "Social Security" fiasco) in enabling programs which do little besides create a permanent underclass dependent upon the nanny state?
Bottom line, Nimbus--my research is just fine. Matter of fact, most of it is first-hand experience and talking to the folks who have served and continue to serve in "the sandbox". I certainly hope Carol can sleep at night if we do in fact leave before victory is achieved. I still wonder how the Congress of the 1970's managed after what transpired in Vietnam.
Posted by: Randy | September 18, 2007 12:29 PM