New Hampshire Reps.Carol Shea-Porter(D-NH) and Paul Hodes(D-NH) Vote Against the Troops
This is an editorial from the New Hampshire Union Leader, the author is uncredited:
So New Hampshire’s two new congressmen are “for the troops,” eh? That’s what they told us, even as they sought to put dangerous troop-withdrawal deadlines on a larded-up military funding bill that probably drew as much political support for its Democratic pork as for its military spending.
Well, the proof of the pudding is in the eating and if any Granite Staters are still swallowing our Congress pair’s “for the troops” hogwash, we feel sorry for them.
For when the much-needed funding bill was finally passed last week — shorn of its insane deadlines — Carol Shea-Porter and Paul Hodes voted AGAINST the troops and against the bill.
Apparently — no, make that CLEARLY — these two would rather deprive America’s and New Hampshire’s fighting forces of much-needed munitions and equipment than be seen supporting President Bush’s request on anything having to do with Iraq.
Their willingness to put domestic politics above the needs of our combat forces is truly astonishing.
Very well said by this author. It amazes me that our representitves can say they support the troops while voting against funding the troops. How can you support them if you don’t want to send the money over there to support them?
America's Watchtower 
On this Memorial Day weekend, hopefully all Americans, while remembering those who paid the ultimate price, will also remember that freedom is not free, and that the Democrat Party of today is the “cut & run” party that does not deserve the privilege to govern this country, especially in a time of war.
This funding, however, only runs through September. It is then that General Petraeus gives his report on the progress of the “surge” and funding will need to be renewed at that time. It really doesn’t matter what he says, though, because we have Reid and Pelosi on record saying they weren’t going to believe him the last time he addressed Congress, (Pelosi had to be shamed into even attending his speech) so why would they believe him this time? Proves to me that this anti-war effort is wholly political, with no regard for our national security interests, or our troops’ safety. The Left will insist that the surge has “failed”, regardless of what does or does not occur. There is no such thing as “success” in this endeavor anyway, according to the Left; thus there is no event, or set of circumstances, with which the Left would acknowledge as constituting “success”. This is the root problem of our political war-difficulties; the Left has re-defined “victory” and “success” in warfare so as to mean something literally impossible to attain. And, they’ll never be held accountable, because they “support the troops”. *hack*
LikeLike